Dog Whistle GOP Attorney General: Welfare Is Like Those Scavenging Raccoons!

Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning, a frontrunner to win the GOP nomination against Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), compared poor people to scavenging racoons in a speech this week.


In a video captured by the liberal group, American Bridge 21st Century, Bruning makes the comparison as part of an elaborate metaphor originally focused on environmental regulations. He describes a requirement that workers at a construction project gather up endangered beetles by luring them into a bucket with a dead rat in order to release them elsewhere. But the plan is thwarted when hungry raccoons then eat them straight out of the rat-infested bucket. Which, according to Bruning, is a perfect image to illustrate how welfare recipients receive their benefits.

"The raccoons figured out the beetles are in the bucket," Bruning said. "And its like grapes in a jar. The raccoons - they're not stupid, they're gonna do the easy way if we make it easy for them. Just like welfare recipients all across America. If we don't send them to work, they're gonna take the easy route."

GOP Wants Welfare Applicants To Get $20 A Month

Minnesota GOP wants it to be illegal to carry cash if you're poor

By Erin Carlyle

Kurt Daudt wants to crack down on cash for poor people

​For a political party that keeps harping on Democrats for trying to control people's lives, Republicans in Minnesota sure are doing some weird things. First, they want government to control decisions made between pregnant women and their physicians. Now they want to make sure that poor people never have more than $20 in their pockets. Poor people can't be trusted with cash, it seems.

A bill introduced by Rep. Kurt Daudt (R-Crown) would prohibit people who use EBT cards--government assistance on plastic--from withdrawing cash at ATMs with the cards, except for $20 per month.

We haven't been able to reach Daudt yet, but Angel Buechner of the Welfare Rights Committee is not amused.

"The Welfare Rights Committee would like to state that this Bill, House File 171, is not based in any common sense or fiscal responsibility," Buechner said at this week's hearing on the bill. "It is appears to be based on knee-jerk, ignorant bias and a desire to stigmatize the poor."

The bill (see the text here) would require cashiers to ask for photo ID and prohibit EBT-card holders from purchasing alcohol or cigs.

Steve Gottwalt (R-St. Cloud) thinks $20 is enough for the month

​As things stand now, people using EBT cards are allowed to withdraw cash, which works out well for them because a lot of stores don't have EBT hook-ups. If the bill passes, all those stores would have to get EBT connections, or poor people using the cards would have a limit on where they could shop.

We reached Jodi Boyne, director of public affairs for House Republican Caucus, and she confirmed that the intent of the bill is to crack down on public money used for bad stuff--those alcohol and cigs again--and actually, in some cases, at a casino, according to this KSTP news report.

"There is documented evidence that these cards have been used for fraudulent purposes, and it's looking at addressing that," Boyne says.

The KSTP report was the reason Daudt launched his bill--watch this video to see the report--and he is not the only Republican supporting it. A whole host of his fellow GOP-ers have signed on, as you can see here.

So Much For The Job Pledge By The Republicans!

GOP-led House is moving to restrict funding of abortions

By William Douglas | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — The battle over abortion takes center stage in Congress this week as two House subcommittees hold hearings on separate bills that would expand restrictions on federal funding of abortions.

The "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" would eliminate tax breaks for abortions. The "Protect Life Act" would restrict use of federal funds for abortions under the new health care law. While both may pass the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, their prospects of passing a Democratic-held Senate or escaping President Barack Obama's veto pen are slim to none.

"They can't expect this legislation to go beyond the House or Representatives," said Steve Smith, a political science professor at Washington University in St. Louis. "It allows the House Republicans to do something symbolically important for their coalition base."

Still, the bills have alarmed abortion-rights advocates, who say they are attempts to attack legalized abortion — federally funded or not — through the tax code and measures to deny women access to the procedure.

"These bills represent a new front in the abortion war," said Donna Crane, policy director for NARAL Pro-Choice America. "The idea...of using the tax code to impose political views, that's extremely alarming."

Opponents of legal abortion, emboldened by powerful support in a Republican-controlled House, say the bills are just the beginning.

"The Republicans in the House are definitely following the promise they made to undo the damage that's been done," said Kerry Brown, a spokeswoman for Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion group.

The "No Taxpayer for Abortion Act," designated H.R. 3 and sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), seeks to codify provisions of the so-called Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funding for abortion but must be renewed by Congress annually.

In addition, Smith said his bill would "permanently end any U.S. government financial support for abortion whether it be direct funding or by tax credits or any other subsidy." A House Judiciary subcommittee will hold a hearing on it Tuesday.

Smith's bill stirred a huge uproar among abortion-rights advocates by listing victims of "forcible rape" among those who would be exempted from the bill.

"Forcible rape" wasn't fully defined in the bill, but abortion-rights supporters warned that the term could be used to block access to abortion for rape victims who were drugged, unconscious or mentally ill.

A spokesman for Smith said the term was dropped from the bill Thursday after Smith concluded that the term was being "misconstrued." That wasn't enough to satisfy abortion supporters.

"The fact that it took weeks of public outrage before the new House leadership was shamed into giving up one if its efforts to redefine rape to deny women access to abortion shows how out of touch they are with the values of the American people," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "Simply put, the now discarded 'forcible rape' provision is just the beginning of what's wrong with Rep. Smith's bill."

Like Smith's bill, the Protect Life Act, or H.R. 358, sponsored by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), seeks to restrict the use of federal funds under the new health care law, but isn't as aggressive in terms of using the tax code. The House Energy and Commerce health subcommittee, which Pitts chairs, will hold a hearing on it Wednesday.

Late last week, abortion-rights supporters turned their attention to Pitts' bill, saying it contains language that would allow hospitals to deny a woman an abortion, even if her life were in jeopardy.

Andrew Wimer, a Pitts spokesman, calls the accusation false. He said the language is an attempt to include in the health care law a "conscience clause" for doctors and hospitals that object to performing abortions.

"These are typical attacks that come up," Wimer said.

Abortion foes both in and out of Congress say they're undeterred by criticism. Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said that taking on abortion would be a House priority under his leadership.

"A ban on taxpayer funding of abortions is the will of the people, and it ought to be the will of the land," Boehner told reporters last month. "The current law, particularly as enforced by this administration, does not reflect the will of the American people."

One of Boehner's guests at Obama's State of the Union address last month was Cardinal Donald Wuerl, archbishop of Washington, D.C. The United States National Conference of Catholic Bishops has endorsed both bills.

Brown of Susan B. Anthony's List said that backing from Boehner and 80 of the 87 new House Republicans will improve their chances of getting legislation through.

NARAL's Crane looks at the diminishing numbers of abortion supporters in the House and the rising GOP numbers in the Senate and worries. While many experts believe a measure to restrict access to legalized abortion couldn't make its way from the Senate to Obama's desk, Crane isn't so sure.

She counts 40 senators who solidly support abortion rights, 46 who oppose abortion — and the rest of them sitting on the fence.

NARAL's strategy for dealing with the changing landscape: "Make sure the White House is the ultimate firewall," Crane said.

Mass of Ugliness!

Democratic Senate Candidate Martha Coakley is challenging Republican candidate Scott Brown for the U.S. Senate Election in Massachusetts. The seat was held by the late senator Edward Kennedy. If she loses this election, it may doom President Obama's agenda, and create another partisan divide that may affect 2010 U.S. Midterm Elections.

WAKE UP CALL FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!

As you may know, the media is turning their eyes on Massachusetts. The U.S. Senate special election for the seat that once was held by Edward Kennedy, has turn uglier.

Scott Brown, the Republican is leading in a few polls and is posing as a major threat to the Democratic-filibuster proof majority. A relativity unknown Republican from Massachusetts may be the first in 40 years to win a seat in a strongly Democratic state.

The Republican Senatorial Campaign, conservative activists, and political opponents are pouring money into the campaign of Scott Brown.

The Democratic candidate Martha Coakley was leading throughout the entire month, but things have turned sour. Her campaign has turned ugly in the final days and needed the assistance of President Obama, former President Bill Clinton and many other Democrats to stomp for her. Many fault her for a lackluster campaign, and being too eager.

Scott Brown's popularity soured throughout the campaign, since being spotlighted on Fox News and conservative blogs. His political capital has benefited him in the social networking sites. Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter has an outpouring of support from conservative activists.

Republicans are hoping they seek victory after winning the governorships in Virginia and New Jersey.

Now I could be jumping the gun, but I can conclude that Brown may seek 2012 as a bigger step in his quest. The way he's going, I can see that Republicans want to line him up as a candidate for president.

Brown is a moderate and that may fit into the mode of New England residents.

I will see the results on the news and congratulate the winner of this election.

Michael Steele - 2010 Spells Disaster For GOP

NRCC Pushes Back Against Steele Over 2010 Pessimism, GOP Operatives Furious

Sam Stein, Huffington Post contributes to the story.

Republican operatives are privately furious with RNC Chairman Michael Steele for predicting on Monday night that the GOP will not take over the House of Representatives in 2010.

One strategist called the comment "stupid," arguing that it will put the party in a bind when it comes to candidate recruitment and generally lower expectations and excitement over the 2010 elections. Others, who refused to go on the record, lamented the inevitable follow-up questions that would be asked to Republicans, such as: do you agree with the sentiments of the RNC Chairman?

And, sure enough, on Tuesday, the National Congressional Campaign Committee released a statement in which it basically slapped down Steele for his electoral prognostication.

See more on this story by visiting the Huffington Post. Click here for the rest of the story.