Just a few more posters to make you feel safe and secure and according to Sowell the cost of Liberalism keeps mounting. (See 1 below.)
and:
More hate from Hamas. (See 2 below.)
===
BLAME
How the world works lately...
If a man cuts his finger off while
Slicing salami at work,
He blames the restaurant.
If you smoke three packs a day
For 40 years and die of lung cancer,
Your family blames the Tobacco Company
If your neighbor crashes
Into a tree while driving home drunk,
He blames the bartender.
If your grandchildren are
Brats without manners,
You blame television
If your friend is shot by a
Deranged madman,
You blame the gun manufacturer
And if a crazed person breaks
Into the cockpit and
Tries to kill the pilot at 35,000 feet,
And the passengers
Kill him instead,
The mother of the crazed deceased
Blames the airline
I must have lived too long to
Understand the world
As it is anymore.
So, if I die while my OLD WRINKLED ASS
Is parked in front of this computer,
I want all of you to
Blame Bill Gates ...
==
The lies and hypocrisy of Obama and his minions is beyond pale but then:"what difference does it make?" After all government is our friend, our brother, our protector, our savior until it isn't. (See 3 below.)
===
He may have run a lousy presidential campaign but in my eyes Bob Dole is a principled man, a true hero and he was a fine Senator though he did get too much in bed with Wayne Andreas! (See 4 below.)
====
It all starts from within and seemingly innocuous legislation and in the end your freedom is gone. (See 5 below.)
Dick
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)
The High Cost of Liberalism: Part III
Thomas SowellIncome inequality has long been one of the liberals' favorite issues. So there is nothing surprising about its being pushed hard this election year.
If nothing else, it is a much-needed distraction from the disasters of ObamaCare and the various IRS, Benghazi and other Obama administration scandals.
Like so many other favorite liberal issues, income inequality is seldom discussed in terms of the actual consequences of liberal policies. When you turn from eloquent rhetoric to hard facts, the hardest of those facts is that income inequality has actually increased during five years of Barack Obama's leftist policies.
This is not as surprising as some might think. When you make it unnecessary for many people to work, fewer people work. Unprecedented numbers of Americans are on the food stamp program. Unprecedented numbers are also living off government "disability" payments.
There is a sweeping array of other government subsidies, whether in money or in kind, which together allow many people to receive greater benefits than they could earn by working at low-skilled jobs. Is it surprising that the labor force participation rate is lower than it has been in decades?
In short, when people don't have to earn incomes, they are less likely to earn incomes -- or, at least, to earn incomes in legal and visible ways that could threaten their government benefits.
Most of the households in the bottom 20 percent of income earners have nobody working. There are more heads of household working full-time and year-round in the top 5 percent than in the bottom 20 percent.
What this means statistically is that liberals can throw around numbers on how many people are living in "poverty" -- defined in terms of income received, not in terms of goods and services provided by the government.
Most Americans living in "poverty" have air conditioning, a motor vehicle and other amenities, including more living space than the average person in Europe -- not the average poor person in Europe, the average person.
"Poverty" is in the eye of the statisticians -- more specifically, the government statisticians who define what constitutes "poverty," and who are unlikely to define it in ways that might jeopardize the massive welfare state that they are part of.
In terms of income statistics that produce liberal outcries about "disparities" and "inequities," millions of people who don't have to earn incomes typically don't.
The more people who are in a non-income-earning mode, the greater the disparities with the incomes of those of us who have to work for a living, and who have to earn more to offset high tax rates. Yet liberals often act as if this is an injustice to those who don't work, rather than an injustice to those who do work, and whose taxes support those who don't.
Actually, the liberal welfare state is an injustice to both, though in different ways.
Despite whatever good intentions some liberals may have had in creating the ever-growing welfare state, practical politicians know that more dependency means more votes for supporters of bigger government.
There are no incentives for either politicians or the bureaucrats who run the welfare state agencies to get people off their dependency on government programs. Moreover, the eligibility rules create a very high cost to individuals who try to rise by getting a job and earning their own money.
It is not uncommon for someone who is receiving multiple government-provided benefits -- housing subsidies, food subsidies, etc. -- to lose more in benefits than they gain in income, if they decide to take a legitimate and visible job.
If increasing your income by $10,000 a year would cause you to lose $15,000 worth of government benefits, would you do it? That is more than the equivalent of a 100 percent tax rate on income. Even millionaires and billionaires don't pay that high a tax rate.
Liberals don't talk -- or perhaps even think -- in terms of the actual consequences of their policies, when it is so much more pleasant to think in terms of wonderful goals and lofty rhetoric.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)Hamas TV clip:
"Our harvest is your heads" -
Hamas TV celebrates killing Israeli soldiers
Hamas leader Haniyeh announced 9 days ago:
Hamas policy is to kidnap Israeli soldiers
Haniyeh announced 9 days ago that the unity agreement with Fatah was imminent
by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
A video broadcast on Hamas' Al-Aqsa TV yesterday shows actors playing Israeli soldiers entering the Gaza Strip, as atext on screen warns, "You will end up in Hell." One by one the actor-soldiers are shot in the head, after which a Hamas sniper collects all the dog tags of the killed soldiers. A text appears on the screen: "Our harvest is your heads." |
| (Sniper picks up soldiers' dog tags) |
[Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas), Apr. 23, 2014]
Palestinian Media Watch reported that during the Gaza War, Hamas broadcast numerous TV clips celebrating the killing of Israeli soldiers and civilians.
Although the world was surprised by the unity agreement announced yesterday between Hamas and Fatah, the official PA daily had already reported nine days ago that Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh announced a unity agreement was about to be finalized and implemented. In addition the Hamas head reiterated that kidnapping Israeli soldiers continues to be Hamas policy.
The following is the text in the official PA daily from April 16, 2014:
"Yesterday morning [April 15, 2014], Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of the deposed Hamas government in Gaza, said that the next stage would be the implementation of the reconciliation [between Fatah and Hamas] agreed on in the past, and the announcement of the end of the schism... Haniyeh emphasized that the next stage would be unlike those that preceded it, and would not [consist] of meetings alone, but of progress, through intensive steps, toward the completion of reconciliation and the implementation of that which has been agreed on.
He [Haniyeh] added: 'The kidnapping of Israeli soldiers is part of the agenda of the Palestinian resistance and of the Hamas movement, and will continue as long as there are Palestinian prisoners in the Israeli prisons.'
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 16, 2014]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3)-
Orlin Wagner/AP – Former senator Bob Dole (R-Kan.), center, takes questions while seated between Gov. Sam Brownback, left, and Rep. Kevin Yoder (R-Kan.) during a visit to the Johnson County Republican Headquarters in Overland Park, Kan.
There is very dangerous legislation making its way through both the House of Representatives and Senate that will finish the United States. The sharia bill calls for Islamic blasphemy laws — the criminalization of speech that offends or insults — who, exactly? Well, that is up to the enforcer, is it not?
Telling Students to Earn Less
Obama now calls for reforming his bleeding college loan program.
The federal student loan program is becoming so costly to taxpayers that even President Obama is pretending to fix it. Readers will recall Mr. Obama as the man who has spent much of his Presidency expanding this program, creating new ways for borrowers to avoid repayment, and then campaigning about these dubious achievements on campuses nationwide.
Now Team Obama is acknowledging that his policies are turning out to be more expensive than he claimed. Participation in federal debt-forgiveness programs is surging. In a mere six months the number of borrowers who've signed up for such plans has increased to more than 1.3 million from less than a million, with total balances rising to $72 billion from $52 billion. Maybe the White House didn't understand that when you give people an economic incentive not to repay a loan, more people won't repay.
Getty Images
Taxpayers can suffer in many ways from federal education lending, because most loans are issued regardless of a borrower's ability to repay. So loose is this form of credit that in the slow-growth Obama economy it has become a vehicle to fund basic living expenses, with tens of thousands of borrowers consuming aid even when they're not enrolled for courses.
But the immediate taxpayer S.O.S. concerns Mr. Obama's Pay As You Earn program. We've warned for years about the risks of this program as Mr. Obama has worked to expand the number of eligible borrowers and sweeten its terms.
Pay As You Earn allows students under certain circumstances to borrow an unlimited amount and then cap monthly payments at 10% of their discretionary income. If they choose productive work in the private economy, the loans are forgiven after 20 years. But if they choose to work in government or for a nonprofit, Uncle Sugar forgives their loans after 10 years.
For aspiring community organizers who go to college and then grad school before moving into a job that the government defines as public service, the forgiven debt can be $150,000 or more, courtesy of the taxpayer. And unlike with some other federal programs, when the government forgives the debt of one of the exalted class of nonprofit or government workers, the do-gooder doesn't have to report it as income to the IRS. Who wouldn't want to pick up $150,000 tax-free?
Energized by Mr. Obama's 2011 expansion, Pay As You Earn has been a slow-motion bailout for law schools, which saw diminishing applications in the wake of the financial crisis. Now the money is still rolling in thanks to more leveraged students. Upon graduation the median law school grad in 2012 was carrying more than $128,000 in grad-school debt, up from $77,000 in 2004.
But how much of it will ever be repaid? At least one creative school, Georgetown, last year offered to pay the students' monthly bills under the Pay As You Earn program while simultaneously raising tuitions. This essentially makes taxpayers pay the entire cost and turns the loans into six-figure grants.
The White House is finally admitting there's a problem, albeit sotto voce. The President's 2015 budget proposes to "reform the [Pay As You Earn] terms to ensure that the program is well-targeted and provides a safeguard against rising tuition at high-cost institutions." But it seems the White House is more concerned with the appearances of this taxpayer fleecing than the reality. Later in the budget tables the White House notes that its plan to "expand and reform student loan income-based repayment" will cost taxpayers even more than the status quo—by more than $3.5 billion over 10 years.
As for the status quo, Jason Delisle of the New America Foundation has been tracking the expanding red ink. He notes that in 2010 when the President first sketched out the idea for Pay As You Earn, the cost of permitting past borrowers to use the program's "more generous terms was approximately $1.7 billion. The administration reported the cost for the same proposal in 2013 as approximately $3.5 billion. In 2014 it quoted the cost at approximately $7.6 billion." Look for the estimates to keep rising—especially after this fall's election.
This might seem like a windfall for the students, but the only clear winners are the universities that are the ultimate recipients of the taxpayer money. While the students may technically get the freebie, the impressionable youngsters, who likely have little or no wealth, are being given an enormous financial incentive to pursue careers in government or at low-paying nonprofits.
The consequences for our economy are no less tragic than for the individual borrowers. They are being driven away from the path down which their natural ambition and talent might have taken them. President Obama keeps talking about reducing income equality. So why does he keep paying young people not to pursue higher incomes?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orlin Wagner/AP – Former senator Bob Dole (R-Kan.), center, takes questions while seated between Gov. Sam Brownback, left, and Rep. Kevin Yoder (R-Kan.) during a visit to the Johnson County Republican Headquarters in Overland Park, Kan.
LAWRENCE, Kansas — There is no press bus this time, no retinue of advisers trailing in his wake, no public-address system blaring his arrival. On this tour, Bob Dole makes a quiet entrance — and then the one-liners begin.
“I’m trying to cover all 105 counties,” he told an audience at the Olathe, Kan., City Hall on Monday afternoon. “I don’t know whether I’ll make it or not. When you’re 90, you don’t order room service.” The room cracked up.
Dole has returned to his home state this week to say thank you to the people who supported him for so long. He is running for nothing but is nonetheless running hard. He did three stops on Monday, four more on Tuesday, including the Dole Institute, which is named for him, at the University of Kansas here in Lawrence. He has another two stops planned for Wednesday. That’s just a warmup. When he returns next month, he has 16 stops on his schedule.
The former Senate majority leader and Republican nominee for president and vice president may be slowed physically, from age and war wounds and now a knee that is bothering him. But his determination is as strong as ever and his wit still sharp. “I’ve got a 45-year-old-mind trapped in a 90-year-old body,” he joked at the Senior Center in Paola.
He draws people of all ages, from fellow veterans of World War II to old friends from bygone days in Kansas to middle-age couples to the occasional youngster. They bring memorabilia of Dole’s long career — old photos and clippings, pamphlets, books and campaign pins. They wait patiently in line to have their pictures taken with him — and he is patient with them.
Dole says the trip isn’t about politics but only about saying thanks. But politics inevitably intrude. In Paola, someone asked him about President Obama. He paused to collect his thoughts. “President Obama is a nice fellow,” he said, recalling that the president had visited him in the hospital and that they are working together on some things. But he did not leave it there.
“I think President Obama certainly means well,” he said, “but without being critical — because I’m not here for that purpose — I think he needs to get acquainted with more members of Congress. . . . You have to get acquainted obviously with your own party, but you’ve got to get acquainted with the other party. All the wisdom doesn’t reside in one party.”
He paused again. “Trying to think here,” he said. “I do think our foreign policy is not very strong.” Dole doesn’t want to see American troops sent to Ukraine, but he said the United States should send weapons and tanks to the Ukrainians. He fears that Russian President Vladimir Putin now believes he can do whatever he wants. Obama, he said, talks about consequences for the Russians if they continue on this path. “We haven’t seen the consequences,” he added.
Younger Republicans
Looking ahead, he thinks Hillary Rodham Clinton, if she runs in 2016, will be a “strong candidate” for the Democrats. So far, he isn’t overly impressed with some of the younger Republicans now thinking of running. He doesn’t name anyone but regards them as very conservative.
“I think they lack experience,” he said. “So I’m hoping someone will come along who has a lot of good common sense and good values and listens to the people.” There are only two possible candidates he mentioned favorably on the first day of his tour — former Florida governor Jeb Bush, whom he thinks could help win more Hispanic votes; and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, of whom he said, “I don’t think he knew what happened on the bridge.”
If Dole had an overriding message at each stop, it is that the rancor and gridlock and polarization in Washington have to end — eventually. What Washington needs, he said, is more people willing to reach across the aisle, as he says he was often willing to do.
“Some people say ‘compromise’ is a bad word,” he said. “That means you must be a liberal. Well, Ronald Reagan told me one day, ‘Get me 70 percent and I’ll get the rest next year. . . . He was pragmatic — and he was Mr. Conservative.”
Dole has been consistently critical of his own party. Last year, he said the GOP should be “closed for repairs” until officials settled on a vision and programs to go with it. He doesn’t think the GOP has yet agreed on an alternative to Obamacare.
Dole believes his party has moved too far to the right. “I believe in a party of inclusion,” he told an audience at the First Lutheran Church in Ottawa Monday night. “You don’t say, ‘You’re not a good enough Republican, you’re too moderate.’ I thought I was a conservative, but we’ve got some in Congress now who are so far right they’re about to fall out of the Capitol.”
In Olathe, the audience included Rep. Kevin Yoder (R-Kansas), who said as a kid from rural Kansas he was inspired by Dole’s example. He still has a photo of the two of them at the Kansas State Fair. Asked how younger elected Republicans react to Dole’s critique of the party as too conservative, he said, “He’s earned the right to do that.”
At every stop, Dole asked if there were any World War II veterans in the audience. He urged anyone with a relative who served in the war to take advantage of the Honor Flights that ferry veterans to Washington to see the World War II Memorial. “I go down every Saturday and greet the veterans who come from all over the country,” he said.
One day he met a veteran who was 103. “He walked like he was 60,” Dole said. “He was in great shape. I don’t know what he ate, but I’d like to find out. Like Strom Thurmond. When he ate a banana, I ate a banana. And he made it to 100.” It is an old line that Dole has used for years. Once again, it gets a big laugh.
Dole talked about the work he did to help raise the private funding for the memorial and recalled trying to solicit a contribution from IBM. “They said, well we really appreciate the call, but this isn’t on our program,” Dole said. “And I said, ‘World War II wasn’t on my program.’”
Sixty-nine years and one week ago, Dole lay on a battlefield in northern Italy, grievously wounded and near death. His back and right shoulder had been shattered by German machine gun fire. A solider gave him a shot of morphine and put an “M” on his forehead, lest an unknowing medic later give him another dose that could have killed him.
The handsome and once-strapping athlete came home to tiny Russell, Kansas, broken in body and spirit. He weighed 122 pounds. He spent 39 months in hospitals in recovery, underwent numerous operations and was left permanently disabled, his right arm incapacitated. He spent hours in back of his home, working a rope-and-pulley contraption with weights that was affixed to the garage, building up his body. When he announced his campaign for president in 1995, he returned to Russell on the 50th anniversary of his wounding. The ropes and pulleys were still there, testimony to how far he had traveled from those darkest days.
He would go on to serve in Congress for 36 years — four times elected to the House and five times to the Senate, where he became the majority leader, until he quit to focus full-time on his 1996 campaign. He ran for president in 1980 and 1988 before finally winning the nomination on his third try, only to fall short against the incumbent, Bill Clinton.
On his thank-you tour, he mentioned the ’96 campaign. Someone, he said, took a poll that showed he had lost eight percentage points “because Gingrich shut down the government.” He was speaking of former House speaker Newt Gingrich, with whom he sparred over the years.
Gingrich once called Dole the “tax collector for the welfare state.” After Gingrich won the South Carolina presidential primary during the 2012 campaign, Dole, a supporter of Mitt Romney, issued a stinging attack, saying Gingrich had been “a one-man band” as speaker and would drag down other Republicans if he were to become the party’s nominee.
Now Dole has mellowed. “On my 90th birthday, I said, ‘Newt, let’s bury the hatchet,’” he said in a telephone interview before leaving for Kansas. “As far as I’m concerned it’s been buried. . . . We’re too old to have enemies. Better keep the friends we have.”
Gingrich attended Dole’s 90th birthday party last year and in an e-mail message on Saturday said, “Bob Dole is seen today as a remarkable historic figure. His courage in recovering from his World War II wounds and the pain and discomfort he has endured every day for nearly 70 years has earned him a respect beyond any ideological bickering.”
True conservatives
But Dole is still a target for some younger conservatives who are waging an ideological war inside the party. In a speech earlier this year, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said Dole was one of a string of Republican presidential nominees — he also cited Romney and Sen. John McCain — who were not true conservatives.
“I was one of the top supporters of President Reagan and had a pretty conservative record when I was in the Senate,” Dole said in the phone interview. “But he [Cruz] didn’t know any of that. He was just making a speech.” Asked what he would tell the young senator if Cruz came to see him, Dole said, “I’d tell him before he criticizes anyone or anything in the party, he ought to look at it first and get the facts.”
In his prime, Dole was known for his sharp tongue. As the vice presidential nominee in 1976, he lashed out at what he called “Democrat wars.” On the night he lost the New Hampshire primary in 1988, he went after the man who defeated him, George H.W. Bush, snarling into a television camera, “Stop lying about my record.” Today he recalls the elder Bush as the president he enjoyed serving with most.
Asked in the interview what things about his career were most satisfying, Dole responded with a list that few Republicans today would ever say: passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act; a deal to shore up Social Security; passage of the Voting Rights Act, and passage of the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, of which he was floor manager.
“I had a great civil-rights record,” he said to an African American well-wisher on Monday.
Dole has been out of elective office for almost two decades, but not out of politics or active life. He still goes to his office at the law firm of Alston and Bird nearly every day. He spends time on veterans issues. Last December, he pushed for Senate to approve a United Nations treaty modeled after the Americans with Disabilities Act. Members of his own party defeated it.
When friends visit, they talk politics and current events. Dole thinks this will be a good year for Republicans, though he is cautious in his predictions. He gives his party a 50-50 chance of taking control of the Senate. “Some people are more bullish, and I don’t follow it as closely,” he said. “I know we’re going to pick up seats. The question is, will we pick up enough?”
He has earned the label elder statesman, revered by Republicans and Democrats alike. Tom Daschle, the former Senate Democratic leader, wasn’t surprised when he heard about Dole’s planned tour of Kansas. Last winter, around Christmas, Dole called him “just to thank me for being his friend,” Daschle said in an e-mail message. “ . . . I love that man.”
In Kansas, he was surrounded by evidence of affection and admiration, praised as an American hero. In Ottawa, Elaine and Ronald Dunbar showed up with copies of three books about Dole and his wife, Elizabeth (who Dole said would join him on a future visit). The Dunbars posed with Dole and later talked about what his visit meant to them and to others in Kansas.
“We were thrilled that he was coming back,” she said. “We’re so happy to have our native son and statesman back with us for a little while in the state. . . . We don’t see people like him so much on the scene any more these days.”
Dole’s visits are steeped in memories, but ever the politician, he is looking ahead. When he arrived at the Dole Institute Tuesday morning, someone held up a sign that read, “4th Time’s The Charm. Dole 2016.” “If something happens to me before the 2016 election, I plan to vote absentee,” he quipped. “But I plan to be around.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is very dangerous legislation making its way through both the House of Representatives and Senate that will finish the United States. The sharia bill calls for Islamic blasphemy laws — the criminalization of speech that offends or insults — who, exactly? Well, that is up to the enforcer, is it not?
On Wednesday, Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) introduced “The Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014″ (S.2219), which seeks “to examine the prevalence of hate crime and hate speech on the Internet, television, and radio to better address such crimes.” Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) introduced a companion bill in the House – H.R. 3878.
Yes, we see, Hakeem. The first amendment protects all speech, not just speech that we like. Or else who would decide what’s good and what’s forbidden? Hakeem? When I was a young girl, the Nazis were given permission to march in a predominately Jewish neighborhood. In those days, Nazi meant something. Morality was still very much in the American DNA. Good and evil was understood — unlike today, where the left has banished such terms. Despite the horror of a Nazi march, they were given permission, and those of us who were repelled by such a monstrous action understood why permission was granted because of the underlying premise — free speech. I didn’t worry that their Nazi ideas would take hold, as long as I could speak and others could speak in the free exchange of ideas. I knew I would win because my ideas were better. Individual rights was the greatest achievement of the enlightened.
Now we are here. Our free speech is threatened by islamic supremacists and their Democrat lapdogs under the guise of “hate speech.” The old “hate speech” canard. They will package this revolution against freedom in a pretty package — and will use the Max Blumenthal-inspired racist murderer, Glenn Miller. But do not be fooled.
It’s bad enough they have all but blacklisted the voices of freedom from media, political and national discourse. Shouting into the wilderness is not freedom of speech.
What next? Burning books? Perhaps just as long as it’s not the quran. And yet there is more hate speech in the quran than in Mein Kampf.
The Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014 (S.2219) is sharia. Start calling your congressmen (click here). Now. Put down everything. Do this. This is the line in the sand. If we lose this, it’s over.
Sen. Ed Markey and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries Introduce Legislation To Examine and Prevent the Promotion of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech in Media, April 16, 2014
Sen. Markey is author of the original provision calling for examination of telecommunications influence on hate crimes.
Boston (April 16, 2014) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, introduced legislation to examine the prevalence of hate crime and hate speech on the Internet, television, and radio to better address such crimes. The Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014 (S.2219) would create an updated comprehensive report examining the role of the Internet and other telecommunications in encouraging hate crimes based on gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation and create recommendations to address such crimes.
In 1992, then-Rep. Markey, through the Telecommunications Authorization Act, directed the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to examine the role of telecommunications in encouraging hate crimes. Senator Markey’s legislation will provide a comprehensive updated report on the current prevalence of hate crimes and hate speech in telecommunications, as the last report was conducted and submitted to Congress over two decades ago, in December 1993. Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) introduced a companion bill in the House of Representatives, H.R. 3878.
“We have recently seen in Kansas the deadly destruction and loss of life that hate speech can fuel in the United States, which is why it is critical to ensure the Internet, television and radio are not encouraging hate crimes or hate speech that is not outside the protection of the First Amendment,” said Senator Markey. “Over 20 years have passed since I first directed the NTIA to review the role that telecommunications play in encouraging hate crimes. My legislation would require the agency to update this critical report for the 21st century.”
“The Internet has proven to be a tremendous platform for innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship. However, at times it has also been used as a place where vulnerable persons or groups can be targeted,” said Rep. Jeffries. “I commend Senator Markey for his longstanding leadership with respect to combating Hate Crimes in America. He understands that in the digital era it is important to comprehensively evaluate the scope of criminal and hateful activity on the Internet that occurs outside of the zone of First Amendment protection. With the introduction of Senator Markey’s bill, we have taken a substantial step toward addressing this issue.”
“I thank Senator Markey for his career-long commitment to ensuring that we have the data necessary to confront and combat hate speech in the media that targets our most vulnerable communities,” said President & CEO of the National Hispanic Media Coalition Alex Nogales. “NHMC has long-recognized that an update to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s 1993 report, ‘The Role of Telecommunications in Hate Crimes’, is long overdue and desperately needed given the incredible evolution of our communications systems over the past 21 years as well as the ever-increasing numbers of hate crimes targeting Latinos and others. As the author of the original piece of legislation directing the 1993 report, there is nobody better than Senator Markey to join Congressman Hakeem Jeffries and others in calling on the NTIA to study this pressing issue once again.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment