Welfare Medicaid Cartoons

Kentucky bill would motivate jobless to find work, proponents say

A bill in the Kentucky Legislature would link the weeks a person may receive unemployment benefits to the state's jobless rate.

Kentucky’s Legislature is considering a bill that would cut in half the number of weeks a person can receive unemployment benefits.

Under Kentucky’s current labor law, a person laid off for any reason other than misconduct is eligible to receive a portion of their paycheck for a maximum of 26 weeks. But under House Bill 252, the maximum number of weeks would change in accordance with the state’s unemployment rate.   

So if Kentucky’s unemployment rate climbs above 9.4 percent, the number of weeks for benefits caps at 26 weeks. But if the unemployment rate dips below 5.4 percent, unemployment insurance would cap at 14 weeks, the Louisville Courier-Journal reported. Kentucky’s current unemployment rate is 4.4 percent.
Proponents say the bill would help employers, who bare the burden of paying unemployment insurance, and incentivize jobless people to search for work.
“It’s strictly economic development,” the bill’s co-sponsor, Rep. Phillip Pratt, R-Georgetown, told the Lexington Herald-Ledger. “Make sure businesses come in and we’re competitive with our surrounding states.”

"It’s strictly economic development. Make sure businesses come in and we’re competitive with our surrounding states."

But opponents argue that cutting off benefits sooner could mean that some workers would not endure an employment crisis.
“People would end up losing their house, they could go bankrupt or have any other financial hardship,” warned Bill Londrigan, president of the Kentucky chapter of the AFL-CIO.
According to the Herald-Ledger, the average number of weeks Kentuckians collect unemployment benefits is 19.
The House Economic Development and Workforce Investment Committee is currently considering the bill. A decision will be made next week.
In January, Kentucky became the first state in the nation to add a work requirement for collecting Medicaid benefits, Fox News reported.

Son of George Soros donated $650G to Dem campaigns, groups last year, data show

Alexander Soros

George Soros

The son of liberal billionaire financier George Soros donated $650,000 to Democratic campaigns and committees last year, according to Federal Election Commission records.
Alexander Soros, Soros's son and managing partner of Soros Brothers Investments, has quietly stepped up as a major liberal donor but has remained relatively obscure due to his father garnering much of the media attention in the family.
Alex's generous contributions spanned across a number of liberal party committees and campaigns, including two donations totaling $203,400 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's (DCCC) recount and building funds, while providing an additional $33,900 to the committee during the primary period.
Alex also gave large amounts to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC). Like his contributions to the DCCC, Soros gave the DSCC $203,400 for its recount and headquarters account, with another $33,900 going towards the primaries.
The Democratic National Committee's (DNC) building account additionally received six figures from Soros. Alex poured $101,700 into the DNC's headquarters account and $33,900 was provided to the committee for the general election.
Soros also gave thousands to the campaigns of Democratic Sens. Claire McCaskill (Mo.), Bob Casey (Pa.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Jon Tester (Mont.), and Chris Murphy (Conn.), among others.
Alex has posted pictures of himself on social media day drinking with Democratic leadership, including Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.), the Daily Caller reported last year.
"Always great to catch up with senator @chuckschumer who has seized the moment as the head of the #democrats in the #senate and masterfully helped preserve the assault on our nations values and #democracy! Thank you Chuck! #chuckschumer #legend #opposition  #dumptrump,", Soros's Instagram caption reads.

More friends of Alex Soros pic.twitter.com/D6oTW9xGjY

— TVisme🇺🇸 (@TVismeuc) February 10, 2018

During the 2016 election cycle, Alex increased his contributions to Democrats by millions of dollars by pouring $4.5 million into liberal committees. This was a drastic shift from the 2014 election cycle, when Soros gave $88,000 to Democratic committees.
Alex did not return a request for comment on his contributions by press time.

NBC still going for the gold in on-air blunders

Medalists in the women's super-G, from left: Austria's Anna Veith, silver; Czech Republic's Ester Ledecka, gold; and Liechtenstein's Tina Weirather, bronze, are seen at the 2018 Winter Olympics in South Korea, Feb. 17, 2018.  (Associated Press)

NBC continues vying for the gold medal in broadcasting blunders during the 2018 Winter Olympics in South Korea.

Most recently, sportscaster Dan Hicks doubled down on a gaffe Saturday night while covering the women’s super-G skiing event, and ski analyst Bode Miller and hockey analyst Mike Milbury faced backlash for some on-air comments.

Hicks covered an Alpine race in which little-known Ester Ledecka of the Czech Republic beat Austria's Anna Veith, and won the gold medal.
Ledecka, who ranked No. 43 in the world, was considered to have so little chance to win that Hicks declared Veith the winner and NBC switched away.
“Four straight Olympic golds in the women’s super G for the skiing powerhouse of Austria. I just about can’t believe it!” Hicks reportedly said.
But the race wasn’t over. And rather than laugh off their mistake or own up to making a wrong call, ski announcers Hicks and Miller seemed intent on justifying their cut-away to the next event.

#NBC just had another Heidi moment (this time, in #AlpineSkiing), and arguably worse than the original, since Dan Hicks at least implied that Anna Veith had won, when another skiier posted a faster time after NBC switched to #figureskating. #NBColympics #NBCfail

— Aaron Camp (@ProgMid) February 17, 2018

“In everyone’s opinion, the race was over. It was one of the most incredible upsets I’ve seen in any sport,” Miller, a five-time Olympic medalist, said.
Some viewers may recall that Hicks also took heat during the 2016 Summer Games in Rio de Janiero, after he said Hungarian swimmer Katinka Hosszu's husband Shane Tusup, who was also her coach, was "the man responsible" for her world-record-breaking gold medal performance in the 400 meter individual medley.
'Might be her husband's fault'
Earlier last week, Miller jokingly said that in addition to Veith’s knee injury, her recent struggles were due to her marriage. Veith got married after winning the Giant Slalom at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, where she suffered a knee injury.
“The knee is certainly an issue,” Miller said. “I want to point out, she also got married. It’s historically very challenging to race on World Cup with a family or after being married. You know, not to blame the spouses, but I just want to toss that out there that it might be her husband’s fault.”

To be clear I was not seriously blaming Anna Veith's lack of results on her husband. It's a changing of priorities that is historically hard, male or female.

— Bode Miller (@MillerBode) February 15, 2018

After receiving backlash on social media, Miller apologized, calling his remarks, “an ill-advised attempt at a joke.”
'Unfortunate incident'
In another NBC-related blunder, hockey analyst Milbury, while commentating on the U.S.-Russia hockey game, described Slava Voynov's expulsion from the NHL -- after being jailed for kicking and choking his wife -- as an "unfortunate incident" that hurt the Los Angeles Kings. His choice of words earned NBC some online criticism for insensitivity.

Mike Milbury saying Voynov trying to kill his girlfriend is “an unfortunate incident that cost the kings a good player” is exactly whats wrong with NBC, hockey culture, and the world, honestly

— Ally "Letangier" Letangier (@letangier) February 17, 2018

Milbury said his intention was to discuss the impact of the incident on hockey after partner Kenny Albert outlined the domestic violence charges.
"As I said at the time he was suspended, the league made the right call, 100 percent," he said.

Trump slams FBI over 'missed signals' on Florida shooting, asserts Russia was distraction

President Donald Trump and other Republicans have been sharply critical of the FBI in recent months. The agency is led by Director Christopher Wray, right, whom Trump appointed to succeed the fired James Comey.

President Donald Trump urged the FBI to “get back to the basics” Saturday night after an embarrassing series of mistakes in connection with the Parkland, Fla., massacre.

“Very sad that the FBI missed all of the many signals sent out by the Florida school shooter,” the president tweeted late Saturday. “This is not acceptable.”

The president then asserted that the agency was perhaps distracted by the investigation into possible Trump administration ties to Russia.
“They are spending too much time trying to prove Russian collusion with the Trump campaign,” the president wrote. “There is no collusion. Get back to the basics and make us all proud!”
On Friday, America’s top law enforcement agency admitted that it failed to act on information that alleged Florida shooter Nikolas Cruz had a “desire to kill people,” had written a series of alarming social media posts and had access to a gun.
Cruz, 19, is suspected of opening fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where he was a former student, killing 17 people and injuring more than a dozen others.
Previously, the FBI acknowleged that it failed to follow up on a September tip flagging a YouTube comment posted by a “Nikolas Cruz,” which said “Im going to be a professional school shooter.” The FBI said it could not identify the user who made the comment.
In response to the FBI gaffes, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered a review of FBI procedures, and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., has urged Congress to launch an investigation into the agency’s operations.
Florida Gov. Rick Scott, meanwhile, has called for FBI Director Christopher Wray to resign.
Trump and other Republicans have heavily criticized the FBI in recent months. They are still dissatisfied with its decision not to charge Hillary Clinton with crimes related to her use of a private email server, and they see signs of bias in special counsel Robert Mueller's probe of possible Trump campaign ties to Russia.

russian investigation cartoons (again)

Ruth Bader Ginsburg: the Supreme Court's outspoken justice

Asleep at the Wheel :-)

Photo taken in California October 26, 2010

Ruth Bader Ginsburg is more than just a member of the Supreme Court -- she’s become a liberal icon and, even more improbably, a celebrity.

Her likeness appears on T-shirts. A book about her, “Notorious RBG,” is a big seller. Kate McKinnon does an impression of her on “Saturday Night Live” (“You’ve been Ginsburned!”).

In January, Ginsburg appeared before an adoring crowd at the Sundance Film Festival premiere of “RBG,” a documentary about her life. The movie went over big, and should soon be appearing at a theater near you.
Part of this rise may be attributable, ironically, to the man who presently sits in the White House. As one of the Supreme Court’s most stalwart liberals, Ginsburg, in recent years, has been defined to a certain extent by her opposition to Donald Trump.
Most justices stay out of political battles, but not Ginsburg. In the midst of the presidential race in 2016, she told “The New York Times” “I can’t imagine what this place would be — I can’t imagine what this country would be — with Donald Trump as our president.”
She wasn’t done. She later added, “He’s a faker. He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego....How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that.” For someone whose job is following precedent, this sort of talk was almost unprecedented.
Trump responded in kind, tweeting: “Justice Ginsburg of the U.S. Supreme Court has embarrassed all by making very dumb political statements about me. Her mind is shot — resign!”
Many felt she’d crossed a line, and she expressed regret for her criticism. (Later that year she criticized Colin Kaepernick for refusing to stand for the national anthem, and ended up apologizing for that, as well.)
Trump, probably to the surprise of Ginsburg, was elected. And Ginsburg, to the surprise of no one, did not resign as Trump had demanded. She also did not stop talking politics.
Earlier this year, she spoke of her fear that the federal judiciary, in Washington’s partisan climate, would be seen as just another political branch. But not too long after, she showed she was still willing to wade into political battles herself, repeating charges she’d made in 2017 that sexism was a major factor in Hillary Clinton’s loss, noting the candidate had a tough time getting by “the macho atmosphere prevailing during that campaign.”
And if that wasn’t enough to keep her name out there, she also made a stir with her #MeToo story of sexual harassment from a teaching assistant when she was a student in a Cornell chemistry class.
When all is said and done, though, what matters most are not the things she says to the media, but the official opinions she expresses as one of the nine most powerful judges in the land.
At 84, she’s the oldest member of the Court, and though she’s had health issues — twice she’s undergone cancer surgery — she has no plans to retire. (Some on the left had hoped she’d leave the court while a Democrat was in the White House, but that wish has been put on hold.) In fact, Ginsburg’s health regimen is well known — there’s a book out by her personal trainer Bryant Johnson, “The RBG Workout.”
Unlike her colleague and second-oldest justice, Anthony Kennedy — the court’s most important swing vote -- Ginsburg’s jurisprudence tends to be less in doubt on controversial cases. Certainly many of her beliefs were clear before she was nominated by President Clinton, as she had worked for the ACLU and specialized in gender discrimination.
Nevertheless, court watchers pay close attention to Ginsburg. Sitting on a court that leans conservative, many see her as the best at making the liberal argument in high profile cases.
Among her most famous opinions are “United States v. Virginia” (1996), striking down the Virginia Military Institute’s male-only policy; “Ring v. Arizona” (2002), limiting the circumstances where a defendant can receive the death penalty; and “Eldred v. Ashcroft” (2003), stating that extending copyright protection doesn’t violate the First Amendment or the Constitution’s Copyright Clause.
But it’s her dissents where many think she’s most compelling.
In “Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.” (2007), Ginsburg wrote for the minority in a 5-4 case about the proper deadline for filing a claim of sexual discrimination.
Apparently troubled, even offended, by the decision from the Court’s conservatives, she took the unusual step of reading her dissent from the bench. Ginsburg argued that the Court had a “cramped interpretation” of the “broad remedial purpose” of civil rights law. Her argument, in a way, won out when, in 2009, Congress passed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, effectively overturning the majority’s decision.
She also dissented in “Gonzalez v. Carhart” (2007), a case that upheld, 5-4, a partial-birth abortion ban.
Ginsburg would have none of it, writing “Today’s decision is alarming...for the first time since ‘Roe,’ the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception safeguarding a woman’s health.” She didn’t hold back: “In candor, the Act, and the Court’s defense of it, cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court — and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women’s lives.”
Then there’s her dissent in yet another 5-4 case, “Burwell v. Hobby Lobby” (2014), where the Court struck down, for certain companies, the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Care Act.
She wrote “mindful of the havoc the Court’s judgment can introduce, I dissent.” She claims the Court, in looking at relevant law and precedent, “falters at each step of its analysis.” She also states “The Court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield” in trying to determine which religious objections to laws are worthy.
In the upcoming months, there will be decisions on a number of potentially game-changing cases — issues regarding the First Amendment, states’ right, labor law and gerrymandering, for example. It’s possible Justice Ginsburg will write some of these opinions.
It’s even more likely, many believe, she’ll be writing more dissents. If that happens, expect fireworks.

Be like Michael Jordan? Not at Air Force Academy

Back in the 1990s, it seemed that almost everyone wanted to be like Michael Jordan.

But apparently those days are over.

This week the U.S. Air Force Academy issued an apology after a commandant cited the former pro basketball star as an exemplar of good grooming and professional appearance.
“He was never seen with a gaudy chain around his neck, his pants below his waistline, or with a backwards baseball hat on during public appearances,” Master Sgt. Zachary Parish wrote in an email to cadets, according to the Gazette in Colorado Springs.

"He was never seen with a gaudy chain around his neck, his pants below his waistline, or with a backwards baseball hat on during public appearances.”

- Air Force Academy Master Sgt. Zachary Parish, in an email to cadets

Parish is the top enlisted airman assigned to the student body, called the cadet wing. Across the military, top enlisted personnel enforce haircut regulations for lower-ranking personnel.
But some recipients of Parish’s email took offense, interpreting his message not as well-intentioned advice, but as a slight against African-Americans, the newspaper reported.
An academy colonel quickly attempted corrective action.
“Let me apologize for the email sent earlier today by our first sergeant,” Col. Julian Stevens wrote, according to the newspaper. "The comments were very disrespectful, derogatory and in no way reflective of (cadet wing) permanent party views.
“Microagressions such as these are often blindspots/unintentional biases that are not often recognized, and if they are recognized they are not always addressed,” Stevens added.
But even the colonel’s message drew criticism, as some Air Force sergeants writing on Facebook accused the officer of being overly sensitive.
“This is a perfect example of why we're going to lose a war with Russia/China,” one commenter wrote, according to the Gazette.

Ted Cruz accuses CNN of sitting on interview after Chris Cuomo said he's ‘afraid’ to appear on network

Ted Cruz spoke with CNN amid staffers accusing him of being afraid to appear on the network.

Ted Cruz wants CNN to know he's no coward.

The Texas senator on Friday blasted the liberal news network for sitting on an interview he gave it even as “New Day” host Chris Cuomo was accusing him of being “afraid” to appear on the network.

CNN even displayed an on-screen graphic on Thursday morning criticizing Cruz, Florida Gov. Rick Scott and Marco Rubio for appearing on Fox News but not CNN with the headline.
“What are they afraid of?” Cuomo, said. "They're all on Fox, the mothership, because they don't want to be asked about [gun control]."
Cruz initially took to Twitter to explain that he has conducted three separate town hall events on CNN in recent months, an indication he isn't afraid of the network. Friday, Cuomo was still tweeting about Cruz, so the Republican lawmaker fired back – claiming CNN never aired an interview that he gave on Thursday afternoon.
“That's funny,” Cruz tweeted. “I spoke to CNN for 15 mins yesterday about proactive solutions to prevent gun violence (like passing the Grassley-Cruz bill—which Dems filibustered—that would add $300 million for school safety) yet CNN has aired NONE of it. Why not air the (entire) interview?”
Cruz even tweeted a picture of a CNN reporter holding a microphone to his face for what he said was a 15-minute exclusive.
CNN is now scheduled to air the interview on Friday afternoon during “The Situation Room” after facing pressure from various media outlets, according to a network source. It is unclear if the interview will air in its entirety.
“Be clear: Cruz and others were invited to come on @NewDay and be tested about how to stop these shootings. They declined. If Cruz or others did an intv [sic] with CNN thereafter fine, but they didn’t when we asked. Period. Offer stands. Anytime. Anywhere,” Cuomo tweeted in response.
The latest embarrassment for CNN began on Thursday when Catherine Frazier, a senior communications adviser to Cruz, tweeted that CNN was making “stupid, pointless accusations."
Meanwhile, critics of CNN were quick to defend Cruz via Twitter when Cuomo initially said he was “afraid” to appear on the network – many pointing to his combative interviews with Republican lawmakers and White House surrogates.
The anti-Trump Cuomo recently told a critic to “get woke” while denouncing the border wall during a lengthy storm of left-leaning tweets. Last year, Cuomo referred to a Trump-supporting viewer as a “lemming” during a nasty Twitter exchange.
Cuomo, 47, who came to CNN from reliably liberal ABC News, is known for his frenetic interviewing style and unusual questions on CNN’s troubled morning program. Cuomo’s older brother Andrew, the Democratic governor of New York, is known to harbor presidential aspirations.

Pelosi’s Doomsday Scenario: Dem leader could face rebellion if House takeover fails

House Democrats see a big opportunity this year to seize control of the chamber after years in the wilderness, but the favorable landscape has emerged as a double-edged sword for Nancy Pelosi – putting high expectations on the House minority leader to deliver or face a resurgent effort to unseat her.

The California Democrat has held onto her leadership post for roughly a dozen years, brushing aside past challenges and touting her political acumen all along, despite her party being relegated to the minority since the 2010 midterms.

This year, Pelosi may face a do-or-die scenario.
And there are no guarantees. While President Trump is thought to be a drag for Republicans in purple districts, GOP strategists see Pelosi as an albatross for Democrats, hammering her most recently for describing tax cut-tied bonuses as "crumbs." And a fresh poll shows Republicans erasing the Democrats' edge in the so-called "generic" ballot, which asks voters which party they'd support for Congress.
If Democrats do fall short in November, a contest to replace Pelosi as the chamber’s top Democrat already has been handicapped as a two-person battle – between Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer, the chamber’s No.  2 Democrat, and New York Rep. Joe Crowley, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus.
“This is very political. Nobody wants to kill the queen. Joe’s just going about his work, but he’s on everybody’s short-list,” a Democratic strategist, who asked to speak anonymously for this story, told Fox News.
Other names could emerge in such a post-midterm melee.

Rep. Joe Crowley is seen as a potential candidate for House Democratic leader, if Pelosi is challenged.  (AP)

Beyond Hoyer and Crowley, Democratic Reps. Seth Moulton, of Massachusetts; Kathleen Rice, of New York; and Linda Sanchez, of California, have all been mentioned as possible Pelosi challengers, in large part because they have publicly stated their desire for a change in leadership.
Moulton, a two-term congressman and Harvard-educated Iraq War veteran, has been openly critical of House leaders since at least 2016, when Pelosi couldn’t make good on predictions that Democrats, relying heavily on the anti-Trump message, would retake the House.
As a result, Pelosi, 77, faced a challenge for her post from Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan. Pelosi won two-thirds of the caucus vote, as she accurately predicted. But 63 of the 134 House members voted against her.
In 2012, after failing to significantly cut into the GOP’s majority, Pelosi shot down a reporter’s question about whether the decision by her and others in House leadership to remain in their posts is delaying the rise of younger members. She responded by highlighting her efforts to get younger Democrats elected to Congress and concluded, “The answer is no.”
Ryan -- who argued in 2016 that the Democratic Party, including its elite California and New York leaders, has failed to connect with Middle America voters -- has since made clear he has no desire to mount another challenge. His office did not return a request for comment for this story.
The 39-year-old Moulton, even this week, continued to argue for a “next generation” of leaders. And many House Democrats consider him, not Hoyer, the “bridge” to such a new group, a House Democratic source said.
Moulton press secretary Matt Corridoni told Fox News on Tuesday that the congressman is “not interested in seeking a leadership post.”
Hoyer also has suggested that he could be the bridge to the next generation. But at 78, and as a longtime member of Pelosi’s team, such an argument is difficult to make, several Democrats said this week.
The chairman of the House Democratic Caucus is considered the No. 4 post on Pelosi’s leadership team. But Crowley maintains a high profile in Washington and in congressional districts across the country, having recently visited states like New Hampshire and Michigan and often taking charge of House Democratic leadership’s weekly Capitol Hill press conferences.
He also has contributed at least $2.6 million to candidates and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, from his own committees or from money raised from donors, his office recently told The Washington Post.
While solid numbers, they cannot match Pelosi’s, who is known as a prolific fundraiser. Last year, Pelosi reportedly raised $49.5 million for House Democrats, including $47.6 million for the DCCC.
“She can raise in Hollywood and Silicon Valley like nobody’s business,” the Democratic strategist also said. “Crowley hasn’t matched that, but he does well.”
Crowley's office declined to comment for this report. Hoyer press secretary Mariel Saez said in an email: “Mr. Hoyer – and the entire Democratic Caucus – are focused on taking back the House in November. He will continue working hard in the coming months to ensure we have a Democratic Majority in 2019.”
A Pelosi spokesman brushed off the post-midterm speculation.
“The leader is focused on winning back the House,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill told Fox News on Wednesday. “She’s not here to work a shift. She’s on a mission. There will always be people [on Capitol Hill] with ambition. That’s part of the game. But the leader is singularly focused on winning back the House and has the widespread support of the caucus.”
To be sure, Democrats have a good chance this year to win a total of two-dozen seats and take the House.
The party that controls the White House historically loses about 30 seats in the first midterms after the presidential election. In addition, Trump’s relatively low approval rating will be a strain on GOP candidates in moderate districts; more than 30 House Republicans this cycle are not seeking reelection; and recent federal election records show 55 Democratic candidates so far have raised more money this cycle than the Republican incumbents they are challenging.
But while Democrats hold the edge in many races, polling in recent weeks has shown their advantage on the generic ballot narrowing, even before this week's Politico/Morning Consult poll.
Beyond concerns about Pelosi’s tenure hurting her party’s ability to keep the party vibrant with newer members, whose ideas and leadership would presumably attract younger voters, the Democratic Party also must contend with her status as a San Francisco liberal alienating moderate voters and a lightning rod for Republicans during election seasons.
"The fact that Nancy Pelosi is the face and leader of the Democratic Party is the gift that keeps on giving for the NRCC," Matt Gorman, National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman, said last week. "As her colleagues openly grumble that she's a liability for 2018 and she continues to be the most unpopular politician in the country, I can only say one thing: go, Nancy, go."