DOWNLOADS: (80)

PLAYS: (685)

Embed

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on Tuesday lashed out at fellow members of Congress for looking into how technology giant Apple is able to avoid paying billions of dollars in taxes.

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a report on Monday detailing how Apple had used a network of offshore shell companies in recent year to avoid paying taxes.

At a committee hearing on Tuesday, Paul was livid that Apple CEO Tim Cook was asked to testify.

"I'm offended by a $4 trillion government bullying, berating and badgering one America's greatest success stories," the Kentucky Republican told the committee. "Tell me what Apple has done that is illegal?"

Paul added that he was also "offended" that that the IRS would "bully" tea party groups.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (78)

PLAYS: (261)

Embed

Conservative columnist George Will suspects that the Supreme Court could support equal rights for LGBT people because "quite literally the opposition to gay marriage is dying... it's old people."

On Friday, the Supreme Court announced that it would take up cases on California's Prop 8 same sex marriage ban and the federal government's Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which denies benefits to gay and lesbian spouses.

Will on Sunday suggested that it was not a coincidence that the court decided to hear the cases just a month after voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington backed marriage equality.

"It could make them say, 'It's not necessary for us to go here,'" Will explained. "They don't want to do what they did with abortion. The country was having a constructive accommodation on abortion, liberalizing abortion laws. The court yanked the subject out of democratic discourse and embittered the argument."

He continued: "On the other hand, they can say it's now safe to look at this because there is something like an emerging consensus. Quite literally, the opposition to gay marriage is dying... it's old people."

Republican strategist Mary Matalin, who has previously said that marriage equality is not a civil right, asserted that polls now show Americans support same sex marriage because they know it's not a "threat to the civil order."

"Well, because Americans have common sense," she explained. "There are important constitutional, biological, theological, ontological questions relative to homosexual marriage. People who live in the real world say, the greater threat to the civil order are the heterosexuals who don’t get married and are making babies. That’s an epidemic in crisis proportions. That is irrefutably more problematic for our culture than homosexuals getting married."

DOWNLOADS: (156)

PLAYS: (1986)

Embed

From Democracy Now: Anaheim Police Kill 2 Latinos, Wound Protesting Residents:

Police in the California city of Anaheim are facing allegations of murder and brutality after fatally shooting two Latino men over the weekend and firing rubber bullets at crowds of protesters. On Saturday, Anaheim police shot and killed 24-year-old Manuel Diaz after he reportedly ran away from a group of officers who confronted him in an alleyway. Diaz was unarmed. One witness reported that Diaz had his back to the officers when he was shot in the buttocks. Police then allegedly fired another bullet through his head as he fell to the ground. Two of Diaz’s sisters demanded justice for their slain brother.

Correna Chavez: "Once they even shot him in the leg, and he went down, the cop continued and shot him in the head. Like, what is that about? My brother did not have a weapon on him at all."

Lupe Diaz: "These cops need to know what they’ve done to us, to our family, especially my mom. And we’re going to speak for him, and we’re going to bring this to justice."

Hours after Diaz’s death, a chaotic scene broke out when police fired rubber bullets and tear gas at a crowd of local residents protesting the shooting. A number of people were wounded, included several children. Video was taken of a police dog rushing a man trying to protect his infant child. More than 24 hours after Diaz’s death, police shot dead another Latino resident in Anaheim, Joel Acevedo. Police say Acevedo was suspected in a car robbery. The circumstances around his death remain unconfirmed.

And here's more with some updates from Raw Story: California police fire into crowd of women and children during near-riot:

A near-riot broke out in Anaheim, California on Saturday after a police shooting left one man dead and angry witnesses began throwing bottles at police offers. Police responded by firing bean bags and rubber bullets into a crowd of terrified women and children and even loosed a police dog on one woman and her baby.

Residents, who have recently been complaining about alleged police violence, told KCAL 9 News that Manuel Diaz was running away from police who had attempted to speak with him when he was shot from behind with a bullet that hit him in the buttocks. He fell to his knees and was struck in the head by another bullet. Police handcuffed the motionless man and he was taken to the hospital, where he died three hours later. [...]

Update: On Sunday afternoon, protesters gathered in the lobby of the Anaheim Police Department chanting “No justice, no peace” and “Justice for Manuel.”

The demonstration came at the same time as a police press conference, during which it was announced that two officers involved in the fatal shooting have been placed on paid leave, pending a full investigation of the incident. Police Chief John Walter also indicated that the dog which rushed into the crowd biting people had accidentally escaped from a police vehicle.

“We are extremely sorry for the people who were bit,” Welter stated. “The city will be responsible for all medical bills associated with the dog. The canine officer responsible for the dog is devastated by this.”

More at our sister site Occupy America here: Anaheim Police Open Fire on Innocent Men, Women & Children.

Marriage equality in New York rests on a Staten Island Republican, and an American man pretends to be a Syrian lesbian blogger.

DOWNLOADS: (286)

PLAYS: (1404)

Embed

Looks like Carly Fiorina decided that Sean Hannity isn't such a "tough interview" after all since she came running back into his loving arms for another softball session with him to bash her opponent for the US Senate in California, Barbara Boxer. The former HP outsourcer who doesn't think that there is any "job that is America's god given right anymore" trashed Boxer for her record on job creation and rattled off of course the typical Republican talking points we've heard this campaign season... the stimulus didn't work, spending is out of control, and yada yada.

Fiorina must have been really grateful for Sean being nice to her one more time since she even gave him a shout out for his faux documentary "The Valley Hope Forgot". The Huffington Post has more on that one -- Sean Hannity Steals From Hollywood In His Mockumentary, "The Valley Hope Forgot".

Please California let's not send this woman to Washington DC. I already had my fill of her before McCain's staff stopped her from doing any more interviews.

HANNITY: All right. The race for California Senate seat is tightening as we close in on Election Day. In the latest FOX News state poll shows that Senator Barbara Boxer's Republican opponent Carly Fiorina is closing the gap.

Now Senator Boxer is slightly ahead of Fiorina, 48-44. And with less than two weeks until voters head to the polls, and it's still anyone's game.

And joining me now is the Republican Senate candidate herself Carly Fiorina.

Welcome back to the show. Thanks for being with us.

FIORINA: It's great to be back with you, Sean. Thanks for having me.

HANNITY: All right. Obviously the president is spending a lot of time and resources. How many times did the president, vice president, Michelle Obama -- how many times they've been out there campaigning for Boxer?

FIORINA: Well, the president is out this week for the third time. Michelle is out for the first time. The vice president is out here for the second time. That is all the proof you need to know that Barbara Boxer is in serious trouble.

And in less than two weeks we can win this race.

Continue reading »

Via Calitics:

Jerry Brown is out with a devastating new ad that shows Meg Whitman and Arnold Schwarzenegger are, word for word, offering the same kind of failed policies and solutions for California's problems.

Here's what the Brown campaign said about the ad:

Pointing to the familiar echo voters are hearing from billionaire Meg Whitman on the campaign trail, the Jerry Brown for Governor Campaign today released a new television ad that features a montage of video clips in which the candidate repeats, rehashes and repackages the same talking points and utterances as our current Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"Meg Whitman said it herself, 'Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and hoping for different results,'" said Brown for Governor Campaign Manager Steven Glazer. "Yet, the Long Island native has had no qualms about recycling the same platitudes, repackaging the same campaign events and rehiring the same high priced consultants as the state's current Governor."

The Brown Campaign's television ad began airing statewide today.

As Calitics notes:

The ad aired in the Bay Area during the Giants-Phillies playoff game this afternoon, so that's a significant - and not cheap - buy for this ad.

Game over.

DOWNLOADS: (281)

PLAYS: (1472)

Embed

Isn't it wonderful to see one of our Beltway Villager "journalists" pretend to ask a Republican candidate a serious question about the people who are funding their campaign, only to see them punt and let that candidate get away with a ridiculous explanation to that question unchallenged? That's exactly what John King did here with Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in California and former HP CEO Carly Fiorina.

King asks Fiorina about that Koch Brothers money that's been coming her way and allows her to punt without being challenged and say that there's money from special interests coming in on all sides and to pretend that she's some "newcomer" to politics. I guess King forgot that she was an adviser to John McCain's presidential campaign, so she can hardly claim to be a political "newcomer".

King of course didn't challenge her on that fact. And apparently Fiorina thinks that former CEO's who make their golden parachutes by outsourcing jobs from the United States are better suited than those evil "career politicians" with helping our country get out of this economic ditch we're in.

Barbara Boxer has been pretty decent with representing progressive issues even if she did fall by the wayside with supporting Joe Lieberman's reelection which I'll always have a sore spot with her for her doing so. That said, she's a mile better than miss-outsourcing queen Fiorina. The Koch brothers are funding Fiorina for a reason, and it's not because they're looking out for the average citizen out there. They're looking out for their own interests and figuring Fiorina will be on the side of big business like all of the Republicans.

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (412)

PLAYS: (427)

Embed

Senator Barbara Boxer and ex-Hewlett Packard, No-God-Given-American-Jobs, CEO and GOP mean-girl Catty-Carly Fiorina squared off for a debate tonight and after being hammered on at every opportunity by Boxer for outsourcing jobs while taking her golden parachute at HP, Fiorina resorted to a typical Republican tactic. When things aren't going well, play the victim card. This time is wasn't for her though. It was for "a treasure of California" and its employees Hewlett Packard. Why does Barbara Boxer hate California "treasure" HP and their workers? She really must hate America for pointing out what they paid Carly.

FIORINA: I think it's actually a shame Barbara Boxer would use Hewlett Packard, a treasure of California, one of the great companies in the world whose employees work very hard and whose shareholders have benefited greatly from both my time as CEO and all the hard work of the employees that I have the privilege to lead and I think it's a shame that she would use that company as a political football. I understand she's going to mischaracterize my record and my severance package, but I think it's a shame she would use the company in that way.

After she appeared on Fox News Sunday I pointed out just how bad that record of hers is, so it's not surprising she'd take this tack and try to pretend Boxer was attacking her former employer and their workers. Talk about some projection going on here. If anyone harmed the company or the workers, it was Fiorina.

As I noted in the other post, Think Progress' Wonk Room has more on her record at HP and what she thinks about protecting American workers. FLASHBACK: McCain Adviser Carly Fiorina: ‘There Is No Job That Is America’s God-Given Right Anymore’.

DOWNLOADS: (702)

PLAYS: (3083)

Embed

Carly Fiorina... just looking out for the little people out there who pay too much in taxes. If this wasn't a made for the teabaggers ending argument on why the voters of California should vote for her, I've never heard one. Every one of the dog whistles was there. I was glad to see Barbara Boxer call her right back out for sending jobs overseas and her record as an HP CEO after this "man of the people" speech by Fiorina during their first debate for the California Senate.

The video above includes both Fiorina and Boxer's closing remarks from their debate tonight.

I took the time to transcribe Fiorina's remarks. They're begging for some Bobblespeak Translations which I sadly did not have time for, but maybe some of the commenters will have the time for instead.

FIORINA: Thank you so much for the privilege of truly to be here and to have a great debate with you Sen. Boxer. I have traveled up and down this wonderful state and I have been struck by the beauty and by the spirit of Californians. But I must say I am also struck by the anger, the frustration and yes, even fear. I remember meeting the immigrant who had built his small business from the ground up only to see it ruined with too much taxation and too much regulation and I remember him looking me and saying “This is not the country I came to. My own government is destroying my livelihood.”

I remember speaking to the city councilman who talked about his struggles to keep his community together while they struggled with almost 40% unemployment. And I remember as well the woman who looked me in the eye and grasped my hand and said I have never voted before, but I am voting for you because I am afraid for my children’s future.

Promise me this, when you get to Washington, you will not forget us. We can turn our nation around. We can get it back on the right track. We can get our state on the right track. We can grow or economy. We can control government spending.

But to do all these things, we must start by changing the people we send to Washington. I ask for your support. I ask for your vote. And I pledge to you this. I will go to the U.S. Senate and I will fight for the millions of Californians who love their country, who go about their business, who pay their dues, who serve their communities. You don’t ask for frills or favors. You give a lot and you expect little. You are asking for one simple thing now, that we take our government back, make it listen and make it work.

DOWNLOADS: (634)

PLAYS: (1804)

Embed

Now that a Federal judge has stuck down California's Proposition 8, Keith decided to reair his Special Comment from November 2008.

Here's your blast from the past from the C&L archives. Countdown Special Comment On Prop 8: What Is It To You?

Finally tonight as promised, a Special Comment on the passage, last week, of Proposition Eight in California, which rescinded the right of same-sex couples to marry, and tilted the balance on this issue, from coast to coast.

Some parameters, as preface. This isn't about yelling, and this isn't about politics, and this isn't really just about Prop-8. And I don't have a personal investment in this: I'm not gay, I had to strain to think of one member of even my very extended family who is, I have no personal stories of close friends or colleagues fighting the prejudice that still pervades their lives.

And yet to me this vote is horrible. Horrible. Because this isn't about yelling, and this isn't about politics.

This is about the... human heart, and if that sounds corny, so be it.

If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or the sentiment they expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not... understand. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence and fly-by-night relationships, these people over here want the same chance at permanence and happiness that is your option. They don't want to deny you yours. They don't want to take anything away from you. They want what you want -- a chance to be a little less alone in the world.

Only now you are saying to them -- no. You can't have it on these terms. Maybe something similar. If they behave. If they don't cause too much trouble. You'll even give them all the same legal rights -- even as you're taking away the legal right, which they already had. A world around them, still anchored in love and marriage, and you are saying, no, you can't marry. What if somebody passed a law that said you couldn't marry?

I keep hearing this term "re-defining" marriage.

If this country hadn't re-defined marriage, black people still couldn't marry white people. Sixteen states had laws on the books which made that illegal... in 1967. 1967.

The parents of the President-Elect of the United States couldn't have married in nearly one third of the states of the country their son grew up to lead. But it's worse than that. If this country had not "re-defined" marriage, some black people still couldn't marry...black people. It is one of the most overlooked and cruelest parts of our sad story of slavery. Marriages were not legally recognized, if the people were slaves. Since slaves were property, they could not legally be husband and wife, or mother and child. Their marriage vows were different: not "Until Death, Do You Part," but "Until Death or Distance, Do You Part." Marriages among slaves were not legally recognized.

You know, just like marriages today in California are not legally recognized, if the people are... gay.

And uncountable in our history are the number of men and women, forced by society into marrying the opposite sex, in sham marriages, or marriages of convenience, or just marriages of not knowing -- centuries of men and women who have lived their lives in shame and unhappiness, and who have, through a lie to themselves or others, broken countless other lives, of spouses and children... All because we said a man couldn't marry another man, or a woman couldn't marry another woman. The sanctity of marriage. How many marriages like that have there been and how on earth do they increase the "sanctity" of marriage rather than render the term, meaningless?

What is this, to you? Nobody is asking you to embrace their expression of love. But don't you, as human beings, have to embrace... that love? The world is barren enough.

It is stacked against love, and against hope, and against those very few and precious emotions that enable us to go forward. Your marriage only stands a 50-50 chance of lasting, no matter how much you feel and how hard you work.

And here are people overjoyed at the prospect of just that chance, and that work, just for the hope of having that feeling. With so much hate in the world, with so much meaningless division, and people pitted against people for no good reason, this is what your religion tells you to do? With your experience of life and this world and all its sadnesses, this is what your conscience tells you to do?

With your knowledge that life, with endless vigor, seems to tilt the playing field on which we all live, in favor of unhappiness and hate... this is what your heart tells you to do? You want to sanctify marriage? You want to honor your God and the universal love you believe he represents? Then Spread happiness -- this tiny, symbolic, semantical grain of happiness -- share it with all those who seek it. Quote me anything from your religious leader or book of choice telling you to stand against this. And then tell me how you can believe both that statement and another statement, another one which reads only "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

---

Continue reading »