Toyota

Since the Dilly, Dally, Delay & Stall Law Firms are adding their billable hours, the Toyota U.S.A. and Route 44 Toyota posts have been separated here:

Route 44 Toyota Sold Me A Lemon



Monday, February 29, 2016

Bloviating Family Values Jack Ass O'Reilly Loses custody of kids


Poor kids! 

POLITICS

“Family Values” Hypocrite Bill O’Reilly Loses Custody Of Kids After Choking His Wife



Bill O’Reilly loses custody battle with ex-wife over their two kids 


Notorious FOX pundit Bill O’Reilly has been denied custody of his children by a New York appeals court after they were convinced that he was unfit to care for them after a vicious domestic violence incident. His kids, a 12-year-old boy and 17-year-old girl, will stay with his ex-wife Maureen McPhilmy. The court ruling announced that:

“Viewing the totality of the circumstances, there is a sound and substantial basis for the Supreme Court’s determination that it is in the best interests of the children for the mother to be awarded primary residential custody. Particularly relevant in this case are the clearly stated preferences of the children, especially considering their age and maturity, and the quality of the home environment provided by the mother.”
The right-wing propagandist and shameless liar initially lost custody of his kids following O’Reilly’s horrific attack on his ex-wife; his daughter told a court psychologist that he “was choking her mom or had his hands around her neck and dragged her down some stairs.


NYC PAPERS OUT; NO SALES TO DAILY MAIL; Social media use restricted to low res file. Max 184 x 128 pixels and 72 dpi;
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS/NY DAILY NEWS VIA GETTY IMAGES

Bill O'Reilly and his now ex-wife Maureen McPhilmy during happier times.


Bill O’Reilly can’t put a spin on this: his kids don’t want to live with him.

A New York appeals court has upheld a ruling that denied the Fox News host status as sole decision-maker for the 16-year-old daughter and 12-year old-son he had with his ex-wife, Maureen McPhilmy.

“There is a sound and substantial basis for the Supreme Court's determination that it is in the best interests of the children for the mother to be awarded primary residential custody,” the four-judge Appellate Division panel wrote.

“Particularly relevant in this case are the clearly stated preferences of the children, especially considering their age and maturity, and the quality of the home environment provided by the mother.”

O’Reilly will have visitation rights with his kids on alternating weekends and other days.

As for his bid to be the sole decision maker, the “O’Reilly Factor” host will have to take a more fair and balanced approach — he has to share joint authority over the kids with his ex-wife, the appeals court said.

The ruling said “the record supports the court's finding that if either parent were awarded sole decision-making authority, there would be a danger that it would be used to exclude the other parent from meaningful participation in the children's lives.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bill-o-reilly-loses-custody-battle-ex-wife-article-1.2548115


Fox’s Bill O’Reilly loses custody of teen children after New York appeals court ruling



Bill O'Reilly (Fox News)
A New York appeals court denied Fox News host Bill O’Reilly’s petition seeking custody of his two children,Gawker reported on Monday.
The court’s Feb. 24 ruling upheld a Nassau County Supreme Court decision granting full custody of the 12-year-old boy and 17-year-old girl to Maureen McPhilmy, the Factor host’s ex-wife.
“Viewing the totality of the circumstances, there is a sound and substantial basis for the Supreme Court’s determination that it is in the best interests of the children for the mother to be awarded primary residential custody,” the Appellate Division Second Judicial Department court stated. “Particularly relevant in this case are the clearly stated preferences of the children, especially considering their age and maturity, and the quality of the home environment provided by the mother.”
Court transcripts published last May showed that the girl told a court-appointed psychologist that O’Reilly “was choking her mom or had his hands around her neck and dragged her down some stairs.”
The psychologist, Larry Cohen, also testified that the daughter told him that O’Reilly described McPhilmy as “an adulturer,” and described McPhilmy’s new husband as “not a good person.”
According to Cohen, the daughter said O’Reilly told him that, “if she spends her time or more time at the mother’s home, it will ruin her life.”
O’Reilly and McPhilmy divorced in September 2011 and originally agreed to split custody of the children.



South Carolina: Hack the VOTE for Hillary!




Hillary’s Touch Screen Landslide

Hillary South Carolina LandslideWe’ll Never Know Whether Voters or Machines Source of Clinton ‘Landslide’ South Carolina Win

Hillary Clinton could not have asked for more. According to the official count, she scored a 47.5 point victory of Bernie Sanders in the South Carolina primary—20 points greater than the RCP average going into the February 27 primary election.
Clinton’s fawning supporters wasted no time. The Washington Post proclaimed that the results spelled “big trouble for Bernie Sanders” going into Super Tuesday.

Was this official “landslide” actually an overwhelming rejection of Sanders’s political revolution or the pre-designated result of the South Carolina’s easily hacked  touch screen voting systems?

But was this official “landslide” actually an overwhelming rejection of Sanders’s political revolution or the pre-designated result of the South Carolina’s easily hacked  touch screen voting systems?  We’ll never know because, as the author noted in 2011, South Carolina, and unfortunately a large number of Americans, are “still clueless” about the 100% unverifiable touch screen voting systems that were used during yesterday’s faith-based election.
For more than a decade, computer scientists and election integrity advocates have sounded the alarm—to no avail.  “I follow the vote,” CIA cybersecurity expert Steven Stigall told members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission back in 2009.  “And wherever the vote becomes an electron and touches a computer, that’s an opportunity for a malicious actor potentially to…make bad things happen.”
While e-voting systems have often been the source of unlikely results, it was the 2010 South Carolina U.S. Senate Democratic Primary contest between Alvin Green and Judge Vic Rawl that produced an “It’s the machines transparency, stupid!” moment.  That election was conducted on the same 100% unverifiable ES&S iVotronic touch screen voting system that was used in yesterday’s Democratic Presidential Primary.
Greene was unemployed; virtually unknown. He had no campaign website, no volunteers, no campaign literature. He didn’t even own a computer or a phone. His opponent, the respected circuit judge and former state legislator Vic Rawl had raised hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars, appeared at 80 campaign events; had hundreds of volunteers.
The numbers were beyond absurd. Lancaster County paper absentee ballots went to Rawl 84% to 16%. The unverifiable touch-screens in the same county, however, said Rawl lost the it by 17%. Greene received more votes than were cast in 25 Spartanburg County precincts. The votes of 50 other precincts were missing from the final count. Statewide, the virtually unknown Greene somehow managed to captured 60% of the vote, according to the iVotronic DREs.
Denied access to the iVotronic memory cartridges, source codes, and machines, Rawl nonetheless presented an impressive five-hour case to the state Democratic Party Executive Board in contesting the race. Two computer scientists testified that system malfunction provided the only reasonable explanation. Voters said they saw their votes flipped to Greene. Campaign workers saw poll workers swapping out memory cartridges during the election.
Rawl’s challenge of the machines was ignored by most of the mainstream media and summarily rejected by the Democratic Party’s Executive Board, largely for what has been described to The BRAD BLOG by insider sources as “political reasons”.
Touch screen voting has been and remains a clear and present danger to our democracy — and not just because of the risk of malicious manipulation of the count.
In “The Problem with Touch-Screens” …Dan Rather visited the Manila sweat shop where he witnessed the shoddy assembly of the ES&S iVotronic LED screens by $2.50/day workers. The company’s “quality control” process at the Filipino facility, on the rare occasions that it was applied, was to hold up one of these sensitive items of electronic equipment and shake it to determine whether there were any loose parts rattling around inside.
When he covered Rather’s documentary at The BRAD BLOG, the late John Gideon observed: “The machines made by ES&S may not have any screws loose, but the folks who think this is any way to run a democracy certainly do!”
That pretty much sums up the level of thinking in every jurisdiction which continues to employ these exorbitantly-priced pieces of unverifiable electronic junk.
ernest-canningSo when anyone tells you that South Carolina voters handed Bernie Sanders a landslide defeat, your answer should be “maybe, but maybe not.”
Ernest Canning
Veterans for Bernie









vv

Rep. Louie Gohmert [R-TX] America's Dumbest Congressman begs for donations....


A few facebook comments...there are many...please remember to thank the Dirty Energy Koch Brothers and their ilk for electing such Jack Asses: 

How can he fight being called a clown when every time he opens his mouth he proves that he is a clown. Surely the people in the Tyler area can find a democrat that would beat this guy.

 louie is a clown an embarrassment and a total fool -- he has nothing to fight but the truth itself

Send money to a politician so he can fight the idea that he's a brainless goon. The poor man is even dumber than he looks, which is saying something.

Louie is in a hotly-contested race with Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman for the title of the most brainless public person in America. Every time that I ready to declare on of them the winner, another opens their mouth. They have an aggregate IQ of 37.

Gomert is one of the leading empty-headed bigots in politics in the nation. Worse than a clown any day.

He's not the clown ,, it's the idiots who vote for morons like Louie , Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum etc ,only a fool would vote against their own interest




Louie Gohmert Begs For Donations To Fight Back Against Primary Attacks That He's A 'Clown' And An 'Embarrassment'

Rep. Louie Gohmert called into Glenn Beck's radio program today to beg listeners to donate to his re-election campaign so that he can fight back against attacks that he's a "clown" and an embarrassment to the state of Texas.
Gohmert is facing a serious primary challenge from rancher Simon Winston, who donated a large sum of money to his own campaign and is running with the message that Congress has become a circus and "Louie Gohmert is one of the main clowns."
The Texas Republican revealed that because he "had done so well in prior elections" and never faced a primary challenge before, he didn't see a need to maintain a large campaign war chest, which is now coming back to haunt him since his opponent has dumped several hundred thousand dollars into a campaign to defeat him.
Gohmert's main opponent, he said, "is a self-funder and his motto is, 'Congress is a circus and Gohmert's the biggest clown and he's an embarrassment.'"
"And the problem is if people say that enough," Gohmert stated, "then it's possible some seeds could stick and start growing, so we have got to be up on television [and] radio. You can't let those things go ... There is a point [where] you have to defend yourself and that's what I'm having to do so anybody who can help by going to Gohmert.com — it's G-o-h-m-e-r-t dot com — I'd really appreciate it."
- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/louie-gohmert-begs-donations-fight-back-against-primary-attacks-hes-clown-and-embarrassment#sthash.7uALkC4J.dpuf

When your platform is HATE......




Things Get Even Worse For Donald Trump As Photographer Attacked At Campaign Rally

Donald Trump's run of bad press continues as a Time photographer was attacked and choke slammed by a Secret Service agent after he went 18 inches outside of a media pen to photograph some protesters.

Things Get Even Worse For Donald Trump As Photographer Attacked At Campaign Rally






10 Republican Senators That Will Probably Lose Their Seats



This is a good beginning...there are a few more Lunk Heads that need to go as well.....watch out for the BOGUS REPUBLICAN ELECTIONS and PHONY ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES! 


10 Republican Senators That Will Probably Lose Their Seats



10. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul

cultofmac.com
cultofmac.com
Rand Paul’s stumble in the 2016 presidential race could come back to haunt him come November, since the Democrats plan to take his seat on the Senate with vengeance. While the prospect is still slim due to Kentucky tilting to the right in recent years, Democrats are rallying behind Lexington mayor, Jim Gray in a super focused campaign to oust Paul.

9.Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson

yourblackworld.com
yourblackworld.com
Ron Johnson is currently sitting at the top of most people’s lists when it comes to being the most vulnerable at losing his seat. He’s most likely going to go up against Democrat Russ Feingold who’s strongly hinting at running after stepping down from the State Department. Current polls show that Johnson is not well-liked by voters and his hardcore conservatism isn’t doing him any favors.

8.Pennsylvania Senator Patrick J. Toomey

www.politico.com
www.politico.com
Senator Pat Toomey is likely to run against Democrat Joe Sestake once again, who lost to Toomey back in 2010. Although Sestake had a very rough start when he launched his campaign at the end of last year, it’s expected with Pennsylvania’s lean to the left, he could oust Toomey. Meanwhile, Toomey is continuing to distance himself from his Tea Party poster boy image by working with Democrats on budgeting concerns and gun control laws.

7. New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte

rightweb.com
rightweb.com
The GOP is beginning to show its nervousness when it comes to Kelly Ayotte retaining her seat in the Senate, and have already begun to run ads against New Hampshire Governor Maggie Hassan who may run in 2016. While there’s been no official campaign announcement yet, Republicans believe Ayotte would be hard to remove. However, if the governor runs, it could be a very tight race.

6. Ohio Senator Rob Portman

wepo.com
wepo.com
The former Ohio governor is not considered at the top of the list of senators who could lose their seat, however Democratic candidate Ted Strickland deciding to run could give the current Senator a run for his money. The Democrats are hoping to paint Portman as someone bought by Wall Street, however if Clinton wins the state, it could be hard for the Democrats to oust Portman since his views align with Clinton.

5. Arizona Senator John McCain

nydailynews.com
nydailynews.com
Many have tried to oust Senator John McCain who’s held his seat in the Senate for what some consider “far too long” however none have been able to win against him. Democrat, Ann Kirkpatrick, hopes to change all that by running against McCain who is going for his sixth-term in 2016. Currently, he holds a 9% lead over the other candidates, though this could change as we see how the presidential election shapes up in the next few months.

4. North Carolina Senator Richard M. Burr

nytimes.com
nytimes.com
One of the biggest obstacles for Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina is he’s not very well known. On top of that, North Carolina has a fractured media market which makes it hard for any candidate to campaign effectively. This may be to the Democrats advantage this year who plan to put former Senator Kay Hagan (D) up against Burr. Time will tell if she has what it takes to oust him.

3. Missouri Senator Roy Blunt

www.huffingtonpost.com
www.huffingtonpost.com
The one thing that Senator Roy Blunt has going for him right now is he’s a hard worker and he knows how to run a tough campaign. However, the Democrats hope to reclaim his seat by putting up Missouri Secretary of State, Jason Kander against him in November. It’s going to be a tough one for Kander to win, however; depending on the presidential election it could swing in his favor.

2. Illinois Senator Mark S. Kirk

www.illnoisreview.com
www.illnoisreview.com
Senator Mark Kirk is only in his first term and has worked extremely hard to bolster his bipartisan credentials within the Senate, even going as far as backing same-sex marriage. However, the Democrats are hoping to kick Kirk out by supporting Tammy Duckworth in an effort to avoid an expensive primary. An Iraq veteran, who lost both of her legs in the war, Duckworth’s experience completely undermines any of Kirk’s military credentials and since she’s likely to harbor a sympathy vote, he should start sweating just a bit.

1. Florida Senator Marco Rubio

kake.com
kake.com
The fact that Marco Rubio is running for president should be enough to think he’ll lose his seat in the 2016 elections, however Rubio is not planning to give up so easily. While many have called for him to concede his seat due to his presidential run, it seems Rubio wants a backup plan in case he doesn’t win the nomination. Currently, Democrats Alan Grayson and Patrick Murphy of Congress are both vying for his seat, while House Republicans David Jolly and Ron DeSantis are also launching campaigns.



Label it dammit!




Label it dammit!
Who do Republicans work for?
“All over this country, people are becoming more conscious about the food they eat and the food they serve their kids. When parents go to the store and purchase food for their children, they have a right to know what they are feeding them,” Sanders said ahead of the Senate agriculture committee’s hearing on a shocking legislation (The New Dark Act) introduced by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) that would block Vermont and other states from requiring labels on genetically modified foods.

Monsanto Feels the Bern as Sanders Turns Focus to GMO Labeling


U.S. Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has turned his focus to supporting GMO labeling and attacking Monsanto’s interests this week after Hillary Clinton’s love of GMOs was recently confirmed by the Gates Foundation.
On Wednesday Sanders made sure that GMO labeling will become an issue on the campaign trail when he made the main focus of his Senate website a picture stating “You have a Right to Know what’s in the food you eat” followed by quotes on his support for GMO labeling in Vermont and beyond.
“All over this country, people are becoming more conscious about the food they eat and the food they serve their kids. When parents go to the store and purchase food for their children, they have a right to know what they are feeding them,” Sanders said ahead of the Senate agriculture committee’s hearing on a shocking legislation (The New Dark Act) introduced by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) that would block Vermont and other states from requiring labels on genetically modified foods.
“The overwhelming majority of Americans favor GMO labeling. We cannot allow the interests of Monsanto and other multi-national food industry corporations to prevail. I am very proud that Vermont took the lead nationally to make sure people know what is in the food they eat. Vermont and other states must be allowed to label GMOs.”
see the rest of the article: 

CounterCurrents: The Scandal Of Voter Supression, “We Came! We Saw! He Died!”: Reflections On Libya





Dear Friend,

If you think the content of this news letter is critical for the dignified living and survival of humanity and other species on earth, please forward it to your friends and spread the word. It's time for humanity to come together as one family! You can subscribe to our news letter here http://www.countercurrents.org/subscribe.htm. You can also follow us on twitter,http://twitter.com/countercurrents and on Facebook, http://www.facebook.com/countercurrents

In Solidarity
Binu Mathew
Editor
www.countercurrents.org


Modi Regime Turning Fascist or A Farce? Sedition Charges Slapped On Rahul Gandhi, Kejriwal, Yechury, D. Raja And Others 
By Countercurrents.org

http://www.countercurrents.org/cc290216.htm

The Narendra Modi regime is fast turning into fascist or a farce! Only time will tell which direction India is heading . In the latest incident a case of sedition has been registered in Hyderabad against Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, CPM General Secretary Sitaram Yechury,CPI leader D Raja and five others in connection with the JNU row. It seems that the Sangh Parivar has let loose its fringe elements to brand anyone who doesn't agree with its ideology as antinationals, framing fabricated cases, beating them up and even publicly lynching. The eerie silence of the central government is deafening and frightening


Is Sisi Plotting With Israel To Have Dahlan Replace Abbas? 
By Alan Hart

http://www.countercurrents.org/hart290216.htm

It's not too much of a secret that Egypt's President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, a Trump-like megalomaniac and a tyrant with few equals, is happy to do dirty work for Israel. And it may now be that he is seeking to prepare the ground for Mohammed Dahlan, almost certainly an American and Israeli intelligence asset (not a fulltime agent) to succeed Mahmoud Abbas as president of the Palestinian Authority (PA)


“We Came! We Saw! He Died!”: Reflections On Libya 
By Prof. Francis A. Boyle

http://www.countercurrents.org/boyle290216.htm

Colonel Qaddafi ruled Libya like the traditional Arab Shaikh of a Bedouin tribe. Indeed, Libya as a state consisted of an amalgamation of disparate Arab and Tuareg tribes that Qaddafi had melded together into his Jamahiriya system, a state of the masses. The jury is still out on whether or not this now discombobulation of tribes living in Libya can ever be reconstituted as a functioning state after the U.S./NATO war. Libya stands on the verge of a statehood crack-up, as was the U.S./N.A.T.O. intention from the get-go


Photo Essay: How Many Global Crises Can A 15 Year Old Afghan Take On, Including The Water Crisis?
By Dr. Hakim

http://www.countercurrents.org/hakim290216.htm

On 31st Jan, I followed Zekerullah, an Afghan Peace Volunteer who coordinates the Borderfree Street Kids School in Kabul, to visit Zuhair and his family in their rented room. Zuhair attends the School on Fridays with 92 other working and street kids, a minuscule number in the context of 6 million working children in Afghanistan. My heart squirmed at the unequal math of today’s economics. In any world, children should have access to water, but in an internationally supported, ‘most-drone-attacked’ and ‘democratic’ Afghanistan, Zuhair is one person among 73% of the Afghan population who do not have access to clean, potable water


The Scandal Of Voter Supression 
By William John Cox

http://www.countercurrents.org/cox290216.htm

The scandal of voter suppression corrupts the core of representative democracy, and the quality and effectiveness of political representation is directly related to the percentage of voter participation. Unless representatives are selected by the greatest number and broadest range of voters possible, the processes of government will not reflect the true will of the People. Indeed, if the current trend continues, the United States government will become an irrevocable plutocracy instead of a democracy; government of, by, and for the People will cease to exist; and the flame of freedom—no longer fueled by effective voting—will be extinguished

Ostensibly, universal voting is the ideal of a free and democratic republic; however, barriers have been placed between many citizens and the ballot box ever since the creation of the United States. Many of these obstacles, such as property ownership and the racially-biased poll tax, have been removed. They are, however, being replaced by voter identification (ID) laws and other voter suppression schemes designed to discourage and prevent many, otherwise eligible voters from participating in elections. Voter suppression takes many forms and—in its aggregate—could allow the election of a president in the November 2016 election who is not the choice of the American People.

Voter Suppression. Approximately one quarter of all qualified voters are not registered, and many state laws and administrative practices are aimed at blocking—rather than encouraging—their enrollment. These include the imposition of arbitrarily short deadlines for the submission of voter registration forms; imposing harsh penalties for administrative errors; and even requiring the forms to be printed on very specific weights of paper. On the other hand, some states such as California, automatically register all eligible voters when they apply for driver's licenses, and a number of states now allow online registration.

Other devices to suppress voting involve the unnecessary purging of registration rolls to remove qualified people; the deliberate misallocation of election resources resulting in long lines in low-income and college precincts; misleading voters regarding procedures and locations for voting; and "caging," which involves sending certified letters to voters and striking registrations for those whose letters are returned as undeliverable. Scandalous as these plots may be, they verge on criminal conspiracies when they are directed by politically partisan secretaries of state and other officials who have the responsibility to ensure elections are fair and unbiased.

Although some suppression dirty tricks are bipartisan—four Kerry supporters were convicted of vandalism for slashing the tires of vans intended to transport Republican voters to the polls in 2004—it is primarily Republicans and other conservatives who engage in voter suppression. Many of these individuals and groups consider voting to be a privilege, instead of a right, and they are untroubled by efforts to reduce the voting participation by certain groups, such as racial minorities, students, and the poor, who traditionally vote for Democratic candidates.

The most successful electoral subversion results from voter ID laws passed in many states in the past 15 years. These laws have been enacted—purportedly— to prevent voter fraud, in which an ineligible voter impersonates an eligible voter. 

Typically, these laws require the presentation of photographic identification, such as a driver's license or passport in order to vote. In truth, these laws are a blatant stratagem to prevent the political opposition from voting.

As the less popular party, many Republicans unabashedly admit the purpose and consequence of these laws. One Republican legislator in Michigan warned, "If we do not suppress the Detroit vote, we're going to have a tough time in this election;" Another legislator believed the Pennsylvania voter ID law would "allow Governor Romney to win the state," while another bragged that the Pennsylvania laws "cut Obama by five percent" and that "voter ID helped a bit in that." The former head of the Florida Republican Party acknowledged that "We've got to cut down on early voting because early voting is not good for us." Presidential candidate Governor John Kasich agreed: "I guess I really actually feel we shouldn't contort the voting process to accommodate the urban—read African-American—voter-turnout machine." Prior to dropping out of the presidential race, Governor Chris Christie said that Republicans need to win gubernatorial races so they can control the "voting mechanism" in the presidential election.

There are millions of otherwise eligible voters in the United States (as many as ten percent) who do not possess acceptable photographic identification. If the reason is a lack of money to pay the licensing fee, voter ID laws have the same effect as the Jim Crow poll tax did in the South. The laws disproportionately affect the young, disabled, seniors, minorities, and the poor and disadvantaged of every race. One rigorous academic study conducted at UC San Diego concluded, "We find that strict voter identification laws do, in fact, substantially alter the makeup of who votes and ultimately do skew democracy in favor of whites and those on the political right."

The reality is that voter fraud is very rare, and when it does occur, it would not be prevented by voter ID laws. An in-depth study by the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University involved travel to 40 cities, 21 states, interviews of more than 1,000 people, and reviews of nearly 5,000 public documents. The effort identified only 10 cases of voter impersonation in more than a decade. There were more cases of absentee ballot fraud and registration fraud, which would not have been prevented by the voter ID laws.

The conservative political bias of suppression laws is indicated by the fact that more than half of all state photo ID legislation resulted from the efforts of the conservative, corporate-sponsored, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Sixty-two bills based on the model ALEC Voter ID Act have been introduced in state legislatures. Of the 22 states in which new voting restrictions have been passed, 18 have Republican-controlled legislatures.

The underlying racial basis of these laws was revealed by the Brennan Center for Justice which determined that of the 11 states with the highest numbers of African American voters in 2008, seven have since passed voter suppression laws. Of the 12 states with rapidly growing Hispanic populations, nine have enacted new restrictions. Finally, nine of the states formerly supervised by the Voting Rights Acts because of past racial discrimination have passed new voter suppression laws.
With Congress and the state legislatures and judiciaries increasingly controlled by corporations and the financial elite, there is little hope for legislative action or judicial relief to reduce the scandal of voter suppression. In 2008, a conservative majority of the U.S. Supreme Court approved an Indiana voter ID law—even though it had a partisan basis—because it was not "excessively burdensome" to most voters. The decision followed an earlier one in 2000 in which the Court affirmed that the Constitution "does not protect the right of all citizens to vote, but rather the right of all qualified citizens to vote." Amazingly, the Court shortly thereafter admitted in Bush v. Gore that "the individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote."

A Voters' Bill of Rights. The only way to assure the voting power of the American People and to ensure the United States continues as a representative democracy is to amend the constitution to include a Voters' Bill of Rights. The United States Voters' Rights Amendment (USVRA) not only specifically guarantees a right to cast effective votes in all elections, but it also includes specific provisions regarding voter participation and suppression.

Any lingering doubt about the necessity of a constitutional amendment was quashed by another opinion of the Supreme Court rendered immediately prior to the 2014 midterm elections. The decision reversed a Federal District Court in Texas, which had ruled that the state's voter ID law unconstitutionally prevented more than 600,000 registered Texans from voting. The lower court had found the law was adopted "with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose" and that it placed "an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote." The conservative majority of the Supreme Court disagreed—directly cutting off the access of more than a half million Texans to the polls and challenging the votes of millions of other Americans subject to similar laws in other states.

Previously, the Texas voter ID law had been blocked by the Voting Rights Act, which required jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination to obtain permission before changing voting procedures. That provision of the Act was earlier struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013, and Texas officials announced they would begin enforcing the state's new voter ID law.

In her dissent to the 2014 decision, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, "A sharply disproportionate percentage of those voters are African American or Hispanic." She added that "racial discrimination in elections in Texas is no mere historical artifact."

Whether affected by strict photo ID rules or other forms of voter suppression, the turnout for the 2014 midterm elections was the lowest since 1942. The effect was shown by the difference between Texas—with the most restrictive rules and a 33.6 percent turnout—and Colorado, Washington and Oregon, which permit everyone to vote by mail, and their participation rates of 53, 54, and 69 percent, respectively.
The United States Voters' Rights Amendment is a broad-spectrum treatment regimen specifically formulated to cure a variety of illnesses currently infecting representative democracy in America. Voter encouragement and suppression is covered by Section Three:
The States shall ensure that all citizens who are eligible to vote are registered to vote.
In balancing the public benefit of maximum voter participation with the prevention of voting fraud, Congress and the States shall not impose any unjustifiable restriction on registration or voting by citizens.
The intentional suppression of voting is hereby prohibited and, in addition to any other penalty imposed by law, any person convicted of the intentional suppression of voting shall be ineligible for any public office for a period of five years following such conviction.
Universal voting is also encouraged by Section Eleven, which requires that "Federal elections conducted every second year shall be held on a national voters' holiday, with full pay for all citizens who cast ballots."

Voting Fuels the Flame of Freedom. The scandal of voter suppression corrupts the core of representative democracy, and the quality and effectiveness of political representation is directly related to the percentage of voter participation. 

Unless representatives are selected by the greatest number and broadest range of voters possible, the processes of government will not reflect the true will of the People. Indeed, if the current trend continues, the United States government will become an irrevocable plutocracy instead of a democracy; government of, by, and for the People will cease to exist; and the flame of freedom—no longer fueled by effective voting—will be extinguished.

William John Cox is a retired public interest lawyer. His new book, "Transforming America: A Voters' Bill of Rights" presents the United States Voters' Rights Amendment. He can be reached through his website, http://www.williamjohncox.com




We May Not Get One More Socrates, But One Sartre Must Come Out
By Debabrata De

http://www.countercurrents.org/de290216.htm

We may not get one more Socrates to save us from danger, but one Sartre must come out from ourselves, at least to show the way of thinking


Bahujan Discourse Puts JNU In The Crosshairs 
By Pramod Ranjan

http://www.countercurrents.org/ranjan290216.htm

The Panchjanya article and the report of the intelligence department have uncanny similarities. Both smack of a conspiracy to associate students’ organizations of Bahujan ideology with extremist leftist organizations


Denial Of Justice To Minorities In Pakistan And India
By Pushkar Raj

http://www.countercurrents.org/raj290216.htm

Two recent legal developments underscore the dismal state of Hindu minority in Pakistan and Muslims in India. While Pakistan’s parliamentary legal select committee approved the Hindu marriage bill for its about four million Hindu population, two district courts in India began acquitting accused of the Muzaffarnagar Hindu-Muslim riots of 2013 in which 60 people were killed and thousands were displaced


Political Violence, “Rational Ignorance”, And “Political Illiteracy” In Bangladesh 
By Taj Hashmi

http://www.countercurrents.org/hashmi290216.htm

There was yet another shocking headline in Daily Star of Bangladesh (Feb 22): “Priest killed, devotee shot”. Some “unknown” assailants raided a Hindu temple, slit the throat of a priest, and shot a devotee at Panchagarh in northern Bangladesh. This wasn’t a random violent crime. Of late, there is nothing exceptional about premeditated attacks on minority communities or on people holding divergent views on religion and politics across the country. Unfortunately, most Bangladeshis, first of all, don’t consider such violence as politically motivated; and secondly, people are no longer that vocal against random or selective killing of people by criminals, terrorists, or law-enforcers unlike their predecessors, who wouldn’t remain quiet at any violent attack on fellow citizens by anybody


Killings And Kashmir: Interchangeable Lexis of Twenty First Century 
By Kashoo Tawseef

http://www.countercurrents.org/tawseef290216.htm

Killings and Kashmir are synonyms now. Everyday the newspapers are full of news items about the killings and the only difference is numbers. It seems no one is bothered about why killings are happening in Kashmir, and no one is concerned how to stop such killings. The most strange fact is there’s new culture of unidentified gunmen which have evolved recently and no one knows who is killing who and why? There’s complete anarchy and it seems something disastrous is in the offing


Kashmir: The “New” Wave Of Militancy!
By Mohammad Ashraf

http://www.countercurrents.org/ashraf290216.htm

Recently Indian Army Commander in a press statement declared that the infiltration across LOC has reached almost to zero level. But it is a half statement only. He did not mention that in spite of zero infiltration the militancy is on the rise and there have been a number of serious encounters. He did not say a number of police personnel including a head constable and a number of constables have run away with their weapons and joined the militant ranks. Most of the “New” militants are highly motivated and educated persons


Dear World, I’m Sorry For Being Such A Vegan 
By Mickey Z.

http://www.countercurrents.org/mickeyz290216.htm

Hey, Mickey Z. here. Formerly known (on social media) as “Mickey Z-vegan.” You know, the keynote speaker each year at the Veggie Pride Parade, the guy with the raised fist and a million vegan-related articles and talks and protests under his belt and…well, I could continue for a while with my lengthy resume but it’s not as if any of my activism has done a damn thing to make a difference. Either way, I’m not here to boast. I’m here to apologize