Group items tagged

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

If your vehicle has a repeated repair or issues after a service then you may want to contact the Lemon Lawyers to take a necessary steps on the service. Call Lemon Law Experts @ (855) 598-3909 or Visit http://lemonlawexperts.com

Two high level Congressional staffers who have been instrumental in creating or moving forward both PROTECT IP (PIPA) and SOPA have left their jobs on Capitol Hill and taken jobs with two of the biggest entertainment industry lobbyists, who are working very hard to convince Congress to pass the legislation they just helped write. And people wonder why the American public looks on DC as being corrupt. Allison Halataei, former deputy chief of staff and parliamentarian to House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), and Lauren Pastarnack, a Republican who has served as a senior aide on the Senate Judiciary Committee, worked on online piracy bills that would push Internet companies like Google, Yahoo and Facebook to shut down websites that offer illegal copies of blockbuster films and chart-topping songs. Pastarnack went to the MPAA where she'll be "director of government relations" and Halataei to the NMPA (music publishers and songwriters) where she'll be "chief liaison to Capitol Hill." The Politico article linked above notes that this kind of "revolving door" is all too common. It may not be directly corrupt, but to the public it sure feels corrupt. It certainly gives off the appearance of "hey, write us the insane bill that we want, and then we'll reward you with a super cushy high paying job." At the very least, it should raise significant questions about whether or not these two bills were written with the public's interest in mind (I know, I know, don't laugh....) or their future employers'. Technically, neither of them can directly lobby the specific committees where they worked, but they can certainly assist in the process. "They can provide invaluable insight to people on the outside - even in the consultation mode," one tech industry lobbyist said, noting that Halataei had been Smith's secondhand person and knows how the Texas Republican thinks and what would be an effective lobbying strategy. Additionally, the Senate and House panels work close

Pentagon investigators are reportedly still searching for Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange, who helped release a classified US military video showing a US helicopter gunship indiscriminately firing on Iraqi civilians. The US military recently arrested Army Specialist Bradley Manning, who may have passed on the video to Wikileaks. Manning's arrest and the hunt for Assange have put the spotlight on the Obama administration's campaign against whistleblowers and leakers of classified information. We speak to Daniel Ellsberg, who's leaking of the Pentagon Papers has made him perhaps the nation's most famous whistleblower; Birgitta Jónsdóttir, a member of the Icelandic Parliament who has collaborated with Wikileaks and drafted a new Icelandic law protecting investigative journalists; and Glenn Greenwald, political and legal blogger for Salon.com. [includes rush transcript]

Both Supreme Court justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas describe themselves as "originalists," meaning that they believe they possess the innate knowledge of exactly what the Founding Fathers intended when they penned the U.S. Constitution. Given such an almost reverent standard it is fair to ask a few questions regarding the Judiciary branch of government which, in my opinion, no longer represents the people of our country. It has become so deeply immersed in right-wing ideology that there is little resemblance to the this branch of government today and when the Founding Fathers established it. Did the Founding Fathers intend that Supreme Court judges sitting on the highest court of the land can decide who the president should be, especially if one of those judges was appointed by the father of one of the complainants? Surely, most of us would agree, that judge should be disqualified from involvement in such an extraordinary decision. Did the Founding Fathers intend that a judge sitting on the highest court of the land to be cozy with incendiary, hate-mongering partisan extremists who make seditious statements for the sole purpose of undermining and subverting democracy? Surely, you would ask, should a judge deciding cases on the Supreme court be colluding and conniving with a Screech Radio insurrectionist who spouts non-stop hatred and incites violence against our president and elected officials? Did the Founding Fathers also intend for the spouse of a sitting Supreme Court justice to be actively fomenting hatred, insurrection and subversion, the sole aim of which is to overthrow, even by armed insurrection, a democratically-elected president and political party? Surely, the Founding Fathers did not intend for that to be an admirable or patriotic role of the spouse of a Supreme Court justice? The solid phalanx of activist, partisan ideologues, Roberts,

The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether former Attorney General John Ashcroft may be sued by an American detained for 16 days. It's a case that a

On May 20, the Senate passed its bill to reregulate Wall Street by a vote of 59-39, complete with a (watery) version of the Volcker Rule. The story of the legislation's passage can be told in a number of ways: a tale of conflict or compromise, triumph or capitulation. But on any reading, that story is only the climactic chapter in a larger narrative: how the masters of the money game fell out of love with-and into a state of bitter, seething, hysterical fury toward-Obama. The speed and severity of the swing from enchantment to enmity would be difficult to overstate. When Obama was sworn into office, Democrats on Wall Street rejoiced at the ascension of a president in whom they saw many qualities to admire: brains, composure, bi-partisan instincts, an aversion to class-based combat. And many Wall Street Republicans-after witnessing the horror show that constituted John McCain's response to the financial crisis-quietly admitted relief that the other guy had prevailed.

There may yet be justice for the victims of the post-9/11 US torture program. Just not in the United States.

This document presents details on the wealth and income distributions in the United States, and explains how we use these two distributions as power indicators. Some of the information may come as a surprise to many people. In fact, I know it will be a surprise and then some, because of a recent study (Norton & Ariely, 2010) showing that most Americans (high income or low income, female or male, young or old, Republican or Democrat) have no idea just how concentrated the wealth distribution actually is. More on that a bit later.

For over a week now, in response to the draconian anti-labor proposals of the Republican Governor, the people of Wisconsin have rose up in the hundreds of thousands in militant and creative fashion in defense of public workers and the unions. The Capitol in Madison has been occupied. The surrounding area has seen a sea of demonstrators. Teachers across the state have gone on unofficial strike and high school students have walked-out in support. Rallies of hundreds and thousands have occurred all over the state. This week support rallies will happen all over the country.

Let me see if I can coherently explain - even for Senate-myth-saturated audiences (which are remarkably, if unconsciously, resistant to criticism of "bipartisan" Party dogma) - how and why Rand Paul came to singlehandedly hold the power, if he so chooses, to delay S. 1038 into the weekend, without "filibustering," ahead of the Senate's planned week-long Memorial Day recess next week. [I've linked to a lengthier general explanation.] Before I do that, though, read what Rand Paul himself said on CNN Friday night (May 20th), for a rare insider's view of what the Senate is today, courtesy of both Parties:

"Those who make peaceful evolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable."- John F. KennedyThere's one thing for sure: 2008 isn't anything like politics as usual.The corporate media (with their unerring eye for the obvious point) is fixated on the narrative that, for the first time ever, Americans will likely end this year with either a woman or a black man headed for the White House. Bloggers are telling stories from the front lines of primaries and caucuses that look like something from the early 60s - people lining up before dawn to vote in Manoa, Hawaii yesterday; a thousand black college students in Prairie View, Texas marching 10 miles to cast their early votes in the face of a county that tried to disenfranchise them. In recent months, we've also been gobstopped by the sheer passion of the insurgent campaigns of both Barack Obama and Ron Paul, both of whom brought millions of new voters into the conversation - and with them, a sharp critique of the status quo and a new energy that's agitating toward deep structural change.There's something implacable, earnest, and righteously angry in the air. And it raises all kinds of questions for burned-out Boomers and jaded Gen Xers who've been ground down to the stump by the mostly losing battles of the past 30 years. Can it be - at long last - that Americans have, simply, had enough? Are we, finally, stepping out to take back our government - and with it, control of our own future? Is this simply a shifting political season - the kind we get every 20 to 30 years - or is there something deeper going on here? Do we dare to raise our hopes that this time, we're going to finally win a few? Just how ready is this country for big, serious, forward-looking change?Recently, I came across a pocket of sociological research that suggested a tantalizing answer to these questions - and also that America may be far more ready for far more change than anyone really believes is possible at this moment. In fac