GOP Continues to Lie About Benghazi and Exploit Families

GOP LIES and Exploits Benghazi Families

John  A. Smith, Editor/Founder August 9, 2016

 GOP HELD 10 COMMITTEES AND SPENT OVER $50M IN TAXPAYER'S MONEY TO FIND NOTHING    

Photo by wonkette.com

     This is one of those rare times that Democratic Nominee for President of the United States Hillary Rodham Clinton is being "Mostly True" according to PolitiFact: "There have been seven investigations [there have actually been ten now] (of Benghazi) led mostly by Republicans in the Congress" that concluded "nobody did anything wrong, but there were changes we could make."— Hillary Clinton on Monday, October 5th, 2015 in on NBC's Today Show. "House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy suggested last week [from Oct. 5, 2015 article] that Congress’ current investigation into the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, is a political move against former Hillary Clinton, and she was quick to jump on the Republican’s gaffe." Read More: Clinton: 7 Benghazi probes so far. 

     What the Republicans don't talk about is how they cut funding to protect the embassies just six months prior. Ten (10) congressional committees have investigated the Benghazi tragedy in the Republicans’ nearly four-year obsession. The latest by the "Select Committee" brought this summary: "The Benghazi Select Committee has now spent more than 7 million in taxpayer dollars in its politically-motivated effort to damage Hillary Clinton. Over the past four years, a total of ten congressional investigations have now looked into Benghazi—and found no evidence wrongdoing [sic] by Clinton or the Obama Administration."  This is a breakdown of those committees by Correct The Record: THE GOP’S ADDICTION TO BENGHAZI “INVESTIGATIONS” JUST WON’T END - Republicans Are Determined to Keep the Benghazi Conspiracy Alive.   

*The following is an opinion column by R Muse*
Republicans have admitted, on several occasions by the way, that the House Benghazi committee’s investigation was a long-term campaign to damage Hillary Clinton even before she announced a run for the White House. The committee’s chairman, Representative Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) has stated that he found nothing, but still, his committee is busy on a taxpayer-funded Republican “campaign” against Mrs. Clinton. The cost, according to estimates as of last year was approximately $6.7 million and it was enough of a waste of money to inspire a high-ranking Defense Department official to include the waste of money in a letter criticizing Gowdy’s tactics on the Benghazi Select committee. The Pentagon is weary of the three-plus years of several committees’ demands to waste their valuable time, money, and personnel. Read More: Pentagon Condemns House Benghazi Committee’s Wasteful “Speculative” Investigation By Rmuse on Sun, May 1st, 2016 at 9:29 pm.    

     From the Benghazi Research Center here is "Benghazi By The Numbers" showing money, hours, and much more about the wasteful, misguided, and at times fraudulent investigations where the "Select Committee" spent more than $7M and  "House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy suggested last week [from Oct. 5, 2015 article] that Congress’ current investigation into the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, is a political move against former Hillary Clinton." The article says there were approximately 252 witnesses, 10 Congressional hearings, 13 published reports, and much, much more. After all the money and time spent they found "0" investigations found evidence of a stand down order, "0" investigations to find evidence of an "intelligence failure" leading to the Benghazi tragedy, and "0" investigations that found any "administrative wrongdoing." Read More: Benghazi By The Numbers/Benghazi Research Center . 

GOP Busted On Benghazi: Voted For MASSIVE Embassy Security Cuts Starting in 2011

Photo by Pinterest McCain asked about Republicans cutting funds to secure embassies

     What the GOP never talks about is their cutting of funds to protect the embassies. The Hill reported as far back as 09/18/12 10:41 PM EDT By Alexander Bolton that GOP cuts to embassy security draw scrutiny, jabs from Democrats . The articles states "Republicans have sought to cut hundreds of millions of dollars slated for security at U.S. embassies and consulates since gaining control of the House in 2011.Democrats are scrutinizing the GOP proposals in the wake of attacks on U.S. embassies and consulates in the Middle East, one of which saw Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other Americans murdered." In October 2015 the Reverb Press reported:"

GOP Complaining About Benghazi Security Issues Despite Previously Demanding Embassy Security Cuts

     "It looks like the GOP’s tendency towards history revisionism is continuing to bite the party in its collective ass." The article went on to say " It’s also worth noting that while the GOP was oh so indignant at the Democrats for questioning their embassy security budget cut proposals, we had then-Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney attempting to pin the failures to stop the attack on the American Embassy in Benghazi on President Barack Obama." Read More: GOP Busted On Benghazi: Voted For MASSIVE Embassy Security Cuts Starting in 2011/Reverb Press

GOP Exploits Families of Victims of Benghazi

 

Photo by www.pinterest.com

     “I blame Hillary Clinton personally for the death of my son,” Smith said during a tearful speech at the Republican National Convention on Monday."  Read more: Benghazi victim's mother blames Clinton for son's death . Today, Patricia Smith, the mother of one of the four Americans killed in the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Hillary Clinton. Actually Hillary Clinton is being sued by parents of Sean Smith and Tyrone Woods, two of the four men who died in Benghazi in 2012. This after all those committees, money, time spent found "no administrative wrongdoing." Does anyone believe that this lawsuit is anything but the GOP exploiting these families? Read More: Parents of Two Benghazi Victims File Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton . You can read the full lawsuit here. 

Media Outlets Report "New" Information on Benghazi - Only NONE OF IT Was New

Screenshot of MediaMatters June 2016 article

     Again, after all the money, time, and effort by the GOP they found nothing and continue to lie to the American people as if they found something, anything to prove wrongdoing. It's disgraceful and a waste of taxpayer's money, and time that the Congress and Senate could be spending actually representing their constituents needs. 

"Several media outlets falsely reported that the final report released by Republicans on the House Select Committee on Benghazi contained “new information,” when in fact all of the “key findings” in the report had been previously reported. Committee Republicans reportedly released “embargoed ‘exclusives’” strategically to manipulate reporters into presenting details in the releases as new information." Read More: Media Fell For Bogus “New Information” Spin In GOP Benghazi Report/MediaMatters For America

Where's all the investigations about these? Photo by www.Pinterest.com

     I don't know about you but I for one NEVER want to hear the word "Benghazi" again! 

 

The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) - Same Sex Marriage - The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) - and Coming Up: "Gerrymandering"

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Decisions on ACA "Obamacare" and Same-Sex Marriage;

 Monday it Will Decide "Gerrymandering" Case;

Congress Gives Obama "Fast-Track" Authority on TPP

U. S. Supreme Court Justices 2015

June 27, 2015

John A. Smith, Founder, Editor 

Facebook Page: StoptheObstructionistsTeaParty

Blog: Get Involved For A Better America

Two Hugh Decisions By the U.S. Supreme Court This Week: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and Same-Sex Marriage

In the 5-4 ruling, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority with the four liberal justices. Each of the four conservative justices wrote their own dissent.

     Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Same-Sex marriage licenses shall be issued, and as such, same-sex marriages shall be recognized by all 50 states. The summary in OBERGEFELL ET AL.v HODGES, DIRECTOR, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL held that: The Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-State. 

Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy — who is often the Court’s swing vote — and the four liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan were in the majority.  Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the dissent, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

      On Thursday, June 25, 2015, The U.S. Supreme Court decided KING ET AL. v. BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL. This summary explains that this case: First, the Act adopts the guaranteed issue and community rating requirements. Second, the Act generally requires individuals to maintain health insurance coverage or make a payment to the IRS, unless the cost of buying insurance would exceed eight percent of that individual’s income. And third, the Act seeks to make insurance more affordable by giving refundable tax credits to individuals with household incomes between 100 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty line. In addition to those three reforms, the Act requires the creation of an “Exchange” in each State—basically, a marketplace that allows people to compare and purchase insurance plans. The Act gives each State the opportunity to establish its own Exchange, but provides that the Federal Government will establish “such Exchange” if the State does not. Relatedly, the Act provides that tax credits “shall be allowed” for any “applicable taxpayer, but only if the taxpayer has enrolled in an insurance plan through “an Exchange established by the State under B(b)–(c).

An example of Gerrymandering: On the left district lines are drawn geographically, each party has equal chance for the vote. On the right, lines have been redrawn, "gerrymandered" and the pink dot party will win 3 out of 4 districts, therefore win all electoral votes for that state even though the same number of voters voted in both examples.

Coming Soon To The U.S. Supreme Court: Monday, June 29, 2015; Gerrymandering (The Redistricting of Congressional Districts To Give One Party An Unfair Advantage

Arizona State Legislature, Appellant v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission Et al is also extremely important if we are to work toward fair elections. Redistricting, or "Gerrymandering" is a way that certain State Legislatures use how they draw the voting district lines to help them win elections. Redistricting  is the way in which we adjust the districts that determine who represents us. This case was filed on April 28, 2014. It was was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 2, 2015. It is scheduled to issue the court's decision on Monday, June 29, 2015.

     How districts are drawn and who gets to control the process is something of the utmost importance. And because the outcome of this case will set national precedence, the ramifications of a ruling either way will be felt for a very, very long time.

     In an article, Supreme Court Will Rule In AZ Redistricting Case Monday—Here’s What You Need to Know in the Phoenix New Times by Miriam Wasser on Friday, June 26, 2015, she explains how it came to be, what’s at stake, and what the outcome could mean for the future.  


     Every 10 years, following the national census, Arizona redraws its two voting district maps—one for the nine U.S. Congressional delegates, and one for the 90 state legislators. Until 2000, the job of delineating districts fell on the state Legislature to figure out.

     But since elected officials in this state are almost always Republicans, some people started getting upset that one party held all of the redistricting power and could manipulate boundaries to benefit their own party and retain control. (This process is called gerrymandering.)

     In 2000, Arizona voters approved Proposition 106, which took away the map-drawing power from the Legislature and gave it to an independent bi-partisan group called the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission. The AIRC is comprised of two Democrats, two Republicans, and one Independent, and is tasked with deciding voter districts based the following criteria:

• That the boundaries of both congressional and legislative districts be “contiguous, geographically compact, and respect communities of interest—all to the extent practicable;”
  
• That district lines follow “visible geographic features, city, town, and county boundaries, and undivided census tracts;”
  
• And perhaps most importantly, that "competitive districts be favored where doing so would not significantly detract from the goals above.”

ger·ry·man·der

ˈjerēˌmandər/

verb

gerund or present participle: gerrymandering

manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party or class.

achieve (a result) by manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency.

"a total freedom to gerrymander the results they want"

     So, we'll be watching, and hoping, that the U.S. Supreme Court will continue making decisions that will help this country move forward, on Monday.  I am hopeful that enough people read this post and are encouraged, and motivated into taking action by contacting their Representatives to let them know that we are out here (the Constituents) and watching how well, or poorly, we are being represented.

The TPP is a massive, controversial "free trade" agreement currently being pushed by big corporations and negotiated behind closed doors by officials from the United States and 11 other countries – Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.

     I am writing this post to help spread the word on what "Fast-Track" and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is all about and how it will effect us in the future. Also, for those who could use a little help finding YOUR Local, and State, Representatives, and YOUR U.S. Congressmen and women, and YOUR U.S. Senators, and their contact information so YOU can call and/or e-mail them.

     Last week 28 Democrats in the House of Representatives and 13 U.S. Senators in the Senate voted to give Fast Track Authority to President Obama to negotiate the TPP.  What does this mean?

      Public Citizen at Citizen.org/Fast Track describes it this way. Fast Track was an extreme and rarely-used procedure initially created by President Richard Nixon to get around public debate and congressional oversight. Fast Track is how we got into the job-killing, wage-flattening North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Thanks to Fast Track, NAFTA and the WTO included terms that promote the offshoring of U.S. jobs to low-wage countries.

      President Obama resorted to asking Congress to give him extreme Fast Track authority to try to railroad into place job-killing trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

      After dogged, diverse grassroots pressure delivered major blows to Fast Track, proponents used procedural gimmicks to pass Fast Track through Congress by a one-vote margin. Anger about Fast Track's underhanded passage will fuel the unprecedented movement fighting to stop the TPP.

YOU Can let YOUR Representatives Know What YOU Think

To FIND, and CONTACT, YOUR State Legislators enter your Zip Code at:  Vote Smart 

To FIND, and CONTACT, YOUR U.S. Congressmen/women enter your Zip Code at: Congress.gov

To FIND, and CONTACT, YOUR U.S. Senators enter your Zip Code at: Senate.gov

     I have provided the links above to assist you in finding and contacting YOUR Representatives simply by typing in your zip code at those sites. By contacting them by phone or e-mail you will let them know that you ARE paying attention to what they are doing, and what YOU want them to do.
 
     The fact that multinational corporations are going to be using arbitrators in countries like Vietnam and others to get the things that they want, and those decisions that are made can not be challenged in American courts, ABSOLUTELY show us that creating and holding on to good paying jobs is not in the interests of these corporations that will avail themselves of the provisions in the TPP. We will not gain from giving the corporations who have spent hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying for the TPP and other laws and policies that will do nothing for the people but plenty for increasing their profits. We will be losing the little fragments of manufacturing that are left to child and slave labor in other countries.

     It's issues like this that I feel WE MUST ACT ON. The only way we can have ANY influence on the "bought and paid for" politicians (on both sides) is to absolutely FLOOD their phone lines and e-mails to let them know that enough people are aware of how they are voting on bills, what actions they are taking, and that this particular issue (whichever one it may be) is one that is important to us. You can TRACK your Representatives, and specific legislation (bills) on the sites that the links above lead you to. You can see how they voted on any bill. They must know that they WILL be fired at the next election if they don't represent you well. But for that to be effective we need people, like YOU, to do their part, and there in lies the challenge. Sometimes it only takes a couple hundred calls to a local office, sometimes they are forced to deal with systems crashing because millions of e-mails have overloaded their capabilities. Either way they have no choice but to take notice when an issue is one that people feel strongly about. Please, if you feel that the TPP trade deal, and "Fast-tracking" is NOT to your benefit CONTACT your Representatives. If you are in one of the States where those 28 Congressmen/women or 13 Senators are that voted to give fast-track authority to the President, let them know that they messed up, and will be fired in the election if they don't represent what YOU want. I always put the links (above) so that people who may not be aware of who exactly represents them in their districts, counties, States, can easily find out not only who their Representatives are, but exactly how to contact them. And all you need to do to become active is go the sites that the links above will bring you to and enter your zip code, these sites will tell you everything about the people who are in public office to represent YOU! This is just one of many articles that you can search out to better understand what the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is: https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp

 Thirteen Senate Democrats on Tuesday helped advance fast-track trade powers for President Barack Obama after overcoming their own concerns about whether a related aid bill for workers would pass the Republican-controlled Congress.
The final tally on the procedural vote for granting Obama trade promotion authority was 60-37. Five Republicans — including two running for president — broke with the GOP and voted against advancing the bill.

The 13 Democrats were:

• Michael Bennet, Colorado

• Maria Cantwell, Washington

• Tom Carper, Delaware

• Chris Coons, Delaware

• Dianne Feinstein, California

• Heidi Heitkamp, North Dakota

• Tim Kaine, Virginia

• Claire McCaskill, Missouri

• Patty Murray, Washington

• Bill Nelson, Florida

• Jeanne Shaheen, New Hampshire

• Mark Warner, Virginia

• Ron Wyden, Oregon

Republicans who voted against advancing the fast-track bill were:

• Susan Collins, Maine

• Ted Cruz, Texas

• Rand Paul, Kentucky

• Jeff Sessions, Alabama

• Richard Shelby, Alabama

Those were the same senators who voted against the measure in late May, with the exception of Cruz, who announced his reversal Tuesday morning. (Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah was also a “no” vote in May, but he did not vote Tuesday.)

Now, House Democrats will have to choose whether to try and block worker aid again, even though the fast-track bill is likely to become law regardless of how they vote on TAA. Critics have said doing so would be tantamount to punishing laid-off workers because Democrats lost the bigger political fight.

Stop the Obstructionist Tea Party Facebook Page Now Listed on The Blue Book Directory

The Blue Book Directory Lists

Stop the Obstructionist Tea Party

Facebook Page

The Blue Book Directory

Facebook Page: StoptheObstructionistTeaParty

 When I opened my e-mail this morning I was pleasantly surprised to see an e-mail from Tom Taylor, Founder of The Blue Book Directory: A Directory of Progressive and Liberal Pages . He said "I understand what hard work it is to maintain a page with great content, lively member commentary and relevant discourse. In fact, it is one of the main reasons my Blue Book group took notice of your page" I felt good about that.
 

I started StoptheObstructionistTeaParty Facebook page because I felt I had to speak out about all the misinformation, misleading, fabricated, lies that I saw on a constant basis. In the media, on Facebook and Twitter and all over the place. It gives me a way to express my views about important issues facing us today, and there are many. This week my Facebook insights say that I had 1065 likes and reached 2,971 people. 404 people engaged which is important. I try to reach people and encourage them to speak up. Speak up to other people and more importantly to their Representatives in government. To this extent I created a blog back in 2013, Get Involved For A Better America . I am pleased to say that I have met many people through my page that are indeed active, not only on social media but that contact their Congressmen/women and Senators. The page is meant to encourage people to get involved because our politicians are only listening to whoever gives them the most money. I thank Tom Taylor and The Blue Book Directory again for voting to list my page on their directory, and encourage you to check out this great directory that puts a lot of good information all in one place.

Get Involved For A Better America

Blog: Get Involved For A Better America

I haven't been writing many blog post lately but that will soon change as we all need to start speaking up often, and loudly, as we approach the 2016 election. I started the blog in August 2013 making 93 posts between August and December as there was much that needed to be talked about. The Mission of the blog was simple, educate, and/or inform people about the truth and help them find and contact their Representatives. You will see a great many posts on the "Citizen's United" decision by The U.S. Supreme Court Citizens United v FEC, January 21, 2010 . You will find posts on many important issues in the "Archives" on the blog page. Also on the blog under "Pages" you will see numerous links to pages that will allow you to find all of the people that represent you in both the government and your state and local politicians. There are links that allow you to find out how a particular politician voted on a particular bill, and in fact allows you to "Track" politicians so you will know when they vote on a bill, sponsor or co-sponsor a bill, and much more. I hope visitors from The Blue Book Directory: A Directory of Progressive and Liberal Pages avail themselves to the blog and articles and importantly, offer feedback so our posts/articles reflect the opinions of our readers. Remember our Mission is simple and we hope you will share our posts and reply with your opinions.

 Time to Get Involved, Call and E-mail YOUR Representatives

As big money is buying our politicians and elections, as State Legislatures (many of which became under Republican control in the 2012 election) increase the number of Voter ID (Disenfranchise) laws that are being signed into law, and gerrymandering is taking place in more and more areas, we MUST speak out and let our neighbors, friends, and most importantly, our politicians, know that Money is NOT speech, and Corporations do NOT have the same rights as human, American, citizens.

Thank you for visiting our site and reading our material. We look forward to meeting many new people from The Blue Book Directory: A Directory of Progressive and Liberal Pages and elsewhere to help get our messages out.

To Find and Contact YOUR U.S. Senators (just enter your zip code): 

   http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

To Find and Contact YOUR U.S. Congressmen and women (just enter your zip code): 

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/ 

 To Find, Contact, and Track, YOUR State and Local Politicians (just enter your zip code): 

 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/map 

To Find, and Track Bills in the Congress and the Senate:

 https://www.popvox.com/

To Search the Library of Congress for Legislative Bills and see how YOUR Representatives voted: 

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.phphttp://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php

PLEASE NOTE THAT WE ARE NOW PUBLISHING THIS BLOG ON WORDPRESS AT www.Medic3569.wordpress.com

We will continue to post all articles here as well, but the articles will be posted to Twitter, Facebook, and Google+ from WordPress. Thank you for subscribing to our blog. 

 

“Like Gravity” Fast Track Trade Sinks Jobs and Wages

Graphic by secure3.convio.net

Earlier today I asked my followers on Twitter and Facebook to join me in contacting their Congressmen/women and U.S. Senators to urge them to oppose the “Fast-Tracking” of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement, because it is being negotiated in total secrecy and could end up being a NAFTA on steroids. I understand President Obama wanting to not have to include Congress in the negotiations because they oppose and block everything he does. But, to have this complete deal being done with no one else involved is just to dangerous. If you would like to help, use this link, it will ask for your zip code and immediately find your Congressmen/women and U.S. Senators and give you their phone numbers. If you prefer, they will automatically e-mail all 4 of your Reps.

  http://www.stopfasttrack.com/?congress_success=18

A few hours after I made that request the Center for Media and Democracy’s PR Watch posted this article.
Read the article here.  http://www.prwatch.org/node/12367

PLEASE NOTE THAT WE ARE NOW PUBLISHING THIS BLOG ON WORDPRESS AT www.Medic3569.wordpress.com

We will continue to post all articles here as well, but the articles will be posted to Twitter, Facebook, and Google+ from WordPress. Thank you for subscribing to our blog. 

S 1845 - The Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act was Placed on the Senate Schedule January 4, 2014

S 1845 - The Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act Was Placed on the Senate Schedule January 4, 2014 for the Next Legislative Day - Contact YOUR Senators Office

Cartoon by unemployedworkers.org

The S 1845 Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act was placed on the Senate schedule on January 4, 2014 to be acted upon on the very next legislative day. GovTrack.us says it has a 14% chance of being enacted. The bill has 21 Co-Sponsors. Only 23% of bills that made it past committee in 2011–2013 were enacted. That's not saying much because we've had an obstructionist party blocking all legislation that our current President was is favor of. See below for step-by-step instructions on finding and calling your U.S. Senators (with screenshots) and a link to track the bill and your Representatives.

Photo by www.westernjournalism.com

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Proposes Expanding Unemployment Benefits - Not Just Extending Them

In a Washington Post blog,  The Plum Line - Greg Sargent's take from a Liberal Prospective, article Reid: Let's Not Just Extend Unemployment. Let's Expand it. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid proposed expanding Emergency Unemployment Benefits, not just extending them.


The short version of this is that under the current proposal to extend the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program, the overall program would be extended three months. But that doesn’t mean all people on unemployment insurance get three months more; their duration is dictated by how much they’ve already received, and how long the duration of those in their tier are supposed to last. Each tier — there are four of them — is dictated by the unemployment rate in their states.

What Reid is proposing is to change the structure of the program, so that those in states with a high unemployment rate – but one that’s not high enough to qualify for the maximum of 73 weeks, the top tier – would get the maximum length. In other words, the duration of benefits would last longer for more people.
Reid told the Las Vegas Sun that he won’t push for this restructuring of the program until the three month extension is secured (which may or may not happen). And obviously, this is going to be a huge lift, given that even the temporary extension’s passage is in doubt.

Graph by www.dailykos.com

What Exactly is Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC)?

EUC is a 100% federally funded program that provides benefits to individuals who have exhausted regular state benefits. The EUC program was created on June 30, 2008, and has been modified several times. Most recently, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-240) extended the expiration date of the EUC program to January 1, 2014.These benefits DO NOT apply to provide additional weeks of benefits to individuals who had already exhausted all entitlements under previous law.

Photo by inhabitat.com

President Obama Says He Will Sign 3-Month Extension of Unemployment Benefits

In a CBS News post by Jake Miller Unemployment Benefits' Expiration "Just Plain Cruel" a video of President Barack Obama shows him saying he would sign a 3-month extension bill for EUC. He urges Congress to pass he bill. The President says that these benefits are vital to a mother trying to feed her children while she's looking for work, or a father who needs help paying the rent while he's learning the skills to get a better job.

 In another article by Greg Sargent Republicans Could Face Serious Backlash Over Unemployment Benefit Expiration he examines whether or not there will be a backlash on Republicans for refusing to extend the EUC before going home for the holidays, and continuing to be stingy.

Public Policy Polling (PPP) took a look at four Republican-occupied swing districts in the House, as well as the district of House Speaker John Boehner. Bipartisan majorities of voters in each district supported extending long-term unemployment benefits:

• In California’s 31st district, currently held by Rep. Gary Miller, 68 percent of voters want the benefits continued and 28 percent support ending them. Republicans support an extension 54-41.
• In Colorado’s 6th district, held by Rep. Mike Coffman, voters want the benefits extended by a 63-33 margin, with a narrow plurality of Republicans (48 percent) in favor.
• Rep. Dan Benishek will face voters in Michigan’s 1st district who heavily support an extension, by a 66-29 percent margin, including 60 percent of Republicans.
• In Illinois’s 13th district there is also a 66-29 percent split in favor of extending benefits, with 53 percent of Republicans in favor. The seat is currently held by Rep. Rodney Davis.

 Even in Boehner’s home district, one finds similar numbers: Sixty-three percent of voters want the fund extended and 34 percent do not, including a majority (52 percent) of Republican voters.
A common rejoinder to such polling data is that perhaps voters will not prioritize the issue when casting a ballot next fall — but PPP also asked if a failure to extend long-term unemployment benefits would make voters less likely to reelect the incumbent. In each district the answer was yes.

by www.americanprogress.org

The History of Unemployment Compensation

The Social Security Act of 1935 (Public Law 74-271) created the Federal-State Unemployment Compensation (UC) Program. The program has two main objectives: (1) to provide temporary and partial wage replacement to involuntarily unemployed workers who were recently employed; and (2) to help stabilize the economy during recessions. The U.S. Department of Labor oversees the system, but each State administers its own program. Because Federal law defines the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands as States for the purposes of UC, there are 53 State programs.

photo by www.pcmech.com

 Get Involved For A Better America

 Use GovTrack to Call Your U.S. Senators (2):

1) Click on this link (I've already set it up to go right to the Senate bill "S 1845": S 1845

You will see this:

 

Click on "Call Congress"

You will see two buttons: "I Support S 1845" and "I Do Not Support S 1845" (Choose one) 

NOTE: If you have never registered with GovTrack.gov you will be asked to register, it is a very simple process, follow the prompts. After you register and have chosen whether or not to support the bill, 

You will see this:

It will automatically have your two U.S. Senators, choose what to do with the first one:

1) Enter your phone number and GovTrack will IMMEDIATELY call you at that number and then connect you to that Senators office. There is a "Call Script" to follow if you'd like.

2) GovTrack gives you the direct phone number for that Senators office for you to place the call yourself.

3) Once you've completed the first call, click on the "Call (your second Senator's name) button and you will place a call to your second Senator the same as you did the first.

CONGRATULATIONS! You have GOT INVOLVED! Subscribe to this blog by entering your e-mail address at the top left margin of this blog to get important posts so you can keep getting involved on issues important to you. Or, if you prefer, you can "Subscribe in a Reader" to get RSS feeds. Thanks for getting involved for a better America.

Open Letter to Congress on Veterans, Food Stamps, Unemployment, Women's Rights, Immigration, Jobs, Minimum Wage, Tax Reform, etc.

I'm Just Saying - Can We Please Move Forward? 

A Definition of Liberals

meme by www.sodahead.com

 An Opinion of Republicans

Republicans, as I see them,  are people who:

1) Constantly state "We Support Our Troops" while;
     a) not giving them the proper equipment they need while fighting in active
         theaters in Afghanistan;
     b) cutting food stamps by $5B and wanting to cut them by another $40B while
         there are millions of veterans that need them to eat because they are disabled
         or can't find work after returning from war;
     c) not passing any kind of jobs bill, like repairing and replacing the 80% of our
         infrastructure that has failed repeated inspections and have been deemed
         "obsolete or in need of repair or replacement;"
     d) allowing veterans disability claims to go without determination for eligibility for
         over 18 months;

2) Would rather talk about "Legitimate Rape," and that a women "could shut down
    that whole process" (meaning a woman could shut down her reproductive system
    to prevent getting pregnant) if she is raped;

3) Would rape woman by forcing them to have a "Trans-vaginal Ultrasound" prior to
    an abortion even if a) no medical doctor requests it, or thinks it is necessary, b) in
    cases of incest or rape, and c) when the mother's life is in jeopardy; 

4) Deny extended unemployment benefits to 1.3 million Americans who can't find
    work because the 113th ("Least Productive Congress in the History of the United
    States") Congress didn't do their jobs;

5) Refuse to raise the Federal Minimum Wage to $10.10 per hour which would lead
    700,000 "tipped Workers" out of poverty and create $12.6B in more spending that
    would help the economy;

6) Create Voter ID Laws to combat the so-called "widespread Voter Fraud" that exists
    in places like Iowa where they found 16 cases out of 5.6 million votes after an
    exhaustive study, or where 17 cases were found after spending $150,000 in
    taxpayer money to investigate voter fraud out of millions of votes;

7) Insist on giving corporations billions of dollars in tax breaks while cutting education
    and other very much needed programs;

8) Refuse to work on any kind of immigration reform all the while saying they are for
    it;

9) Say they are for Human and Civil Rights while attacking the LGBT community,
    minorities, and women;

10) Refuse to allow the financial industry to be reformed causing not only the "Too Big To Fail" (TBTF) banks and institutions not to be dismantled, but to actually allow the number of TBTF banks and institutions to rise.

I said to myself over this new years, while contemplating how to grow my blog www.Medic3569.blogspot.com and strive toward my mission that I would be like I wanted my employees to be when I owned a business, "Don't just bring a problem, bring a solution."

Get Involved For a Better America

 I will now go follow my mission statement and start thoroughly researching one issue at a time and see if I can offer any solutions. I hope you will get involved. Please "Subscribe" to this blog by adding your e-mail or "Subscribe through a Reader." Thank you for your interest in this blog and my opinion.

Benghazi - The Facts are in - Republicans Enter "Ignore the Facts" Mode

The reality in Benghazi was Different, and Murkier, than either the YouTube Video Scenario, or the Republicans Claim that it was a Planned Attack by Al-Qaeda Suggests

Photo by NY Times

  Let's be real, we all know that politicians sometimes stretch the truth to say the least. Sometimes they out right lie, which has always disturbed me as far as why they are allowed to use the media to say things they know are false willingly, and without consequence. Both the Republican and Democratic parties often issue "talking points" for there members and surrogates to use whether it be for a campaign, or for a current issue they expect the media to inquire about. Benghazi was one of such incidents that the Republicans were relentless on. They viciously attacked The President, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Susan Rice after she went on that Sunday's news magazine shows. The attacks were premature, in that the facts were not known when the Romney campaign made a crucial error in attacking the President for not protecting the Benghazi embassy while events were evolving. Fox News video from May 23, 2013 They made it a political issue when in fact it was a national security issue that was still unfolding. The republicans held numerous hearings and the attacks continued relentlessly and were still going on up to the time of the NT Times article came out on Saturday. At that point House Intelligence Committee chairman Darrell Issa and those advising him decided he was to go on the Sunday news shows and use their new talking points on how to deal with the new facts, ignore them. Double down on what they had been accusing the White House and the Democrats of, that being everything from cover-ups to negligence to lying about what happened. At this point, after a extensive investigation facts are finally clear, but that won't stop the Republicans in the least, from making up whatever they think should be taken from what actually happened.
 

 "A Deadly Mix in Benghazi" by David D. Kirkpatrick, in the New York Times, December 28, 2013, reveals the actual FACTS about what happened. This has caused House Intelligence Committee chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA49) and other Republicans to enter the "Ignore The Facts" mode.

 Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.

 Fifteen months after Mr. Steven's death, the question of responsibility remains a searing issue in Washington, framed by two contradictory story lines.

 One has it that the video, which was posted on YouTube, inspired spontaneous street protests that got out of hand. This version, based on early intelligence reports, was initially offered publicly by Susan E. Rice, who is now Mr. Obama’s national security adviser.

 The other, favored by Republicans, holds that Mr. Stevens died in a carefully planned assault by Al Qaeda to mark the anniversary of its strike on the United States 11 years before. Republicans have accused the Obama administration of covering up evidence of Al Qaeda’s role to avoid undermining the president’s claim that the group has been decimated, in part because of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

 The investigation by The Times shows that the reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs. Read the entire article

 Yesterday, in an article "Darrell Issa and Mike Rogers Still Think Al-Qaeda is Involved" by The Wire - The Sunday Grind by Conner Simpson, Darrell Issa and Mike Rogers started delivering the Republicans response and talking points. What they did was to ignore the facts, refuse to acknowledge the truth, and out right lie, about what happened in Benghazi and how they handled it. The article said: The New York Times reported local militias were responsible for the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed three Americans, that Al Qaeda played no role, and that anger was stoked by an anti-Muslim Youtube video. Darrell Issa and Mike Rogers are still convinced Al Qaeda was behind the attack. Darrell's response was to deny that it wasn't Al-Qaeda and that it had nothing to do with the video. It really disturbs me when these politicians just decide to ignore the truth, even after it's widely known, and to use the media to just make up whatever suits them as to what did, or didn't happen in a given circumstance.

 Mike Rogers said on Fox News Sunday that the Times report doesn't square with intelligence reports he has seen on the attack. "I dispute that, and the intelligence community, to a large volume, disputes that," Rogers said, referring to the notion anger over the video fueled the attacks. Host Chris Wallace asked the House Intelligence Committee chairman whether he thinks the report was designed to wash Hillary Clinton's hands of any responsibility. “I find the timing odd,” Rogers said. “I don’t want to speculate on why they might do it.” Really?!

 I guess this is there world and we're just living in it. The talking points and "preferred" version of the Republican Party have always been 1) The attack was conducted by Al-Qaeda, 2) The Obama White House tried to cover-up that fact prior to the election, and 3) there was no connection to an American-made video that had sparked riots earlier that day in Egypt. But now we know, thanks to David Kirkpatrick, the author of the NY Times article that that is simply no way the case. The author says "The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO's extensive Air Power and Logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi, and contrary to claims by some members of Congress it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-Made video denigrating Islam."

That should be the end of the conspiracy right? Ooh no, the Republicans want to continue with their version of what happened and tie it to a Hillary Clinton run for President. Why not, just ignore the truth and make it up as you go along. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) on MSNBC Live today said the report is "accurate" and said "many months ago we (the Congress) got a classified briefing that this report seems to be clearly in line with," and went on to say that "unfortunately some of my Republican colleagues seem to be hell-bent on using this tragedy to further their political ends, they were wrong and as this article shows, they are wrong now." 

When Representative Eliot was asked was he surprised by what Darrell Issa said on the Sunday news shows yesterday, he said no, because I've heard him before, he has known he was wrong then, and he knows he is wrong now."  He said Hillary was an excellent Secretary of State and there was a commission that made recommendations as to Benghazi, she not only implemented them but added to them, so it never happens again. He said, in response to "will the Republicans try to use their version to slow Hillary down should she run for President?" "I think intelligent people can come to intelligent conclusions."

I'm not looking forward to all the lies and just plain garbage that is sure to come.

37 Republican Seats Up In The Congress - Let's Look at VOTER ID LAWS and GERRYMANDERING

Did You Know That In Some Places (like PA) There Were 75,000 More Votes For Democratic Congressmen Yet The GOP Captured All But 5 of the States 18 Congressional Seats?

2012 Election - House of Representatives (Congress) chart by dailykos.com

On the chart above you can see that the Democrats captured 51.2% of the popular vote, nationally, for the House of Representatives, yet they won fewer seats. How can that be? Gerrymandering. Look at Pennsylvania. 50.8% of the voters in PA voted for Democratic Congressmen, yet the Republicans won all but 5 of the 18 Congressional seats, How? Gerrymandering.

To further understand what happened in Pennsylvania see the Nov. 15, 2012 Article by NewsWorks - Did Gerrymandering Rob PA Democrats of Congressional Seats?

What Exactly is "Gerrymandering" -- How Does It Work?

 Gerrymandering is defined in Wikipedia (you will find pretty much the same definition in any dictionary) as follows: "In the process of setting electoral districts, gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries to create partisan advantaged districts. The resulting district is known as a gerrymander

 In addition, Wikipedia continues, to its use achieving desired electoral results for a particular party, gerrymandering may be used to help or hinder a particular demographic, such as a political, ethnic, racial, linguistic, religious, or class group, such as in U.S. federal voting district boundaries that produce a majority of constituents representative of African-American or other racial minorities, known as "majority-minority districts".

Gerrymandering is the manipulation of electoral district boundaries for political gain. By creating a few "forfeit" districts where voters vote overwhelmingly for rival candidates, gerrymandering politicians can manufacture more narrow wins among the districts they do seek to win. Gerrymandering relies on the wasted vote effect, effectively concentrating wasted votes among opponents while minimizing wasted votes among supporters. Consequently, gerrymandering is typically done under voting systems using single-member districts, which have more wasted votes.

For the 2010 documentary film, see Gerrymandering (film). The etymology of the word gerrymandering dates back to a redrawing of Massachusetts' state Senate election districts in 1812.^[1] It was named after the governor of Massachusetts, Elbridge Gerry, who signed a bill redistricting the state to his own advantage. One district was described as having the shape of a salamander; hence the term gerrymandering.^[2][3]

 "Democrats are understandably annoyed that despite the fact that Democratic House candidates nationally received more aggregate votes than Republican candidates, the Republicans maintained a solid 234-201 majority. Successful Republican gerrymandering had something to do with it." Eric Black of the MinnPost stated in an article on October 7, 2013" 

In an article by www. pagerrymander.weebly.com the following was stated: "We knew that the Republicans would use their control of the process to draw a map that benefited Republicans, but we did not expect them to abuse their power to this degree, all while shutting out the public."

In a January 2012 an article by ThinkProgress - Thanks To Gerrymandering, Democrats Would Need To Win The Popular Vote By Over 7 Percent To Take Back The House it is explained that the Democrats would have to win by 7% over the GOP to take back the U.S. House of Representatives.

The simplest way I can say what the GOP is doing with gerrymandering districts is this: wherever the Republicans control their State Government (the State Legislature controls drawing the district lines) they are gerrymandering the districts. They redistrict (draw new district lines) to benefit themselves. Here's how the GOP gerrymanders a state; if you had a state with 100 voters, half Democrats, half Republicans, and drew the district lines so that all 50 Democrats were in 1 district, and the rest of the state, with the 50 Republican voters, was broken up into 10 districts, the GOP would win with 10 districts, and the Democrats would only win 1 district, even though 50 people voted Democratic, and 50 people voted Republican. If each district represented a seat in U.S. House of Representatives (Congress,) the GOP would gain 10 seats, and the Democrats would gain 1 seat. That's 10 Republican Congressmen/women vs. 1 Democratic Congressman/woman out of 100 voters, 50 GOP and 50 Dem. That's why (with the actual numbers) the Democrats would have to win by a margin of 7% to take back the House in 2014.

Photo by www.winningprogressive.org

 Who Controls the States And Drawing The Lines?

The drawing  of  "District Lines" is controlled by the State Legislature. See StateScape's "Legislative Control 2013" for a chart showing who has who has control in each state.

26 States have a Republican-Controlled Legislature.
18 States have a Democratic-Controlled Legislature.
  6 States and the District of Columbia have a split-controlled or non-partisan Legislature.

It is important to note that:

In 23 of the 26 States that have Republican-Controlled Legislatures, the Governor's office and both houses are controlled by the Republicans.

In only 12 of the 18 States that have Democratic-Controlled Legislatures are the Governor's office and both houses controlled by their party.

Voter ID Laws Were Passed in 34 States to Supposedly Combat Voter Fraud - Problem? Voter Fraud Almost Non-Existent 

 

But the Laws Are Disenfranchising Hundreds of Thousands of Minorities (Likely to Vote Democratic) From Voting

 The Governor's office, and State Legislatures, are responsible for another issue swaying the elections in the direction of the Republican/Tea Party. Voter ID Laws. Voter ID Laws, disenfranchising Minorities and other Democratic voters have been, and are being, put in place in states that are controlled by the Republicans and Tea Party members. In fact, 34 states have passed voter ID laws since the Republican's gains in State Governments in the 2010 midterm elections.

 On September 18, 2012 Slate.com asked "How Much Voter Fraud Is There? This is in part what they found:

Since the 2010 elections, many Republican state legislatures (as well as Rhode Island's Democratic-controlled body) have moved to pass stronger voter ID laws. Though the supposed goal of this legislation is to stop voter fraud, the data on how much fraud is actually happening are hard to come by.

News21, part of the Carnegie-Knight Initiative on the Future of Journalism Education, has mounted an intensive effort to try to flesh out that record. News21 students have requested and reviewed thousands of public records, court documents, and media reports to see how many prosecutions for election fraud have been made in each state. The result: "analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases since 2000 shows that while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal." The map above illustrates the number of confirmed voter fraud cases found by News21 dating back to 2000. Out of hundreds of millions of ballots cast, they counted 633 incidents. Among states with voter ID laws on the books, Georgia and Kansas have seen the most prosecutions, with 80 and 97 cases respectively. In Pennsylvania, which may require voters to show identification on Election Day if the state’s Supreme Court does not block the new law from taking effect, the number of fraud cases was just five. Read More - See the Map of Voter Fraud by State since 2000

For more recent facts about Voter Fraud we looked at several sources:

PolitiFact/Texas found that Texas' attorney general Greg Abbott, has his facts wrong on the voting process, U.S. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson said in an opinion column published Aug. 8, 2013, in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. For example, "Abbott advocates the use of voter ID laws, allegedly to stop voter fraud," the Dallas Democrat wrote. "Studies have shown that voter fraud is non-existent in Texas."
 
"Non-existent" is pretty strong; we don’t have to look any farther than our own reporting to know that statement isn’t entirely accurate. But how prevalent is voter fraud in Texas? Johnson spokesman Cameron Trimble told us by phone and email that the column should have said "virtually" non-existent. He sent us web links to research and news stories that described nationwide voter fraud as " rare." None of the materials analyzed fraud in Texas specifically, and we found only one mention of a Texas case -- the 2006 conviction of a Pecos woman who filled out and mailed absentee ballots for others.

On the UP w/Steve Kornacki  on Sunday he quoted The Columbia Dispatch as stating that in the 2012 elections in Ohio only 17 cases were found out of 5.6 million voters. And in Iowa the Secretary of State, Matt Schultz,  (who blatantly displays a big red button on his website that offers a "Voter Fraud Hotline") spent $150,000 of taxpayer money to find out there were only 16 cases found out of all the voters there. The numbers don't get much higher anywhere else in the country. Georgia and Kansas have seen the most prosecutions, with 80 and 97 cases respectively.

Both on the UP w./Steve Kornacki and in the Salon.com/PolicyMic December 21, 2013 article "Study confirms every bad thing you suspected about voter ID laws" the following was discovered:

According to new research by University of Massachusetts Boston sociologist Keith Bentele and political scientist Erin O’Brien, the states that have enacted tougher voter ID laws in the past few years are also the same states where both minority and lower-income voter turnout had increased in recent years.

Focusing further analysis on just 2011, when the vast majority of voter ID regulations were passed, the researchers found that states which passed the legislation were highly likely to have:
- Republicans in control of both houses of the state legislature and the governorship
- Strong probabilities of being swing states in the 2012 elections
- Minority turnout which was higher in the 2008 election and with high proportions of African-American voters
- Larger numbers of allegations of fraud in 2004, though these had a “much smaller substantive impact relative to partisan and racial factors.”

 The authors note that the study’s results carry ominous implications and demonstrate voter ID laws have “an uncomfortable relationship to the political activism of blacks and the poor.”

The fact is that Voter ID Laws really have nothing to do with Voter Fraud and everything to do with disenfranchising minorities and likely Democratic voters. One scary thing is that with only 17 cases of voter fraud out of 5.6 million voters in Ohio, and 16 cases in Iowa a Washington Post poll recently found that 48% of Americans think that voter fraud is "a major problem." 33% think it's a minor problem and only 14% think it's no problem. 74% of people think that photo ID should be required, though it is a major problem for some people to get the required ID's. To get State issued ID's you need a birth certificate which for people not living in the state they were born in ca find themselves having to pay a fee to get a copy of their birth certificate of up to $33.00. Not everyone has $33.00 to get a copy of their birth certificate. Niot everyone has transportation to run around to different agencies trying to get the proof they'll need to get a photo ID. States like Texas whose laws won't accept a student ID  from a State College but will accept a gun permit are specifically designed to disenfranchise voters that are likely to vote Democratic.

Photo by newyorker.com

The Dept. of Justice Calls in the Big Guns to Combat

 Voter ID Laws

It’s difficult to exaggerate the prominence Stanford Law Professor Pam Karlan enjoys within the progressive legal community. Karlan is one of the most active members of the Supreme Court bar — among other things, she co-authored the brief that convinced the justices to strike down the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act last June. She is a former litigator for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and she is among the most widely regarded voting rights experts in the nation. If President Obama had shown more courage in the early years of his presidency, or if Senate Democrats had deployed the nuclear option sooner, she would be a federal appellate judge today. Many Court watchers, including myself, would choose her if we could place only one person on the Supreme Court.
So when the Justice Department revealed on Friday that Karlan would become the nation’s top voting rights attorney, it was as if Marsellus Wallace called up the many voters being disenfranchised in states like Texas and North Carolina, and told them that he’s sending The Wolf. READ MORE from ThinkProgress

mrc.org

Meet the 37 Republicans Who Could Lose Their Jobs For Shutting Down The Government

On October 24, 2013 the Huffington Post put out an article with the above headline. This article tells you a little about each of the 37 Republicans that we could fire and take their seats. It's definitely worth the read. Huffington Post - October 24, 2013 - Meet the 37 Republicans...

^{References from Wikipedia for above}

1. There is no evidence that the famous American portrait painter Gilbert Stuart had any involvement with either the design, drawing, or naming of the cartoon, or with the coining of the term. Detailed biographies and academic journal articles about Stuart make no reference to gerrymandering. The myth of Stuart’s association with the original gerrymander has been reproduced and spread, without verification or sources, from one reference book and Internet site to another. Modern scholars of Stuart are in agreement that no proof exists to credit him with the term or cartoon and that he had the propensity not to be involved with such issues. Martis, Kenneth C. (2008). "The Original Gerrymander". Political Geography 27 (4): 833–839. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2008.09.003.
2. O’Brien, D. C. (1984). "Elkanah Tisdale: Designer, Engraver and Miniature Painter". Connecticut Historical Bulletin 49 (2): 83–96.
3. Library of Congress. Original woodblocks for printing “Gerrymander” political cartoon. Geography and Map Reading Room. LCCN Permalink: http://lccn.loc.gov/2003620165.