See on Scoop.it – OUR COMMON GROUND News Board •● ☥●• The Third Eye Parenthesis
If you recall during that most recent presidential debate, candidate Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama were asked to suggest solutions to the serious gun control problem in America.
See on naturallymoi.com
If you recall during that most recent presidential debate, candidate Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama were asked to suggest solutions to the serious gun control problem in America. Both candidates gave what they probably felt were thorough answers, but Romney seemed to believe that the problem was not with the weapons on the street, but with single mothers.
This claim has led to charges of racism and scapegoating by the Romney camp, who are presuming that having a single mother causes young children to be shot by gang bangers in their neighborhoods. Such a suggestion releases Romney and other Republicans from the responsibility of keeping guns off the streets and out of the hands of criminals.
The National Rifle Association is a strong backer of the Republican Party and fights to keep gun laws from being changed. But there are some who suggest that there is a consistent and concerted effort to keep revenue flowing by allowing guns to get into urban neighborhoods, where most of America doesn’t care about the death toll. As a result of this approach, gun violence is the leading cause of death for African American males between the ages of 15 and 19.
Here is what Romney had to say about single mothers and their participation in creating the culture of violence in urban America:
Race-Baiting? Experts Angry that Mitt Romney Blames Single Mothers for Gun Violence | Naturally Moi.
See on Scoop.it – OUR COMMON GROUND News Board •● ☥●• The Third Eye Parenthesis
Race 2012 uses the current presidential election as a lens through which to explore America’s rapidly changing racial landscape.
See on www.pbs.org
See on Scoop.it – OUR COMMON GROUND News Board •● ☥●• The Third Eye Parenthesis
Mitt Romney’s debate bounce seems to have leveled out as new polls now put President Obama back in the lead on the national level.
See on www.examiner.com
MY TRUE SENSE
“Eliminating Ignorance to Empower the People”
ABOUT
A WORD ABOUT OUR RIGHT TO VOTE AND ITS RELEVANCE
October 16, 2012 by mytruesense
October 16, 2012 by mytruesense
With the United States’ Presidential election now 22 days away, we all hear the common refrain reserved especially for times like this: “Our people fought and died for the right to vote, and we do our ancestors a disservice if we don’t.” If one of us brave souls dares to express skepticism about going to the ballot box we hear the equally common “Well if you don’t vote, you don’t have the right to complain.” Because I believe such statements are misleading, inaccurate, and potentially damaging to understand our role in paving the way for Black empowerment, I’m devoting some time here to address the issue.
My premise is that voting is one of many important citizenship rights we have, and arguably not the one that Black people spent most of their energy fighting for or utilizing. A survey of history will demonstrate that the primary things we “fought and died for” included being recognized as United States citizens; having our citizenship rights and privileges enforced and protected; having the artificial barrier of race removed in any evaluation of our ability; being free to fairly compete for employment, education, business, and other opportunities for “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”; being protected from mob attack, lynching, or various forms of white intimidation and physical brutality.
http://mytruesense.wordpress.com/2012/10/16/a-word-about-our-right-to-vote-and-its-relevance/
via A WORD ABOUT OUR RIGHT TO VOTE AND ITS RELEVANCE « MY TRUE SENSE.
 SHARE |
« Previous Coates | Next Coates » |  EMAIL  PRINT |
Jason Thompson, the son of former Governor and Wisconson Senate candidate Tommy Thompson, speaking this morning at a brunch attended RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said that “we have the opportunity to send President Obama back to Chicago — or Kenya.” A woman in attendance then chimed in “we are taking donations for that Kenya trip.”
It’s Funny Because We’re White – Ta-Nehisi Coates – The Atlantic.
See on Scoop.it – OUR COMMON GROUND News Board •● ☥●• The Third Eye Parenthesis
Mitt Romney’s son, Tagg Romney, has been discovered to have engaged in a contract with a surrogate mother with the stipulations that if the child being carried…
See on www.examiner.com
The billionaire Koch brothers have become the poster children for corporate influence on politics in the post-Citizens United era.
WEB ONLY// FEATURES » OCTOBER 14, 2012
Koch Sends Pro-Romney Mailing to 45,000 Employees While Stifling Workplace Political Speech
The billionaire Koch brothers have found a new way to influence the 2012 election—preaching to employees.
BY MIKE ELK
See on Scoop.it – OUR COMMON GROUND Informed Truth and Resistance
WEB ONLY// FEATURES » OCTOBER 14, 2012
Koch Sends Pro-Romney Mailing to 45,000 Employees While Stifling Workplace Political Speech
The billionaire Koch brothers have found a new way to influence the 2012 election—preaching to employees.
BY MIKE ELK
No longer is it good enough for the Kochs to spend unlimited money influencing elections. They are also touting candidates to employees while creating policies that have a chilling effect on employees’ freedom of speech.
Much has been written about the owners of Koch Industries, brothers David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch, trying to control the political process through hundreds of millions of dollars in donations to right-wing causes and candidates. Now, an In These Times investigation reveals that the billionaires have broken out another tactic to influence the 2012 elections: attempting to control their workers’ votes.
In a voter information packet obtained by In These Times, the Koch Industries corporate leadership informed tens of thousands of employees at its subsidiary, Georgia Pacific, that their livelihood could depend on the 2012 election and that the company supports Mitt Romney for president. The guide was similar to one the company distributed before the 2010 midterm elections, which Mark Ames and I reported on in The Nation last year.
See on inthesetimes.com
Ignore all confusing rhetoric. In the end, one candidate really wants to raise taxes, and one wants to cut benefits. Guess which is which. 
In case you’re feeling a bit confused about how exactly the Obama and Romney campaigns differ on their plans for Social Security, don’t worry: it’s probably just a sign you’ve been paying attention during the debates.
During his low-wattage performance in Denver, the president chagrined his supporters by suggesting that he and Romney would take similar approaches to keeping Social Security solvent. The campaign quickly began walking that statement back, and by last night, Joe Biden was railing against the GOP ticket for supporting the Bush administration’s plan to privatize the program. Paul Ryan demurred, arguing that Romney just wanted to curtail retirement payments for higher earners.
Now feel free to forget most of that. Here’s what appears to be the actual divide, made simple: Obama wants to raise taxes in order to keep Social Security afloat while reducing some benefits. Romney doesn’t want to raise taxes, which means he would have to cut more benefits. Sounds familiar, no?
Social Security is expected to tumble into insolvency by 2033. The program already sends more to beneficiaries than it takes in via payroll taxes, but for the time being, the Treasury is covering the deficit by paying back money it borrowed from the program. When those funds run dry in two decades, we’ll be dealing with a serious shortfall.
Neither Romney nor Obama has released a detailed plan for fixing this problem. But they’ve each said enough to give us a rough sketch of their intentions.
The Real Difference Between Romney and Obama on Social Security – Jordan Weissmann – The Atlantic.
OCG 