ASSOCIATED PRESS
America’s blacks voted at a higher rate than other minority groups in 2012 and by most measures surpassed the white turnout for the first time, reflecting a deeply polarized presidential election in which blacks strongly supported Barack Obama while many whites stayed home. Had people voted last November at the same rates they did in 2004, when black turnout was below its current historic levels, Republican Mitt Romney would have won narrowly, according to an analysis conducted for The Associated Press.
Last year’s heavy black turnout came despite concerns about the effect of new voter-identification laws on minority voting, outweighed by the desire to re-elect the first black president. Overall, 2012 voter turnout was roughly 58 percent, down from 62 percent in 2008 and 60 percent in 2004.
Overall, the findings represent a tipping point for blacks, who for much of America’s history were disenfranchised and then effectively barred from voting until passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965. But the numbers also offer a cautionary note to both Democrats and Republicans after Obama won in November with a historically low percentage of white supporters. While Latinos are now the biggest driver of U.S. population growth, they still trail whites and blacks in turnout and electoral share, because many of the Hispanics in the country are children or noncitizens.
In recent weeks, Republican leaders have urged a “year-round effort” to engage black and other minority voters, describing a grim future if their party does not expand its core support beyond white males.
The 2012 data suggest Romney was a particularly weak GOP candidate, unable to motivate white voters let alone attract significant black or Latino support. Obama’s personal appeal and the slowly improving economy helped overcome doubts and spur record levels of minority voters in a way that may not be easily replicated for Democrats soon.
Romney would have erased Obama’s nearly 5 million-vote victory margin and narrowly won the popular vote if voters had turned out as they did in 2004, according to Frey’s analysis. Then, white turnout was slightly higher and black voting lower. More significantly, the battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida and Colorado would have tipped in favor of Romney, handing him the presidency if the outcome of other states remained the same.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Monday, April 29, 2013
John McCain: Syrians need America's help!
(CNN) – The people of Syria, beleaguered by war and potentially being attacked by chemical weapons, are “angry and bitter” that the United States has not played a more leading role in ending the country’s conflict, Sen. John McCain said Sunday.
Long an advocate of a more pronounced American effort in Syria, McCain described the disappointment he saw while visiting a Syrian refugee camp in neighboring Jordan. “This woman who was a schoolteacher said, ‘Sen. McCain, do you see these children here? They're going to take revenge on those people who refused to help them,’ ” McCain recalled on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “They’re angry and bitter. And that legacy could last for a long time too, unless we assist them.”
Last week, the White House told lawmakers in a letter that intelligence analysts have concluded "with varying degrees of confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin." But the analysis was characterized as preliminary, with the White House saying the "chain of custody" of the chemicals was not clear and that intelligence analysts could not confirm the circumstances under which the sarin was used, including the role of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime.
President Barack Obama has said that the use of chemical weapons in Syria would cross a “red line” threshold for greater U.S. action in the country, which McCain argued was coming too late.
“For about two years this situation has deteriorated in a very alarming fashion, affected the surrounding countries, destabilized Lebanon, destabilized Jordan, and has had implications and repercussions throughout the region,” McCain said.
On Friday, Obama noted again that the use of chemical weapons in Syria “crosses a line that will change my calculus and how the United States approaches these issues.” But he said the intelligence gathered on potential use of sarin was still too preliminary to be conclusive.
Nicholas Burns, a former undersecretary of state, said Obama was in a difficult situation. “He was right to make those warnings in the last several months because use of chemical weapons is a war crime under the chemical weapons convention,” Burns said, also on CNN. “I think he's right to be prudent and cautious. We got in a situation in 2003 in Iraq and didn't have all our facts together and went to war in part on an erroneous basis. So he's right to be cautious.” “But when you draw a line in the sand in the Middle East and you dare someone to cross it and they appear to have crossed it, there have been to be consequences,” he added. “And our credibility as a country is very important.”
Long an advocate of a more pronounced American effort in Syria, McCain described the disappointment he saw while visiting a Syrian refugee camp in neighboring Jordan. “This woman who was a schoolteacher said, ‘Sen. McCain, do you see these children here? They're going to take revenge on those people who refused to help them,’ ” McCain recalled on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “They’re angry and bitter. And that legacy could last for a long time too, unless we assist them.”
Last week, the White House told lawmakers in a letter that intelligence analysts have concluded "with varying degrees of confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin." But the analysis was characterized as preliminary, with the White House saying the "chain of custody" of the chemicals was not clear and that intelligence analysts could not confirm the circumstances under which the sarin was used, including the role of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime.
President Barack Obama has said that the use of chemical weapons in Syria would cross a “red line” threshold for greater U.S. action in the country, which McCain argued was coming too late.
“For about two years this situation has deteriorated in a very alarming fashion, affected the surrounding countries, destabilized Lebanon, destabilized Jordan, and has had implications and repercussions throughout the region,” McCain said.
On Friday, Obama noted again that the use of chemical weapons in Syria “crosses a line that will change my calculus and how the United States approaches these issues.” But he said the intelligence gathered on potential use of sarin was still too preliminary to be conclusive.
Nicholas Burns, a former undersecretary of state, said Obama was in a difficult situation. “He was right to make those warnings in the last several months because use of chemical weapons is a war crime under the chemical weapons convention,” Burns said, also on CNN. “I think he's right to be prudent and cautious. We got in a situation in 2003 in Iraq and didn't have all our facts together and went to war in part on an erroneous basis. So he's right to be cautious.” “But when you draw a line in the sand in the Middle East and you dare someone to cross it and they appear to have crossed it, there have been to be consequences,” he added. “And our credibility as a country is very important.”
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Imam: I wouldn't give Boston suspect last rites
(CNN) – Tamerlan Tsarnaev died early Friday, and according to the rules of Islam, he should have been buried by now. But his severely wounded body is still being held to determine a cause of death.
Tsarnaev, 26, had so many penetrating wounds when he arrived at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center early Friday that doctors could not tell which ones had killed him. He'd engaged in a ferocious battle with police in which more than 200 rounds of gunfire was exchanged. He and his brother Dzhokhar, 19, also allegedly hurled improvised explosive devices and handmade grenades at officers.
There are questions about when, where and how Tamerlan Tsarnaev will be buried. And there's a bigger question: whether any Muslim entity will be willing to deliver last rites.
Many Muslim community leaders have sought to distance themselves from the Tsarnaevs in light of reports that Tamerlan Tsarnaev might have been influenced by radical Islam. Fearing retaliation, Muslim leaders have strongly condemned the bombings and made it clear that Islam does not condone violence. At least one Boston cleric said he would refuse to perform funeral rites for a man accused of committing so much violence. The Quran, said Imam Talal Eid, says that anyone who has killed another human being is going to hell.
Eid, who is imam at the Boston Islamic Institute, said he had never met the Tsarnaev brothers but questioned media accounts that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had become a devout Muslim. "A person who is devoted does not kill innocent people," Eid said.
Yusufi Vali, executive director of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, the largest mosque in the Boston area, also rejected the Tsarnaev brothers. "I don't care who or what these criminals claim to be, but I can never recognize these criminals as part of my city or my faith community," he said. "All of us Bostonians want these criminals to be brought to justice immediately. I am infuriated at the criminals of these bombings for trying to rip our city apart. We will remain united and not let them change who we are as Bostonians."
The Tsarnaev brothers occasionally attended prayer services at the Islamic Society of Boston Cambridge Masjid, a small mosque near their apartment in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "In their visits, they never exhibited any violent sentiments or behavior," said a statement from the masjid. "Otherwise they would have been immediately reported to the FBI. After we learned of their identities, we encouraged anyone who knew them in our congregation to immediately report to law enforcement, which has taken place."
Tsarnaev, 26, had so many penetrating wounds when he arrived at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center early Friday that doctors could not tell which ones had killed him. He'd engaged in a ferocious battle with police in which more than 200 rounds of gunfire was exchanged. He and his brother Dzhokhar, 19, also allegedly hurled improvised explosive devices and handmade grenades at officers.
There are questions about when, where and how Tamerlan Tsarnaev will be buried. And there's a bigger question: whether any Muslim entity will be willing to deliver last rites.
Many Muslim community leaders have sought to distance themselves from the Tsarnaevs in light of reports that Tamerlan Tsarnaev might have been influenced by radical Islam. Fearing retaliation, Muslim leaders have strongly condemned the bombings and made it clear that Islam does not condone violence. At least one Boston cleric said he would refuse to perform funeral rites for a man accused of committing so much violence. The Quran, said Imam Talal Eid, says that anyone who has killed another human being is going to hell.
Eid, who is imam at the Boston Islamic Institute, said he had never met the Tsarnaev brothers but questioned media accounts that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had become a devout Muslim. "A person who is devoted does not kill innocent people," Eid said.
Yusufi Vali, executive director of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, the largest mosque in the Boston area, also rejected the Tsarnaev brothers. "I don't care who or what these criminals claim to be, but I can never recognize these criminals as part of my city or my faith community," he said. "All of us Bostonians want these criminals to be brought to justice immediately. I am infuriated at the criminals of these bombings for trying to rip our city apart. We will remain united and not let them change who we are as Bostonians."
The Tsarnaev brothers occasionally attended prayer services at the Islamic Society of Boston Cambridge Masjid, a small mosque near their apartment in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "In their visits, they never exhibited any violent sentiments or behavior," said a statement from the masjid. "Otherwise they would have been immediately reported to the FBI. After we learned of their identities, we encouraged anyone who knew them in our congregation to immediately report to law enforcement, which has taken place."
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Pro-gun group endorses background check bill
By Matt Williams, The Guardian
A pro-gun lobby group broke ranks with the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) on Sunday, stating it would endorse a bill that includes expanded background checks.
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Bear Arms, which is said to represent around 650,000 members, told its supporters via email that it was backing proposed legislation due to go before the Senate this week. The news was later confirmed by senator Joe Manchin – one of the architects of the comprise bill – in a tweet.
A spokesman for the pro-gun rights group later told the Washington Post that they had decided to back the legislation because “we believe it is the right thing to do”. But it comes just days after the group sent out a press release seemingly mocking the concept of wider background checks on buyers and suggesting that gun laws never work.
The bill proposed by Manchin, a Democrat, and Republican senator Pat Toomey would see background checks increased to cover both commercial sales both online and at gun shows. But private sales would be exempt.
The NRA had initially said the compromise was a “positive development” but later hardened its stance, and threatened political retribution to any senators who backed the bill. But an email from the Citizens Committee to its members suggests that the Manchin-Toomey compromise satisfies its demands. The website Politico.com quoted the message as contrasting Manchin and Toomey’s “balanced approach” to more “draconian” measures being proposed by gun control advocates.
A vote on the compromise bill could come as early as Wednesday, lawmakers said Sunday. “We expect the vote this week. Wednesday is probably the most likely day for the Manchin-Toomey alternative,” said Toomey on CNN’s State of the Nation.
But even with the support of anti-gun groups such as Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns and, now, one group on the other side of the debate, it is not clear if there exists enough political will in Washington to push the legislation through. “It’s an open question whether we have the votes. I think it’s going to be close,” Toomey said Sunday.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media 2013
A pro-gun lobby group broke ranks with the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) on Sunday, stating it would endorse a bill that includes expanded background checks.
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Bear Arms, which is said to represent around 650,000 members, told its supporters via email that it was backing proposed legislation due to go before the Senate this week. The news was later confirmed by senator Joe Manchin – one of the architects of the comprise bill – in a tweet.
A spokesman for the pro-gun rights group later told the Washington Post that they had decided to back the legislation because “we believe it is the right thing to do”. But it comes just days after the group sent out a press release seemingly mocking the concept of wider background checks on buyers and suggesting that gun laws never work.
The bill proposed by Manchin, a Democrat, and Republican senator Pat Toomey would see background checks increased to cover both commercial sales both online and at gun shows. But private sales would be exempt.
The NRA had initially said the compromise was a “positive development” but later hardened its stance, and threatened political retribution to any senators who backed the bill. But an email from the Citizens Committee to its members suggests that the Manchin-Toomey compromise satisfies its demands. The website Politico.com quoted the message as contrasting Manchin and Toomey’s “balanced approach” to more “draconian” measures being proposed by gun control advocates.
A vote on the compromise bill could come as early as Wednesday, lawmakers said Sunday. “We expect the vote this week. Wednesday is probably the most likely day for the Manchin-Toomey alternative,” said Toomey on CNN’s State of the Nation.
But even with the support of anti-gun groups such as Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns and, now, one group on the other side of the debate, it is not clear if there exists enough political will in Washington to push the legislation through. “It’s an open question whether we have the votes. I think it’s going to be close,” Toomey said Sunday.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media 2013
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Terror attack at Boston Marathon
(CNN) -- Authorities including bomb experts searched an apartment in Revere, Massachusetts, and removed items, after two deadly bombs struck the Boston Marathon. But investigators remained mum about just how the search may be linked to the bombing investigation.
The search late Monday involved a "person of interest," the Revere Fire Department said on its Facebook page. The FBI; the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; immigration officials, state and local police, detectives and bomb techs all took part, the fire department said. The search, just north of Boston, took place with consent, so no search warrant was needed, a federal law enforcement official told CNN.
Tiny clues may help lead to who was behind the terrorist attack that killed three people and wounded 144. Investigators are beginning the painstaking process of piecing through fragments for anything that could indicate the "signature," said a federal law enforcement official who works in the intelligence community.
Unexploded devices that were recovered could also provide a treasure trove of information such as fingerprints and indications of how the exploded bombs were designed, the official said.
There were two such devices that did not detonate, said U.S. Rep. Bill Keating of Massachusetts. One was found near the bomb site at a hotel on Boylston Street; the other was found at an undisclosed location, said Keating, a member of the House Homeland Security committee. Keating called the bombings a "sophisticated, coordinated, planned attack."
A federal law enforcement official told CNN that both bombs that did explode were small, and initial tests showed no C-4 or other high-grade explosive material, suggesting the packages used in the attack were crude devices.
The FBI is taking the lead in investigating the attack near the marathon's finish line.
The search late Monday involved a "person of interest," the Revere Fire Department said on its Facebook page. The FBI; the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; immigration officials, state and local police, detectives and bomb techs all took part, the fire department said. The search, just north of Boston, took place with consent, so no search warrant was needed, a federal law enforcement official told CNN.
Tiny clues may help lead to who was behind the terrorist attack that killed three people and wounded 144. Investigators are beginning the painstaking process of piecing through fragments for anything that could indicate the "signature," said a federal law enforcement official who works in the intelligence community.
Unexploded devices that were recovered could also provide a treasure trove of information such as fingerprints and indications of how the exploded bombs were designed, the official said.
There were two such devices that did not detonate, said U.S. Rep. Bill Keating of Massachusetts. One was found near the bomb site at a hotel on Boylston Street; the other was found at an undisclosed location, said Keating, a member of the House Homeland Security committee. Keating called the bombings a "sophisticated, coordinated, planned attack."
A federal law enforcement official told CNN that both bombs that did explode were small, and initial tests showed no C-4 or other high-grade explosive material, suggesting the packages used in the attack were crude devices.
The FBI is taking the lead in investigating the attack near the marathon's finish line.
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Washington Redskins Mascot Controversy
Nallelie Vega
For 75 years Washington D.C.’s National Football League team has been known as the Redskins. What many in the sports world don’t realize or choose to ignore is that the term redskin is a derogatory nickname for Native Americans Indians.
In the past decade, many high schools, colleges and pro teams have gotten rid of mascots and team names that are considered racial slurs, such as redskins. But Washington is standing by its 75-year history, refusing to make any changes.
The unwillingness for change has caused an uproar in the Native American community. Earlier this month at the Smithsonian Symposium of American Indians in Washington D.C., the nations capital football team became a hot topic. According to some Native Americans, regardless of franchise history, Washington’s nickname is racist and it needs to be changed.
And considering that George Preston Marshall, the founder of the Redskins, was openly known to be racist, the mascot controversy has been taken to a whole different level, at least in the minds of American Indians.
But the Redskins current ownership does not feel the same way. And NFL Commissioner, Roger Goodell, is reluctant to do anything. According to Goodell, he sees both sides of the situation, but ultimately the franchise has the last say.
Many are probably wondering how it even became a hot topic and my guess is all the attention paid towards Washington’s rising star Robert Griffin III. Before Griffin, the Redskins were an after thought, now they’re the fifth most valuable sports franchise in the world.
Worldwide name recognition is probably one of the reasons the Redskins don’t want to change any aspect of the franchise. Many might argue though, that names and mascots aren’t the only forms of franchise recognition. Take the Golden State Warriors, for example. Golden State changed its derogatory logo decades ago because of a similar controversy and today many don’t even remember the Warriors had such a logo.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For 75 years Washington D.C.’s National Football League team has been known as the Redskins. What many in the sports world don’t realize or choose to ignore is that the term redskin is a derogatory nickname for Native Americans Indians.
In the past decade, many high schools, colleges and pro teams have gotten rid of mascots and team names that are considered racial slurs, such as redskins. But Washington is standing by its 75-year history, refusing to make any changes.
The unwillingness for change has caused an uproar in the Native American community. Earlier this month at the Smithsonian Symposium of American Indians in Washington D.C., the nations capital football team became a hot topic. According to some Native Americans, regardless of franchise history, Washington’s nickname is racist and it needs to be changed.
And considering that George Preston Marshall, the founder of the Redskins, was openly known to be racist, the mascot controversy has been taken to a whole different level, at least in the minds of American Indians.
But the Redskins current ownership does not feel the same way. And NFL Commissioner, Roger Goodell, is reluctant to do anything. According to Goodell, he sees both sides of the situation, but ultimately the franchise has the last say.
Many are probably wondering how it even became a hot topic and my guess is all the attention paid towards Washington’s rising star Robert Griffin III. Before Griffin, the Redskins were an after thought, now they’re the fifth most valuable sports franchise in the world.
Worldwide name recognition is probably one of the reasons the Redskins don’t want to change any aspect of the franchise. Many might argue though, that names and mascots aren’t the only forms of franchise recognition. Take the Golden State Warriors, for example. Golden State changed its derogatory logo decades ago because of a similar controversy and today many don’t even remember the Warriors had such a logo.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, April 4, 2013
North Korea threatens nuclear war against U.S.
(CNN) -- North Korea, who is threatening nuclear war against the United States, kept tensions simmering around its borders Thursday, reportedly moving a medium-range missile to its east coast and continuing to put pressure on a joint industrial complex where hundreds of South Koreans work.
Wednesday, the United States announced it was sending ballistic missile defenses to Guam, a Western Pacific territory that's home to U.S. naval and air bases. North Korea has cited those bases among possible targets for missile attacks.
This comes amid the disclosure of what one U.S. official calls an Obama administration "playbook" of pre-scripted actions and responses to the last several weeks of North Korean rhetoric and provocations.
South Korean Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin told a parliamentary committee in Seoul that the North has moved a medium-range missile to its east coast for an imminent test firing or military drill. The missile doesn't appear to be aimed at the U.S. mainland, Kim said, according to the semi-official South Korean news agency Yonhap.
Wednesday, the United States announced it was sending ballistic missile defenses to Guam, a Western Pacific territory that's home to U.S. naval and air bases. North Korea has cited those bases among possible targets for missile attacks.
This comes amid the disclosure of what one U.S. official calls an Obama administration "playbook" of pre-scripted actions and responses to the last several weeks of North Korean rhetoric and provocations.
South Korean Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin told a parliamentary committee in Seoul that the North has moved a medium-range missile to its east coast for an imminent test firing or military drill. The missile doesn't appear to be aimed at the U.S. mainland, Kim said, according to the semi-official South Korean news agency Yonhap.
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Georgia town passes law requiring gun ownership
(CNN) -- Nelson, a small Georgia city north of Atlanta, is requiring the head of virtually every household to own a firearm, the city's clerk told CNN Tuesday. The community's five-member council voted unanimously to approve the measure Monday night.
The proposal was modeled on a similar law in nearby Kennesaw, a measure that has been on the books since 1982. Nelson, which numbers around 1,300 people, is the second city in the state to mandate gun ownership.
"In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore," the ordinance said. People with physical or mental disabilities are exempt from the law, as are "paupers," felons, and those who oppose gun ownership based on belief or religious doctrine.
Councilman Duane Cronic recently said that the law would give every family the right to protect themselves and their property "without worrying about prosecution for protecting themselves."
The proposal was modeled on a similar law in nearby Kennesaw, a measure that has been on the books since 1982. Nelson, which numbers around 1,300 people, is the second city in the state to mandate gun ownership.
"In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore," the ordinance said. People with physical or mental disabilities are exempt from the law, as are "paupers," felons, and those who oppose gun ownership based on belief or religious doctrine.
Councilman Duane Cronic recently said that the law would give every family the right to protect themselves and their property "without worrying about prosecution for protecting themselves."