Thursday, January 12, 2017

Last Call For The Colors Of Money

I'm pretty sure Trump's more...confederate...supporters are going to have a mild stroke when this happens later this spring.

For the first time in American history, Lady Liberty will be portrayed as a woman of color on United States currency.

In celebration of the U.S. Mint and Treasury's 225th anniversary, the new $100 coin was unveiled on Thursday featuring Lady Liberty as an African-American woman.

Since the passage of the Coinage Act in 1792, all coins are required to feature an "impression emblematic of liberty," in either words or images. Until the new coin designed by Justin Kunz was unveiled, Lady Liberty had always been depicted as a white woman.

I think I'm going to take up the fine art of numismatics later this year.

"As we as a nation continue to evolve, so does liberty's representation," said Elisa Basnight, U.S. Mint chief of staff, at a ceremony unveiling the new coin. "We live in a nation that affords us the opportunity to dream big and try to accomplish the seemingly impossible."

The new 24-karat gold coin, which is set to be released in April and is meant primarily for collectors, is one of a series of new, diverse commemorative coins the Mint will unveil in the coming years. Future depictions of Lady Liberty, according to the Mint, will also feature designs to represent Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Indian Americans, and others "to reflect the cultural and ethnic diversity of the United States."

And I think I'm going to make it a yearly thing at that.

Regulation Obliteration In Trump Nation

While everyone's looking at the Senate right now for confirmation hearing antics and Trump giving arguably the worst press conference ever, please keep an eye on where the real evil is being manufactured: Paul Ryan and the House.

Republicans on Wednesday passed a bill in the House of Representatives that touched on nearly every step U.S. agencies take in creating and applying new rules, continuing their blitz to radically reform "abusive" federal regulation of areas from the environment to the workplace.

In a 238-183 vote, the House passed the "Regulatory Accountability Act," which combined eight bills aimed at changing how the vast government bureaucracy runs. Only five Democrats voted for it.

The legislation would give President-elect Donald Trump tools "to wipe out abusive regulation," said Bob Goodlatte, the Judiciary Committee chairman who is among the many House leaders calling for lighter regulation and saying the costs to comply with federal rules are too high.

Republicans say there is little accountability for regulations that apply to almost every aspect of American life because they are created by appointed officials and not elected representatives. Federal agencies operate either independently or under the president's authority.

The current reform push is part of Trump's campaign promise to "drain the swamp," House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said on Wednesday.

As House Republicans push for reform - last week they passed bills requiring Congressional approval of major rules and giving Congress power to kill dozens of recently enacted ones - Democrats are fighting back.

Democrats have said the many extra procedures required by the reform bills would stall agencies' work, making it impossible to create needed regulations on the environment, financial markets and other areas. Democrats contend that slowing down rulemaking is intended to help big businesses escape oversight.

The accountability act would jeopardize the government's capability "to safeguard public health and safety, the environment, workplace safety and consumer financial protections," the Judiciary Committee's senior Democrat, John Conyers, said before the vote.

"Worse yet, many of these new requirements are intended to facilitate the ability of regulated entities - such as well-funded corporate interests - to intervene and derail regulatory protections they oppose," Conyers said.
Specifically, the bill would require agencies to post more detailed information on proposals for an extended period of time, limit judge's interpretations in legal challenges, and require agencies to enact the lowest-cost version of a rule

That's the big one, folks.  This legislation would allow corporate lobbyists the final say on which regulations they should be subject to.  In other words, the EPA, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, SEC, FDA and FCC?  The regulation they'd make would be rendered toothless.  They wouldn't be watchdog agencies to protect Americans, they'd be government industry groups designed to protect corporations

The Bush administration made this the default before the Obama administration used these regulatory agencies for their intended purpose.  Now the GOP is changing their intended purpose by law to be nothing more than government industry advocacy groups, wholly subject to Congress.

Hopefully Senate Dems can block this with a filibuster, but I can think of a couple of Senate Dems would would be more than happy to destroy the EPA or the CFPA or to defang the FCC or FDA.  Don't count on them saving us from this.

We'll see where this legislation goes, but expect the shock and awe portion of the Trump regime in earnest in a couple weeks.  Things will move quickly after his inauguration, and America will be inundated by a deluge of GOP garbage like this.  I'm betting a healthy chunk of it will become law.

That's Real White of You, Con't

At least one GOP lawmaker, furious that anyone would dare to question GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions over his long career of attacking civil rights, already believes the "race war" is on, and it's being led by Democrats against the white nation of America.

Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks said in a radio interview on Tuesday that criticism of Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, who is Donald Trump's pick to be attorney general, is part of an ongoing "war on whites" by Democrats.

"It's really about political power and racial division and what I've referred to on occasion as the 'war on whites.' They are trying to motivate the African-American vote to vote-bloc for Democrats by using every 'Republican is a racist' tool that they can envision," the Republican congressman said on "The Morning Show With Toni & Gary" on WBHP 800 Alabama radio. "Even if they have to lie about it." 

Got news for you Mo, assuming all black voters are stupid dupes being manipulated by evil Democrats into thinking Republicans are racist?  That's actually a really good case for saying "Hey, Republicans are racists and we're not going to vote for them."

Brooks was responding to a question about criticism of Sessions' record on civil rights, which has come under renewed scrutiny as he seeks confirmation to head the Justice Department. Sessions was denied a federal judgeship in 1986 in part because of comments he allegedly made about organizations like the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union. Sessions, a Republican, also criticized the 1965 Voting Rights Act as "intrusive" in the 1980s. 
In his confirmation hearing on Tuesday, Sessions called charges of racism "damnably false," saying that he had prosecuted a voter fraud case in response to "pleas from African-American, incumbent, elected officials." 
Brooks, who said in Tuesday's radio interview that he was under consideration by Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley to replace Sessions in the US Senate, was defending Sessions in regard to his position on voting rights. 
"Well, to get right down to it, it's all about political power, and the Democrats are not shy about lying in order to achieve their political goals," he said. "And if they have to besmirch the reputation of a good man, Jeff Sessions, in order to achieve their political goals, they as a group are not hesitant to do so."

Who are you going to believe, Mo Brooks or your lying eyes?

In all seriousness, if Mo Brooks believes there's a "war on whites" in America by Democrats, what happens after January 20th when Republicans have control of the federal government and can "fight" that war?


Related Posts with Thumbnails