FEBRUARY 26, 2019


NEWS AND VIEWS


INDIANA JONES GONE ROGUE – AND YES, IT IS ILLEGAL. ONE OR MORE INDIAN TRIBES SOME 20 YEARS AGO WAS WAGING A WAR WITH EVEN LEGITIMATE ARCHAEOLOGISTS FOR COLLECTING AND KEEPING BONES RATHER THAN DOING SOME RESEARCH AND RETURNING THEM TO THE TRIBAL ELDERS, AND EVEN BETTER, LEAVING MOST THINGS UNTOUCHED. BONES AND TEETH ARE USED FOR DATING AND DNA TESTING. IT’S FASCINATING, BUT WE NEED TO REMEMBER THAT AMERINDIANS ARE NOT “CURIOSITIES.” THAT’S A FORM OF “OBJECTIFYING” PEOPLE FOR OTHER REASONS, OFTEN AS A CHOSEN ENEMY TO FOCUS ANGER ON, AND IN MY CASE, AS A MENTAL TOOL FOR TIME TRAVEL. ZOOMING BACKWARD TEN OR TWENTY THOUSAND YEARS IS A THRILL, AND UNLESS YOU HAVE TO PAY A LEGAL FINE, IT’S FREE OF CHARGE. RIGHT?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-speaks-out-on-seizing-artifacts-from-indiana-home-staggering-discovery-of-human-bones/
CBS NEWS February 26, 2019, 8:41 AM
While seizing thousands of artifacts from an Indiana home, FBI makes "staggering" discovery

When the FBI showed up at Don Miller's home in rural Indiana in 2014 to seize part of his vast personal collection of artifacts, it was a shock for people who knew him.

"He was very beloved. He was very charismatic," former local reporter Liz Dykes said. Dykes interviewed the 90-year-old former engineer about his time in World War II, his missionary work in Haiti, and most of all, his huge collection of artifacts from around the world.

"The entire house is a museum. There are things everywhere," Dykes recounted. "It was just mind-blowing."

Miller willingly showed his collection to reporters, residents, and even local Boy Scout troops, so when the FBI came calling, she said, "I wanted to know what they were looking for... There had to have been something."

There was: something the FBI hasn't talked about—until now.

"When I first went into his house and saw the size of the collection, it was unlike anything we'd ever seen," Tim Carpenter, who heads the FBI's art crime unit, told CBS News correspondent Anna Werner. "Not only me, but I don't think anybody on the art crime team."

FBI photos – never before shown publicly – give a glimpse of the collection: some 42,000 items, including pre-Colombian pottery, an Italian mosaic, and items from China, some that Miller labeled "Chinese Jewelry" from 500 BC.

"Roughly half of the collection was Native American, and the other half of the collection was from every corner of the globe," Carpenter said.

But the problem? Carpenter said a lot of it had been illegally obtained. Miller admitted he'd gone on digging expeditions in foreign countries and around the United States for decades in violation of antiquities laws.

"Did he understand that he had obtained some things illegally?" Werner asked.

"He did," Carpenter said, adding that Miller admitted to it.

Miller eventually agreed to let the FBI seize some 5,000 artifacts so they could be returned to their countries of origin. But Carpenter said all the FBI's careful planning couldn't prepare them for another, more disturbing discovery.

"About 2,000 human bones," Carpenter said. "To the best of our knowledge right now, those 2,000 bones represent about 500 human beings."

Nearly all of those human remains, he said, were also dug up from ancient Native American burial sites.

"It's very staggering," Carpenter said.

"Why would anybody have that many human bones?" Werner asked.

"I don't know. I truly don't know," Carpenter said.

Native American burial sites dating back thousands of years have been a source of fascination for archeologists for decades. One old government film showed the excavation of an ancient Native American village in Alabama. Over time, many other sites have been looted by people seeking artifacts and even skeletons.

"This comes down to a basic human right," said Holly Cusack-McVeigh, a professor of archaeology brought in by the FBI on the Miller case.

"We have to think about the context of: Who has been the target of grave robbing for centuries? Whose ancestors have been collected for hobby?" Cusack-McVeigh said. "And this comes down to racism. They aren't digging white graves."

Experts determined the remains found at Miller's residence likely came from Native American tribes including the Arikara. In North Dakota, tribal official Pete Coffey is working with the FBI to bring them home.

"All too often here we have been treated as curiosities rather than a people here," Coffey said. "They could very well be my own great, great, great, great grandfather, or grandmother, you know, that had been – I characterize it as being ripped out of the earth, you know."

Miller died in 2015. We wanted to know what his widow thought about all this, so we went to Miller's home, where a Chinese terracotta warrior figure stood guard outside.

"I can't comment on the situation at this time," Miller's wife said.

But Carpenter believes in his later years, Miller understood the ramifications of what he did.

"I think he felt compelled to try and do the right thing and return these home," Carpenter said.

Returning those Native American ancestors home is what Carpenter calls the FBI's most important mission now.

"You have to treat these people with dignity. These are human beings and people. It matters. It has meaning to people today, it has meaning to our children and their children," Carpenter said.

So far, the FBI has already returned items from Miller's collection to several countries, including Cambodia, Canada, Colombia, and Mexico. A Chinese delegation will go to Indianapolis this week to claim artifacts. They have already returned some Native American ancestral remains to tribes in the South Dakota region and are planning a large-scale repatriation of remains to other tribes in the coming months.

© 2019 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



ANOTHER KAVANAUGH EFFECT? THIS DECISION DOESN’T REQUIRE THAT SALARY HISTORY BE DISREGARDED IN SETTING PAY FOR A WOMAN OR MAN, BUT THAT THE CASE MUST BE RECONSIDERED OVER A TECHNICAL ISSUE AND JUSTICE HAS JUST BEEN UNDONE BY SUBTERFUGE. BOYS WIN, GIRLS LOSE – AGAIN. THAT CASE MUST NOW BE DECIDED AGAIN, BECAUSE NOT ONLY DO DEAD MEN NOT TALK, THEY DON’T VOTE EITHER.

THE KEY LEGAL MATTER IN THE CASE, THOUGH, IS NOT WHO VOTED, BUT THE ALL-IMPORTANT MATTER THAT ANYTHING THAT PREVENTS WOMEN FROM BEING ALLOWED FULL AND EQUAL PAY FOR FULL AND EQUAL WORK, IS DISHONEST, TOTALLY UNFAIR, HEARTLESS AND SHAMELESS. THE REINHARDT DECISION STATES THAT USING PAY HISTORY IS NOT AND NEVER HAS BEEN “GENDER NEUTRAL.” IT IS HEAVILY WEIGHTED IN FAVOR OF MEN, AND THAT IT LEGALLY PERPETUATES ONE OF THE WORLD’S MOST BASIC INJUSTICES.

THIS LOOKS TO ME LIKE JUST ANOTHER RIGHT-WING DECISION, AND CERTAINLY ISN’T JUSTICE. IN THE REAL WORLD, A WOMAN WITH THREE CHILDREN AND CHILD CARE COSTS NEEDS THE EXTRA MONEY ALSO. THE DAY WHEN MEN REALLY “PROVIDED THE SOLE SUPPORT FOR A FAMILY” HAS LONG GONE. ‘NUFF SAID!

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/25/supreme-court-vacates-appeals-court-ruling-written-deceased-judge-gender-neutral-pay/2909718002/
Supreme Court vacates appeals court gender-neutral pay ruling written by a deceased judge
Richard Wolf, USA TODAY Published 9:51 a.m. ET Feb. 25, 2019 | Updated 2:29 p.m. ET Feb. 25, 2019

PHOTOGRAPH -- The Supreme Court acted in a case involving pay equity between the sexes. (Photo11: JIM WATSON, AFP/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court vacated a federal appeals court decision Monday for a simple reason: It was filed after the judge who wrote it had died.

"Federal judges are appointed for life, not for eternity," the justices wrote in an unsigned, five-page opinion.

A California county had asked the Supreme Court to reconsider the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruling in part because it was written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who died March 29, 2018 at age 87. The ruling was filed 11 days later, on April 9.

"Deceased judges cannot decide cases," Shay Dvoretsky, the lawyer for the school district, argued in court papers.

The Supreme Court agreed, noting that Reinhardt's reasoning in the case was endorsed by just six of the 11 judges on the panel, which meant his vote was critical. Although the decision wasn't altered after his death, the high court said judges could have changed their votes, making it an active case until the decision was issued.

"Because Judge Reinhardt was no longer a judge at the time when the en banc* decision in this case was filed, the Ninth Circuit erred in counting him as a member of the majority," the justices said. "That practice effectively allowed a deceased judge to exercise the judicial power of the United States after his death."

Reinhardt was a well-known liberal judge who served on the equally liberal appeals court for more than 37 years. He was the last appeals court judge in active service who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter.

The justices' order does not settle the central issue in the case – whether men and women can be paid differently for the same work because of their prior salaries.

Fresno County hired a female math consultant at a lower salary than her male counterparts. School officials reasoned that salary history was a permissible, gender-neutral basis for determining pay rates under the federal Equal Pay Act of 1963.

The appeals court disagreed last year in an opinion written by Reinhardt, ruling unanimously that "prior salary alone or in combination with other factors cannot justify a wage differential" because it would perpetuate a pay gap between men and women.

Thirteen states, including California, and 10 local governments now prohibit employers from seeking job applicants' salary history. But federal appeals courts are split on whether prior pay can be considered along with other factors.

The central issue in the case is whether salary history is a job-related factor, such as work experience, ability and performance. Because women historically have been paid less than men for the same job, the appeals court ruled that it was not.

"If money talks, the message to women costs more than ... billions. Women are told they are not worth as much as men," Reinhardt wrote for six of the court's 11 judges, all of whom agreed with the result. "Allowing prior salary to justify a wage differential perpetuates this message, entrenching in salary systems an obvious means of discrimination."

The appeals court now must consider the case anew, without Reinhardt's presence.


en banc* -- WHAT DOES THIS LEGAL TERM MEAN?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En_banc
En banc
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In law, an en banc session (French for "in bench") is a session in which a case is heard before all the judges of a court (before the entire bench) rather than by a panel of judges selected from them.[1][2] The equivalent terms in banc, in banco or in bank are also sometimes seen. En banc review is often used for unusually complex cases or cases considered to be of greater importance.[2]



MUCH BETTER SPECIFIC INFORMATION ON THIS WOMEN’S PAY SCALE DECISION IS FOUND HERE FROM LATIMES.COM. ENJOY! ALSO, I LIKE LA TIMES BECAUSE THEY DON’T FORGET TO ROOT FOR THE RIGHT TEAM.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-court-reinhardt-20190225-story.html
Supreme Court overturns 9th Circuit equal-pay decision because of judge’s death
By DAVID G. SAVAGE
FEB 25, 2019 | 2:55 PM
| WASHINGTON

PHOTOGRAPH -- Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, seen at a 2010 hearing in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, died March 29, 2018. (Eric Risberg / Associated Press)

The Supreme Court on Monday overturned a U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision on equal pay because Judge Stephen Reinhardt from Los Angeles died 11 days before the ruling was announced.

“Federal judges are appointed for life, not for eternity,” the high court said in a brief, unsigned opinion.

During his long career, Reinhardt was a liberal leader of the 9th Circuit and voiced a certain pride in being reversed often by the more conservative Supreme Court.

On April 9, the 9th Circuit, based in San Francisco, issued an opinion in a Fresno school case that was written by Reinhardt and spoke for a 6-5 majority.

The opinion upheld an Equal Pay Act claim brought by Aileen Rizo, who alleged she was paid less than male colleagues because her starting salary was based unfairly on her pay level in a previous job. Reinhardt said the 1963 law was intended to eliminate pay discrimination against women. It would be “inconceivable,” he wrote, that the law would permit “disparities that Congress declared are not only related to sex but caused by sex.”

But Reinhardt died March 29 when the case was still pending.

In a footnote issued with the ruling, the 9th Circuit said: “Prior to his death, Judge Reinhardt fully participated in this case and authored this opinion. The majority opinion and all concurrences were final, and voting was completed by the en banc prior to his death.”

But lawyers for Jim Yovino, Fresno school superintendent, appealed. They questioned whether the 9th Circuit was right to bar employers from considering a job applicant’s prior earnings when setting their salary. They also questioned whether a deceased judge can cast the deciding vote in an appellate decision.

On Monday, the justices set aside the 9th Circuit’s ruling based on Reinhardt’s role.

In Yovino vs. Rizo, the court said, the 9th Circuit had not explained how the April 9 decision could be a “majority opinion” since it “was not endorsed by a majority of the living judges at the time of issuance.”

The justices had a similar recent experience. In mid-February 2016, Justice Antonin Scalia died unexpectedly. He had cast votes in a series of cases in which the opinion was still pending at the time of death. In several cases, the high court announced it was split 4-4 and could not issue a ruling.

Monday’s ruling makes clear that the votes of deceased judges cannot be used to decide cases.

Other than in this case, the high court’s opinion said, “we are aware of no cases in which a court of appeals panel has purported to issue a binding decision that was joined at the time of release by less than a quorum of the judges who were alive at the time.” Issuing a ruling written by Judge Reinhardt after his death “effectively allowed a deceased judge to exercise the judicial power of the United States after this death. But federal judges are appointed for life, not for eternity."

The outcome leaves unresolved the question of whether the Equal Pay Act forbids employers from paying new employees based on his or her previous salary. Rizo’s case will return to the 9th Circuit, which could convene a new en banc court to decide the issue, with another appellate judge taking Reinhardt’s place.

The latest from Washington »
More stories from David G. Savage »


WHAT AN INTERESTING SET OF STORIES WE’VE HAD TODAY. I PERSONALLY WOULDN’T WANT TO FIGHT IN A WAR, BUT I KNOW SOME WOMEN DO. WE EACH SEEK OUR OWN AUTONOMY IN DIFFERENT WAYS. AS LONG AS THERE ARE NON-COMBATANT ROLES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN A UNIVERSAL SERVICE LAW, IT COULD VERY WELL BE GOOD FOR WOMEN. YOUNG PEOPLE, MALE OR FEMALE, NEED A BOOT UP OUTSIDE THEIR PARENTS’ HOME AND FROM THEIR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION, WHATEVER THAT IS, VERY FREQUENTLY. IT TAKES AWHILE FOR MATURITY TO CATCH UP TO YEARS.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/02/24/military-draft-judge-rules-male-only-registration-unconstitutional/2968872002/


EVERY WOMAN SHOULD WATCH THIS VIDEO, AND PERHAPS MEN, TOO. I TEND TO FORGET THAT MEN GET RAPED. IT ISN’T THAT IT DOESN’T HAPPEN, BUT THAT WE DON’T HEAR ABOUT IT FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS; SO THESE HOTELS NEED TO BECOME MORE RESPONSIBLE. THE ATTACKER IN THIS STORY GOT THE KEY TO THE VICTIM’S ROOM – IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT – BY SIMPLY GOING TO THE DESK AND ASKING FOR IT. HE WASN’T EVEN ASKED TO PRESENT HIS ID. IT’S AN ARGUMENT FOR CARRYING A PISTOL. IN THIS CASE, SHE WAS ASLEEP AND WOKE UP TO HAVING THIS MAN TOUCHING HER LEG, AND SHE FROZE IN FEAR. SO, DON’T PUT YOUR PISTOL INTO THE NIGHT TABLE, BUT UNDER YOUR PILLOW? EVEN THAT ISN’T FOOLPROOF. THIS WOMAN IS MAKING A SETTLEMENT NOW WITH THE HOTEL FOR MONEY. THAT’S BETTER THAN NOTHING, BUT NOT AS GOOD AS A SAFE AND UNDISTURBED NIGHT’S SLEEP. MONEY DOESN’T ERASE MEMORIES. SHE HAS PURCHASED A SEPARATE LOCK WHICH SHE HERSELF CAN ATTACH AS NEEDED.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live/video/20190225132522-woman-attacked-in-hotel-room-speaks-out-after-settling-sexual-assault-case/?ftag=CNM15cf32c



HERE IS ANOTHER CAUTIONARY TALE. BE PREPARED TO MOVE QUICKLY, ESPECIALLY IF THE BUILDING YOU LIVE IN CHANGES HANDS. KEEP THAT EXTRA MONTH’S RENT UNTOUCHED IN YOUR BANK ACCOUNT AS LONG AS YOU CAN. I REMEMBER LIVING IN A BUILDING IN WASHINGTON DC WHICH WAS TRYING TO EDGE THE OLDER TENANTS OUT SO THAT THEY COULD RAISE THEIR RENTS WITHOUT A LAWSUIT, AND THE RENT CONTROL MOVEMENT BY PEOPLE LIKE US WHO HAPPENED TO LIVE THERE. WHY ISN’T MANDATORY RENT CONTROL, AT LEAST ON BUILDINGS OVER, SAY, FIFTY YEARS OLD, THE LAW OF THE LAND? WE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE, AND WE SHOULD OF COURSE, BUT WE NEED TO CONTROL EXPENSES ALSO.

IN THIS VIDEO STORY, THE RENTS IN LOS ANGELES WERE RAISED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT SO THAT PEOPLE ON THE EDGE IN THEIR INCOME LEVEL WERE SUDDENLY UNABLE TO PAY. THAT IS LEGAL, BUT IT SHOULDN’T BE. MAYBE IT WON’T BE FOR LONG IF PUBLIC AWARENESS IS IMPROVED. OF COURSE, I HAVE HEARD OF THE EXTREMELY HIGH RENTS IN L.A. FOR YEARS, SO IT’S NOT NEW. IT’S ALSO NOT LIMITED TO SOUTHERN CA OR NEW YORK CITY. WHEREVER LANDLORD TENANT LAWS HEAVILY FAVOR THE LANDLORD, IT OCCURS, AND THAT IS SURELY EVERYWHERE IN THE USA.

MY MEMORIES OF LIVING IN APARTMENTS WHEN I WAS SINGLE INVOLVED SHARING THE SPACE AND THE RENT. FOR ME, I PREFER THAT, BECAUSE I ALSO LIKE THE COMPANIONSHIP AND THE GREATER FEELING OF SAFETY IN THAT ARRANGEMENT. I’VE PICKED THIS ARTICLE TODAY TO POINT UP THE FACT THAT MANY PEOPLE LIVING IN THEIR CAR OR A TENT ARE NOT DRUG ADDICTS OR ALCOHOLICS, AS SOME ASSUME. THEY JUST AREN’T WEALTHY, HAVE LOST THEIR JOB, MAY HAVE A MEDICAL CONDITION OR A CHILD TO REAR, AND ACTUALLY END UP OUT IN THE RAIN. THIS ARTICLE IS ABOUT THE INCREASING NUMBER OF SUCH HONEST BUT UNFORTUNATE PEOPLE, AS RENTS ARE ALLOWED TO RISE SKY HIGH. I THINK WE NEED LAWS, NATIONWIDE, THAT MAKE IT UNLAWFUL TO CHARGE MORE THAN ONE QUARTER OF A RENTER’S INCOME.

THERE WOULD BE WEEPING AND WAILING AMONG THE WELL-TO-DO CLASS AS THEIR INCOMES WERE CUT OFF OR REDUCED SIGNIFICANTLY, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO (IF I WERE MAKING THE LAWS) GIVE A THREE-MONTH NOTICE TO THE RENTER BEFORE EVICTING HIM. BUILDING OWNERS COULD, ALSO, CHOOSE TO BECOME HUD HOUSING PROVIDERS, RECEIVING A TAX BREAK FOR THAT SERVICE, AND ACCEPT A MANDATED LESSER RENT – BUT GIVEN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO NEED GENUINELY AFFORDABLE HOUSING – THEY STILL WOULD MAKE A REGULAR INCOME THROUGH AN INCREASE IN VOLUME, THOUGH NOT THE “PRINCELY SUM” THAT THEY ARE USED TO CHARGING.

REMEMBER THE OLD CLASSIC COMEDIES IN WHICH MULTIPLE UNRELATED PEOPLE ARE SHARING THE SAME SPACE, OR THAT GRAND OLD SONG THAT GOES, “FIFTEEN MEN IN A BOARDING HOUSE BED, ROLL OVER ROLL OVER. ONE MAN DECIDED IT WOULD BE A GREAT JOKE NOT TO ROLL OVER WHEN ANYONE SPOKE, AND IN THE CONFUSION, HE GOT HIS NECK BROKE. ROLL OVER, ROLL OVER.” NEXT VERSE: “FOURTEEN MEN IN A BOARDING HOUSE BED, ETC.” NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT’S THE KIND OF SONG THAT IS, AS THEY SAY IN OLD BOOKS, “WRY HUMOR” – LAUGHING TO KEEP FROM CRYING, BECAUSE IT IS BASED IN REAL WORLD PAIN.

I WAS THINKING OF THE 1930S IN REGARD TO THAT SONG, BUT IN LOOKING UP “BOARDING HOUSE” ON GOOGLE, I FOUND MANY ERAS AND MANY STORIES. RUNNING BOARDING HOUSES HAS A LONG HISTORY. MANY WIDOW LADIES HAVE MADE ENOUGH MONEY TO GET ALONG BY RENTING OUT THE ROOMS IN THEIR OLD FAMILY HOME, AND AN ENTERPRISING FEW STILL DO. THE GREAT IF ECCENTRIC NORTH CAROLINA WRITER THOMAS WOLFE AND HIS MOTHER RAN A BOARDING HOUSE IN THEIR HUGE OLD FAMILY HOME IN ASHEVILLE.
[SEE: https://www.romanticasheville.com/thomaswolfe.htm -- GUIDED TOURS FOR $5.00.]

AS THE WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE ON BOARDING HOUSES MENTIONED, SHERLOCK HOLMES IS PORTRAYED AS LIVING IN A MORE OR LESS PERMANENT BOARDING HOUSE ARRANGEMENT. I WOULDN’T WANT TO DO IT, BUT IF I HAD NO OTHER PLACE TO GO, I CERTAINLY WOULD. I COULD JOIN THE RANKS OF FAMOUS IMPOVERISHED WRITERS, A SELECT AND HONORABLE CLUB. [SEE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boarding_house. ]

VIDEO -- https://www.cbsnews.com/video/priced-out-los-angeles-hidden-homeless-cbsn-originals/



BERNIE, HE’S THE MAN. IF YOU WANT TO SEE WHAT I SEE IN HIM ON THE PERSONAL LEVEL, LOOK AT THE PHOTO WHICH IS WITH THIS ARTICLE. SO WARM, HONEST, GENTLE AND BENIGN. WHEN HE’S NOT FIGHTING, HE’S “JUST BERNIE.” HE DOESN’T HAVE TO GO TO ACTING SCHOOL TO BE ABLE TO APPEAR TO REALLY EMPATHIZE WITH AND BELIEVE IN THE PEOPLE. HE IS OF THE PEOPLE. WHY CAN’T ALL POLITICIANS BE LIKE THAT?

SO, WHAT IF HE GETS A LITTLE GRUFF SOMETIMES? THAT IS ONE THING THAT IS TRUE ABOUT ALL GENUINE LEADERS, AND THAT IS WHAT BERNIE IS. HE WALKS ON OUT FRONT TO CONFRONT THE ATTACKERS AND THE UNNECESSARILY, THE UNCONSCIONABLY WEALTHY. I HAVE BEEN TIRED OF OVERLY SMOOTH, PERHAPS TIMID, AND DEFINITELY LESS THAN CREATIVE DEMOCRATS FOR YEARS NOW. IT’S TIME FOR AN INDEPENDENT, APPARENTLY, TO LEAD THE DEMOCRATS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, SINCE THEY HAVE VEERED SO FAR OFF THE PATH TO THE RIGHT, AND FOR SUCH A LONG TIME. THE DNC CENTRISTS HOLD A GRUDGE AGAINST BERNIE FOR THAT NEAR SUCCESS ON HIS PART, BUT THE CONSIDERABLE REDIRECTING THAT HE HAS DONE IN THE PARTY IS THE ROLE OF AN INDEPENDENT – TO BRING NEW IDEAS AND POINT OUT THE ERRORS OF THE PAST.

OTHERS MAY STEP UP, GOD BLESS THEM, NOW THAT IT IS RELATIVELY SAFE FOR THEM TO DO SO, BECAUSE NOW THEY STAND IN THE SHADOW OF “THE MAN,” AND CLAIMING TO BE VERY “PROGRESSIVE/SOCIALIST” PROBABLY WON’T GET THEM KNOCKED OUT OF THE CANDIDATE ROLLS. IT IS POPULAR NOW RATHER THAN SEEMINGLY “DANGEROUS” TO BE MOVERS AND SHAKERS. A NUMBER HAVE BEGUN TO SAY RECENTLY HOW PROGRESSIVE THEY ARE; BUT WE NEED FOR THEM TO BE THERE, TOO, ON THE NIGHT OF THE NEXT DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION, AND ACTIVELY HELP NOMINATE BERNIE FOR PRESIDENT. AT THIS POINT, I BELIEVE WHAT I SEE.

THAT’S THE WAY THE STORY OUGHT TO GO, ANYWAY. YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED THAT UNDER HIS LEADERSHIP, WARREN, CASTRO AND OTHERS HAVE PRESENTED GOOD IDEAS, BOLDER BY THE DAY, BUT WHERE WERE THOSE PEOPLE IN THE PAST? ALSO, THEIR GOALS AND BELIEFS AREN’T SO NEAR TO HIS AS I WOULD LIKE, EXCEPT MAYBE FOR AOC, AND SHE’S TOO YOUNG TO BE VP. I’M INTERESTED IN KAMALA HARRIS AND STACEY ABRAMS, ALTHOUGH I DON’T KNOW MUCH ABOUT EITHER OF THEM. THEY DO BOTH LOOK HONEST, INTELLIGENT AND OPEN, THOUGH. THEY MIGHT BE GOOD CHOICES IF THEY ARE OLD ENOUGH FOR THE PRESIDENCY IN 2020. ABRAMS ISN’T, I DON’T THINK, BUT HARRIS MAY BE. SHE ISN’T AS CLOSE TO SANDERS’ MODEL IN HER BELIEFS AS I WOULD LIKE, BUT SHE HAS CONSIDERABLE PERSONAL CHARM AND A SWEET AND HAPPY-LOOKING SMILE. FOR A GREAT ARTICLE ON STACEY ABRAMS, GO TO:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/06/stacey-abrams-could-become-the-first-black-female-governor-in-the-us.html.

THEN HE WILL PICK ONE OF THEM FOR VICE PRESIDENT, AND IT SHOULD BE ONE OF THE COURAGEOUS ONES, SUCH AS ELIZABETH WARREN, AND MAY THE TRUMPSTER’S NAME FOR HER, “POCAHONTAS,” BE HER BADGE OF HONOR. INSULTING TRUMP OR CHALLENGING HIM IN SOME WAY IS A GOOD THING, IN MY VIEW. TRUMP ALWAYS GOES AFTER THE ONE WHO SEEMS LIKE A GENUINE CHALLENGER AND TRIES TO CRUSH THEM. SHE DOESN’T SEEM CRUSHED YET. GOOD FOR HER.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/02/20/unprecedented-bernie-sanders-campaign-says-it-raised-6-million-225000-donors-first
Published on
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
byCommon Dreams
'Unprecedented': Bernie Sanders Campaign Says It Raised $6 Million From 225,000 Donors in First 24 Hours
The figures, argues the campaign, show that his candidacy has "a level of grassroots support of unprecedented size and excitement"
byJon Queally, staff writer

PHOTOGRAPH -- The first-day results, the Bernie Sanders campaign said, show that his candidacy has "a level of grassroots support of unprecedented size and excitement, signaling the strength of the movement set on winning the Democratic nomination, defeating Donald Trump and creating a government that works for all Americans."(Photo: Phil Roeder/Flickr/cc)

In the 24 hours since Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont announced his 2020 run for president, his campaign on Wednesday morning reports it was able to raise nearly $6 million from 225,000 individual donors across all 50 states.

According to a statement by the campaign, exactly 223,047 individuals contributed $5,925,771—putting the total raised over the $6 million mark with an average donation of just under $27. Since putting it online early Tuesday morning, the campaign said the senator's launch video has been viewed more than 8.3 million times across social media platforms, including 5.3 million views on Twitter alone.

The first-day results, the campaign said, show that his candidacy has "a level of grassroots support of unprecedented size and excitement, signalling the strength of the movement set on winning the Democratic nomination, defeating Donald Trump and creating a government that works for all Americans."

The fundraising figure—in addition to generating top political headlines—dwarfs anything other Democrats in the already crowded primary field were able to generate in their opening day and speaks to the advantage Sanders has with a massive email list from his 2016 campaign and shows his ability to generate campaign revenue with small-dollar donations has not lost its shine.

After the Sanders campaign confirmed it had raised $4 million dollars during the first 12 hours of the campaign on Tuesday night, news outlets reported this was more than double what Sen. Kamala Harris of California raised in her first 24 hours and quadruple the $1 million it took Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota to raise in 48 hours after her announcement.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License


SOME OTHER DEMOCRATS BESIDES BERNIE ARE GETTING THE RIGHT IDEA NOW. “INCREMENTALISM” IS FOR REPUBLICANS, NOT FOR DEMOCRATS, ANY MORE THAN IT IS FOR THE GENUINE GOOD OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. MOST AMERICANS ARE NOT WEALTHY, BUT THEY’RE NOT STUPID EITHER, AND THEY ARE GETTING IMPATIENT. COULD ANYONE DOUBT WHY A GENUINE PROGRESSIVE LIKE TEDDY OR FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT WOULD PLEASE PEOPLE, AND NOW SANDERS COMES ALONG. A FRIEND OF MINE COUNTERED THAT TEDDY ROOSEVELT WAS A REPUBLICAN. YES, HE WAS, BUT NOT A “CONSERVATIVE.” HE WAS A PROGRESSIVE. PARTY NAME IS NOT AS IMPORTANT AS THE NEEDED CHARACTERISTICS.

I HAVE SOME FEAR THAT RIGHTIST FORCES OF SOME STRIPE MIGHT TRY TO ASSASSINATE SANDERS. I GOOGLED THE SUBJECT, AND SANDERS DOES HAVE A SECURITY TEAM. THAT’S GOOD, BUT WILL IT BE ENOUGH? AS WITH JOHN KENNEDY, I WONDER IF HAVING A SECURITY FORCE IS ENOUGH PROTECTION FROM OLIGARCHIC RAGE.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/02/20/tax-rich-most-americans-think-its-great-idea
Published on
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
byCommon Dreams
Tax the Rich? Most Americans Think It's a Great Idea
"Across party lines, Americans want the very wealthiest families to pay their fair share so we can have an economy that works for everyone."
byJulia Conley, staff writer

PHOTOGRAPH -- Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has unveiled a a plan to levy a two percent tax on household assets over $50 million—a proposal which has gained traction with a majority of Americans. (Photo: @ewarren/Twitter)

"Who else is tired of an economy and a tax code that benefits the wealthy and corporations while working Americans are left behind?" the national economic justice movement Tax March asked on Wednesday.

According to recent polling, the answer is "Most Americans."

A poll this month by the New York Times and Survey Monkey showed that most Americans from across the political spectrum support "tax the rich" proposals like the ones put forward by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), with nearly two-thirds of Americans saying that the current economic system—in which the richest 0.00025 percent of the population now owns more wealth than the bottom 60 percent—is immoral.

"They're not paying their fair share," Fred Wood of Williamsport, Pennsylvania told the Times. "It's just not right when folks cannot afford healthcare."

Warren's plan to levy a two percent tax on the assets of Americans with more than $50 million has proven popular, with 75 percent of Democrats and more than half of Republicans supporting the proposal. The "Ultra-Millionaires Tax" would raise $2.75 trillion over a decade, according to economists advising Warren, and would partially be used to pay for the senator's universal childcare plan.

"Across party lines, Americans want the very wealthiest families to pay their fair share so we can have an economy that works for everyone," Warren told the Times.

The newspaper's polling also found that Ocasio-Cortez's proposal to tax income over $10 million at 70 percent is popular with Americans—despite Republicans' and centrist Democrats' attempts to portray the idea as "unrealistic."

Fifty-one percent of respondents supported Ocasio-Cortez's plan, including about a third of Republicans.

The Times pointed out that the public has for decades believed that the government should force the wealthiest Americans and corporations to pay more in taxes—but that they have rarely been given the opportunity to vote for politicians who offer ambitious tax proposals.

"This is about politicians catching up to where Americans have been," political scientist Leslie McCall told the Times.

The poll results followed Sen. Bernie Sanders's (I-Vt.) Tuesday announcement that he was officially entering the 2020 presidential race. As part of his argument for his candidacy, Sanders noted that his condemnation of the outsize wealth of millionaires and billionaires was treated as "radical" by many during his 2016 campaign—but that his demand the richest Americans contribute far more to the common good has now gone mainstream.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License


60 MINUTES

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/opioid-epidemic-did-the-fda-ignite-the-crisis-60-minutes/


LOOK AT THIS PHOTOGRAPH (AND THE OTHERS AT THAT SITE) FOR ITS’ COMBINATION OF BEAUTY AND AN UNEASY SENSE OF POWERS GREATER THAN MYSELF.

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/jpl/dramatic-jupiter

SEE THIS HUGE “CIRCULAR FEATURE,” WHICH LOOKS LIKE A SUPERSIZED HURRICANE. IT LEAVES NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT I DON’T WANT TO LIVE ON ANOTHER PLANET. WE’D BETTER TAKE BETTER CARE OF THIS ONE, UNLESS SOMEBODY KNOWS MORE THAN I THINK THEY DO ABOUT ROCKET TECHNOLOGY AND PLANS TO SET UP AN EARTHLIKE ENVIRONMENT WAY, WAY OUT THERE SOMEWHERE.