The old liberal class, the safety valve that addressed grievances and injustices in times of economic or political distress, has been neutered. There are self-identified liberals, including Barack Obama, who continue to speak in the old language of liberalism but serve corporate power. This has been true since the Clinton administration. Bill Clinton found that by doing corporate bidding he could get corporate money—thus NAFTA, the destruction of our welfare system, the explosion of mass incarceration under the  omnibus bill, the deregulation of the FCC, turning the airwaves over to a half dozen corporations, and the revoking of FDR’s 1933 Glass-Steagall reform that had protected our banking system from speculators. Clinton, in exchange for corporate money, transformed the Democratic Party into the Republican Party. This was diabolically brilliant. It forced the Republican Party to shift so far to the right it became insane.”
BILL MOYERS: [T]he middle class is still struggling. In fact, their income, adjusted for inflation is lower than it was five years ago, and they’ve lost about three percent of their purchasing power since then. Yet stocks are soaring, the economy is expanding, and the benefits are not going to the middle class families. Why can’t Washington do better by them?
SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN: So I think Washington doesn’t do better by them because Washington isn’t trying to do better by them. If you look at Washington as a whole, I think this is the fundamental problem in our system right now. Washington works for those who can hire armies of lobbyists, armies of lawyers, and get just the rules they want. It doesn’t work so well for American families.
When I was a kid I thought your 20s were supposed to be fun, not filled with perpetual anxiety about financial stability and constantly feeling like an unaccomplished piece of shit.
That’s because it was fun for baby boomers and they basically gave us this impression it would always be like that, but then they ruined the economy.
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—After announcing, on Thursday, that it would seek $500 million to help “train and equip appropriately vetted elements of the moderate Syrian armed opposition,” the White House today posted the following Moderate Syrian Rebel Application Form:
Welcome to the United States’ Moderate Syrian Rebel Vetting Process. To see if you qualify for $500 million in American weapons, please choose an answer to the following questions:
As a Syrian rebel, I think the word or phrase that best describes me is:
B) Very moderate
C) Crazy moderate
I became a Syrian rebel because I believe in:
C) The American Way
D) Creating an Islamic caliphate
If I were given a highly lethal automatic weapon by the United States, I would:
A) Only kill exactly the people that the United States wanted me to kill
B) Try to kill the right people, with the caveat that I have never used an automatic weapon before
C) Kill people only after submitting them to a rigorous vetting process
D) Immediately let the weapon fall into the wrong hands
I have previously received weapons from:
A) Al Qaeda
B) The Taliban
C) North Korea
D) I did not receive weapons from any of them because after they vetted me I was deemed way too moderate
I consider ISIS:
A) An existential threat to Iraq
B) An existential threat to Syria
C) An existential threat to Iraq and Syria
D) The people who will pick up my American weapon after I drop it and run away
Complete the following sentence. “American weapons are…”
A) Always a good thing to randomly add to any international hot spot
B) Exactly what this raging civil war has been missing for the past three years
C) Best when used moderately
D) Super easy to resell online
Thank you for completing the Moderate Syrian Rebel Application Form. We will process your application in the next one to two business days. Please indicate a current mailing address where you would like your weapons to be sent. If there is no one to sign for them we will leave them outside the front door.
WASHINGTON — A U.S. House panel on Wednesday rejected a measure that would have enabled veterans with same-sex spouses to receive partner benefits regardless of where they reside. The Washington Blade reports that the U.S. House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs rejected the Veteran Spouses Equal Treatment Act by a vote of 12-13.
WASHINGTON — A U.S. House panel on Wednesday rejected a measure that would have enabled veterans with same-sex spouses to receive partner benefits regardless of where they reside.
The Washington Blade reports that the U.S. House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs rejected the Veteran Spouses Equal Treatment Act by a vote of 12-13.
Although the vote was a largely along party lines withRepublicans voting “no” andDemocrats voting “yes,” Rep. Jon Runyan (R-N.J.), a co-sponsor of theEmployment Non-Discrimination Act, was the only Republican who broke with his party to vote “yes” on the amendment.
Introduced in June 2013 by U.S. Rep. Dina Titus (D-Nev.), the Veteran Spouses Equal Treatment Act would amend the definition of “spouse” in Title 38 of the U.S. Code to ensure equal treatment for same-sex spouses, thereby aligning the Veteran Administration with the Department of Defenseand the Supreme Court ruling in Windsor v. U.S.
The change would prevent legally married LGBT veterans from losing their federal benefits if they live in a state which does not recognize marriage equality. ‘
“Today the House VA Committee had the opportunity to end this injustice by passing my amendment to ensure all veterans have equal access to the federal benefits they have earned and deserve, said Titus, in a statement.
“It makes no sense that legally married soldiers receive benefits while in the military but can lose those benefits when they become veterans if they live in the wrong place. And it is unfair that a legally married couple can get federal VA benefits if they live in California but lose them if they move to Florida,” she said.
“Sadly, my Republican colleagues chose not to stand with our veterans and their families, and instead remained silent, allowing this discrimination to continue. They lack one ounce of the courage they so often extol as a virtue of our nation’s veterans. Shame on them.”
Because, according to these godly Americans known as Republicans and conservatives, if you are gay or lesbian, the law should demean your full humanity, you should suffer extra hardships because Jesus says so, or something, you should be told by your Christian conservative betters that you are less worthy than they are, you should “know your place” in the sexual orientation apartheid state that the Republican party wants to preserve.