Birtherism Reborn: Candidate Ted Cruz and the Wrath of Karma

by Nomad

Republicans have once again incurred the wrath of the Karma goddess. After years of ranting suspicions about Obama's eligibility to be president, the Republicans could be in a pickle in 2016.
Karma has now focused her attention on GOP/Tea Party darling, Ted Cruz.

For most of President Obama's first term in office, the subject of his birth and eligibility for office were constantly being bandied about by ultra-conservatives. The "Birther" bunch was lead primarily led by one Orly Taitz- a colorful character to say the least. No amount of proof seemed to satisfy her and her scouts. Something, they said, was just not right (white?) about Obama. 

Eventually even the most die-hard conservative lost interest. To the so-called right wing-nuts, the question was enough to bring up any attack against the president. Truth did not need to prevail, the innuendo was sufficient. 

Now the subject of citizenship seems poised to re-appear, but this time it will become the bane- (so to speak) of Republicans.

The Importance of Being American

Last week, Texas Senator Ted Cruz formally renounced his Canadian citizenship which he had maintained throughout his life. As of May 14, Cruz was no longer a Canadian citizen. 

Born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada  on December 22, 1970, Cruz had kept his dual citizenship until its existence was revealed by the Dallas Morning News.

This move and the revelation that necessitated it was an important step in the career of Ted Cruz.

Why?

A recent survey by Public Policy Polling (PPP) found that Ted Cruz was a Republican front-runner for the 2016 election, beating out Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal and even Jeb Bush. 

Hard to believe, I know. 

The poll also found that Cruz is considered the de facto leader of his party, with a large majority of respondents saying they trust him more than Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker of the House John Boehner.

With Eric Cantor expectedly tossed out on his tunkus, who knows who is next to receive the bum's rush out of the doors of Congress.

Therefore the question of Cruz's eligibility to run for president suddenly becomes essential.

Shutting It Down: The Costs of Silencing Occupy Dissent

by Nomad

Shutting down dissent is costly. After a court ruling this week on police handling of Occupy Wall Street protesters, we learned how much such tactics by law enforcement cost the American taxpayer. Of course, the American taxpayer has had to foot the bill,  not once, but twice.

This week, lawyers for the organization Lawyers for the Rest Of Us. issued a statement announcing the largest settlement to date regarding the Occupy Wall Street protesters and the City of New York. In addition to the public relations nightmare, the city has agreed to pay a staggering out $583,024 to 14 who were falsely arrested. 

According to the source:

On January 1st, 2012, in a federal lawsuit, Peat v. City of New York, 12-cv-8230, filed in the Southern District of New York on November 13, 2012. The lawsuit alleged that the plaintiffs’ Constitutional rights to free speech and assembly were violated by their arrests.

This settlement is notable as it is  the largest single settlement to date for an Occupy Wall Street-related civil rights lawsuit in New York. The details of the case are worth reviewing since it may not be the last of its kind.

The fourteen plaintiffs were arrested at 2nd Avenue and 13th Street in Manhattan during a peaceful march of Occupy Wall Street supporters. At that location, police officers accompanying the march stopped the march from continuing forward and enclosed the marchers within police lines composed of scooter patrol officers and officers on foot. High-ranking NYPD officers, including then-Chief of Patrol James Hall, Deputy Chief Theresa Shortell, Deputy Inspector Daniel O’Donnell, and Captain William Taylor were present at the scene and directly participated in making the arrests.

The plaintiffs were charged with blocking pedestrian traffic under Penal Law 240.20 (disorderly conduct). The District Attorney’s office later declined to prosecute the criminal cases against the plaintiffs.

The point was to get them off the street and, others might say, to intimidate them into silence.

Comrade Abraham: Was President Lincoln a Closet Marxist?

by Nomad

When we think of Lincoln, most of us do not consider the sixteenth president as a Marxist revolutionary. Yet, a little research uncovers some very interesting- slightly confounding- connections between Abe Lincoln and the father of the Communist movement. As fascinating as that might be, there is an even bigger shock in store when it comes to the origins of the Republican Party.

This quote in the meme above reportedly came early in his political career (December 1847). For some of us who grew up thinking of "Honest Abe" as a folksy backwoods lawyer, it's a bit jarring to hear him talking about labor issues. It's not the image many of us have of the man who freed the slaves and held the nation together. (It's hard enough to think of him as a Republican.)

But there was more to that quote. Lincoln also wrote in that same passage:

These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert to fleece the people.

It's impossible to imagine that any president would dare to say such a thing today. And especially not a Republican one. Any conservative politician who expressed such thoughts today could expect to be skewered alive and roasted slowly (with relish) live on Fox News.

The Battle of the Quotations
As we are all well aware, politicians tend to talk more than necessary and in doing so, say a lot of nonsense, especially early on in their careers. However, in Lincoln's case there is more to it than that. We do know that from early in his career, Lincoln's ideas had not changed but actually expanded. 

A Snapshot from the Frontline: Where Boston's Homeless Find Health Care

by Nomad

Providing health care to homeless citizens is a job that gets far too little attention compared with, say, celebrity news. One film takes a closer look at the people who have dedicated themselves to that task.

Director  Jeff Schwartz hadn't anticipated that his short film would turn into a full-length documentary.. or a life-changing experience.

"With a small crew and unprecedented access to homeless men and women on the streets.. I was introduced to people I would have normally passed by. "

The result was a film that hat NPR has called "extremely powerful" and "fascinating."

"Give me a Shot of Anything: House Calls to the Homeless" deals with lives of homeless and the doctors and care-givers who provide them with health care. 

Schwartz gave his assessment:

"These are people that care. They see the humanity of the homeless and make sure they are granted basic rights like food, shelter and quality health care."

On a larger scale this film documents one city's response to America's health care needs, the Boston Healthcare for the Homeless Program.