Thursday, June 13, 2013

Immigration debate clears procedural Senate hurdle

WASHINGTON (AP) ? In Spanish and English, the Senate pushed contentious immigration legislation over early procedural hurdles with deceptive ease on Tuesday as President Barack Obama insisted the "moment is now" to give 11 million immigrants in the United States illegally a chance at citizenship.

Despite the lopsided votes, Republicans served notice they will seek to toughen the bill's border security provisions and impose tougher terms on those seeking to gain legal status. "This bill has serious flaws," said their party leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, one of several who noted pointedly that the 60-vote majority they will demand for passage is hardly assured.

Even before the first proposed changes were considered, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a potential 2016 Republican presidential contender, outlined the complicated state of play for a measure that he helped draft as a member of the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" and now seeks to alter. With changes to tighten control of the U.S.-Mexican border, he said, about half of the Senate's 46 Republicans are prepared to vote to create the pathway to citizenship that is backed by most or all of the 54 lawmakers aligned with the Democratic majority.

At the White House, Obama said repeatedly the current immigration system is broken, for the foreign-born who live in the United State legally and illegally alike.

Referring to the 11 million currently in the country unlawfully, he said, "Yes, they broke the rules; they didn't wait their turn. They shouldn't be let off easy. They shouldn't be allowed to game the system. But at the same time, the vast majority of these individuals aren't looking for any trouble. They're just looking to provide for their families, contribute to their communities. "

At its core, the bill sets out a 13-year journey to citizenship for the millions of immigrants who arrived in the United States illegally through the end of 2011 or who overstayed their visas. That journey would include paying fines and back taxes and other measures. The bill also requires a tighter border to prevent future illegal immigration.

Other key provisions would create a new program for low-skilled workers to enter the country and expand the number of visas for high-skilled who are particularly in demand in technology firms. The bill also jettisons a decades-old system that favors family ties over education, job skills and other factors in prioritizing prospective legal immigrants.

Obama didn't say so, but the legislation is likely his best hope of achieving a second-term landmark domestic accomplishment.

Numerous Republicans hope to use the issue to repair their party's image among Hispanic voters, a growing portion of the electorate in key states, and a group that polls show gave Obama 71 percent of its votes last year. But the GOP is divided, with tea party-backed lawmakers and other conservatives resisting anything that smacks of amnesty or otherwise seems to permit legalization without assuring the long border with Mexico in particular is virtually closed to future unlawful immigration.

"Of all of the issue swirling around this bill the path to citizenship for those who are here illegally is the single most divisive issue," said Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican elected to his first term last fall. "And that is the issue on which the Obama White House and Senate Democrats insist, and by insisting on that division I believe they by design destine this bill to be voted down."

In the Capitol, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., chose to deliver a speech on the immigration measure in Spanish. He said it was appropriate to do so since the language "has been spoken in this country since Spanish missionaries founded St. Augustine, Florida in 1565. Spanish is also spoken by almost 40 million Americans who have a lot at stake in the outcome of this debate," he said in an English translation provided by his office.

Taken together, the two procedural votes had the effect of placing the bill formally before the Senate and open for amendments. Both drew more than 80 votes, reflecting a bipartisan desire to have the debate that now is expected to consume three weeks.

Substantively, an early skirmish took shape over a proposal by Cruz' fellow Texan, Sen. John Cornyn. It would permit the legalization process to begin, but require several changes before anyone currently in the country illegally could receive a green card that confers permanent legal residence.

Those changes include apprehension of at least 90 percent of those seeking to cross into the United States at every segment of the Southern border, implementation of a biometric exit system at all air and sea ports of entry and a nationwide E-Verify system to check the legal status of prospective employees.

Democratic supporters of the legislation have deemed Cornyn's plan a "poison pill," designed to wreck the bill's chances for passage instead of enhance them. But the Texan told reporters he had some leverage to force changes, if nothing else.

"I think if they had 60 votes to pass a bill out of the Senate they probably wouldn't be talking to me. And they are," Cornyn said of majority Democrats.

As the Senate embarked on a debate expected to last for weeks, Speaker John Boehner said he hoped companion legislation could clear committee in the House by the end of the month.

In an ABC interview, the Ohio Republican sidestepped when asked if he is prepared to support a pathway to citizenship for those living in the country illegally. "A lot of these big questions will be decided on the House floor," he said.

In the Senate, McConnell sounded a similar note.

"The Gang of Eight has done its work," he said, referring to the four senators from each party that crafted the basic bill. "Now it's time for the Gang of 100 to do its work."

____

Associated Press writer Erica Werner contributed to this report.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/immigration-debate-clears-procedural-senate-hurdle-201715813.html

brad miller chandler jones peyton hillis fletcher cox charlotte bobcats new york rangers nfl mock draft 2012

South Africa's path to marriage equality

I can't say, of course, how the U.S. Supreme Court will rule on the same-sex marriage cases before it. But I can talk about how South African courts grappled with the issue in 2005, after a case was brought by a lesbian couple who had been denied the right to marry. As a justice on the Constitutional Court at the time, I was asked to write the judgment in that case, which led to South Africa's becoming the fifth country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage.

The case before the court involved Mari? Fourie and Cecelia Bonthuys, two Pretoria women who had lived as a couple for 10 years and wanted to get married. The local state marriage officer said that although he would be willing to officiate, the law prevented him from doing so. South Africa's Marriage Act required the recitation of a vow that included the specific terms "husband" and "wife," and because Fourie and Bonthuys were both women, he could not perform the ceremony.

They went to court to challenge the decision, and at around the same time, a gay rights advocacy group brought a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the marriage vow. The court consolidated the two cases so they could be heard together.

TIMELINE: Gay marriage chronology

The issue was sharply contested. South Africa's post-apartheid Constitution banned discrimination based on sexual orientation, but marriage between two people of the same sex wasn't specifically addressed. And the common law at the time defined marriage as "a union of one man with one woman, to the exclusion, while it lasts, of all others."

By the time we took up the matter, it was clear that the "M-word" aroused fierce passions on both sides of the debate. On the day the case was heard by the Constitutional Court, South Africa's equivalent of the U.S. Supreme Court, the gallery was packed with people on both sides as well as journalists from all over the world.

Counsel representing religious groups acknowledged that same-sex couples had a constitutional right to legal protection for their unions. But marriage, they argued, was an intrinsically heterosexual institution created by religious bodies to legitimize procreation. Accordingly, there was nothing unfair in denying same-sex couples access to it, provided the law protected same-sex relationships adequately in other ways.

FULL COVERAGE: Prop. 8 and DOMA

Counsel on the other side argued that common law and the Marriage Act were unfairly discriminatory and therefore unconstitutional.

This was one of those cases where the manner of explaining a decision and the adoption of an appropriate remedy turned out to be as important as the actual technical reasoning employed. A crucial dimension was the role that the legislature should play in providing an appropriate remedy. We debated the issues in at least five workshops before coming to agreement on the final text. Finally, in all but one respect, we were able to achieve unanimity.

At the heart of the ruling was the court's basic belief that respect for the dignity of all human beings lay at the heart of our quest for equality. As the judgment put it: "Indeed, rights by their nature will atrophy if they are frozen. As the conditions of humanity alter and as ideas of justice and equity evolve, so do concepts of rights take on new texture and meaning?. What was regarded by the law as just yesterday is condemned as unjust today."

VIDEO OP-ED: Fighting for gay marriage and immigration reform

The justices agreed that denying same-sex couples the status, rights and responsibilities that the marriage law granted to heterosexual couples represented a profound violation of their dignity and right to equality. The court noted that the unfair discrimination came not from gay men and lesbian women being expressly targeted for exclusion but from their being made invisible, as if their love, intimacy and acceptance of mutual responsibility were not worthy of the same kind of public legal recognition available to male-female couples. We concluded that the situation could not be remedied by applying the notorious doctrine of "separate but equal," with its connotations of unworthiness.

Finally, the judgment dealt extensively with the relationship between the sacred and the secular. It acknowledged the meaning that religion has for millions of people in our society, and emphasized that it was inappropriate to regard opponents of same-sex marriages as bigots. Rather, South Africa's Constitution called for coexistence between the sacred and the secular. The same text that barred using religious beliefs as a means of denying the fundamental rights of others protected members of faith communities from being compelled to celebrate relationships that went against their deeply held beliefs.

The one point of dissent among the justices concerned how the remedy for this unconstitutionality should be crafted. One justice held that the court should simply mandate the use of gender-neutral words in the marriage vow, which would mean same-sex couples could begin marrying immediately. The remaining 10 justices, however, felt that it was the role of the legislature to enact statutory changes that would permit same-sex marriages. Ultimately, we gave Parliament one year to adopt the necessary legislation, with the caveat that if it failed to do so, the words "or spouse" would be automatically be read into the law.

Just days before the allotted year had elapsed, Parliament adopted a new law in response to the court order that made it legal for same-sex couples to marry.

Two weeks later, I entered the parking area of Kirstenbosch Botanical Gardens in Cape Town, looking for promised directions, and found a sign with an arrow: "To Amy and Jean's marriage." It seemed so simple, so obviously right that a couple who loved each other could marry in this most family oriented of places. Today, such unions are commonplace in South Africa. Indeed, many South Africans are proud that our country helped lead the way in allowing people the fundamental right to be who they are.

Albie Sachs was appointed by Nelson Mandela to be a justice on the Constitutional Court of South Africa in 1994. He retired in 2009.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/latimes/news/opinion/~3/0Agfm8d1_s0/la-oe-sachs-gay-marriage-south-africa-20130613,0,7047978.story

Illinois Lottery texas lottery Dell Levis Fireman Ed Allegiant Air Melissa Rycroft

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Secret program leaker Snowden missing since Monday

HONG KONG (AP) ? The whereabouts of a former CIA employee who leaked top-secret documents about U.S. surveillance programs remain unknown two days after he checked out of a Hong Kong hotel.

Edward Snowden arrived in Hong Kong on May 20. His identity as the source of the secret information was revealed on Sunday at his own request.

He was last seen Monday afternoon, when he left his chic Hong Kong hotel.

There were no clues Tuesday or Wednesday as to where he might be or whether he remained in the Chinese special autonomous region, which maintains a Western-style legal system and freedom of speech.

Hong Kong has an extradition agreement with the United States, but there are exceptions in cases of political persecution or where there are concerns over cruel or humiliating treatment.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/secret-program-leaker-snowden-missing-since-monday-045820873.html

WWE April Macie nicki minaj celebrity apprentice Jodi Arias Trial Live Bay to Breakers Andrea Rebello

Samsung Galaxy Note III reportedly enters limited production

Remember the wave of pundit insanity over the death of Trayvon Martin two Februaries ago? Well, get ready for round two. The trial of George Zimmerman, who stands accused of second degree murder, began today in Sanford, Florida, and immediately inspired one of the most baffling comments ever uttered by a talking head about Martin's late-night confrontation with Zimmerman, even for a story already so loaded with race, death, lawyers, Florida, and inevitably Nancy Grace. ...

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/samsung-galaxy-note-iii-reportedly-enters-limited-production-201020163.html

Gus Malzahn hyperemesis gravidarum BCS Bowls palestine Zig Ziglar alabama football sean taylor

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Watch Nintendo's E3 2013 presentation here! (updated)

Nintendo's making its E3 announcements digitally this year, so if you're looking to hear more on the Wii U, 3DS and all those presumably incoming games, we'd advise you gaze into the embedded video stream right after the break. We'll be reporting all the notable news as it develops and it all kicks off in a few minutes now!

Update: And here's what Nintendo had to show. We've embedded the full presentation after the break.

Super Mario 3D World announced for Wii U, coming this December

The Legend of Zelda: the Wind Waker HD launches in October, boasts faster sailing

Mario Kart 8 launching on Wii U in spring 2014

Super Smash Bros for Wii U and 3DS coming in 2014, brings Megaman along for the ride

Nintendo says Wii Fit U now delayed until December

Filed under: ,

Comments

Source: http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~3/Sxd4X-OYltw/

WrestleMania 29 Lilly Pulitzer Ben And Jerrys Accidental Racist Lyrics Mad Men Jenna Jameson melissa mccarthy

WHO: New Virus Has Pandemic Potential (Voice Of America)

Share With Friends: Share on FacebookTweet ThisPost to Google-BuzzSend on GmailPost to Linked-InSubscribe to This Feed | Rss To Twitter | Politics - Top Stories News, RSS and RSS Feed via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/311850459?client_source=feed&format=rss

Jeff Gordon Test Drive Veronica Mars Pope John Paul II Galaxy S4 google reader carnival cruise nfl

Monday, June 10, 2013

'GoT' by the book: Could changes impact finale?

TV

3 hours ago

Image: Robb and Talisa

HBO

Hey! Jeyne -- errr, Talisa -- wasn't supposed to be at the Red Wedding!

If you're still reeling from the "Game of Thrones" Red Wedding, steel yourself: One episode remains in the HBO fantasy's third season, and the finale could deal even more devastating blows to our already fragile psyches.

But even though the series is adapted from George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" fantasy novels, the show runners are deviating enough from his original story and timelines to keep even devoted readers guessing.

Here's a rundown of the major differences this season -- and what they could mean for Sunday's finale, "Mhysa." (More on the title's significance below.)

Baby-mama drama: The most gruesome, shocking scene in the wedding massacre -- the frenzied stabbing in the gut of Robb's pregnant queen -- never happened in "A Storm of Swords." In fact, "Talisa" (she was Jeyne Westerling in the books, with a different history altogether), wasn't even in attendance. Other than heightening the scene's drama and heartbreak, Talisa's murder probably won't change the story line that much, but it will definitely intensify the backlash and the Stark supporters' thirst for revenge.

Bloody face: What the writers giveth, they taketh away. While Talisa's gut-wrenching (sorry) death scene was made out of whole cloth (or, if you will, chain mail), "The Rains of Castamere" spared us from the madness of Catelyn. In fact, she went so bonkers after her eldest son's murder that she gouges her own face. To quote author George R.R. Martin, "tearing off strips of flesh, leaving deep furrows that ran red with blood." (This is a perplexing omission, considering what is to come.)

Slings and arrows: Joffrey is a monstrous, vicious psychopath and sadist, but in the books he never practiced his toy crossbow on prostitutes. This kid really needs a time out, and Tywin might give him one in their finale showdown.

Spirited away: Melisandre's kidnapping of Gendry never happened in the books. Her motives at this point are unclear, but we wager they have less to do with his blacksmithing skills than the fact that he's Robert Baratheon's bastard son -- and living proof for Stannis that Joffrey and his sibs aren't legitimate heirs to the Iron Throne. (On account of Uncle Jaime being their dad and all.) Melisandre's face time with Arya Stark never happened on the page either, but it's unlikely their meeting will be addressed until season four.

Run like the (Grey) Wind: During the Red Wedding, Robb's direwolf was murdered in captivity while Arya looked on. In the books, she never got that close, and Grey Wind was released from his stable -- inflicting some major damage before he was shot down. Maybe HBO didn't have any room left in the CGI budget for the direwolf's heroism? Or could this omission indicate their choice not to depict the Freys' horrifying "postmortem" of the King in the North? (It could still happen in the finale, so be warned: It's unspeakably gruesome.)

Image: Theon

HBO

Poor Theon's getting it much worse on the show than in the books.

Torture chamber: Theon's tiresome, gratuitous "Hostel"-style torture scenes warranted only a very peripheral mention -- sans gruesome details -- in the third book. In fact, the show really steps on the gas when compared to the former Winterfell hostage's story in "A Song of Ice and Fire." The tale of the torturer's identity, and the new one Martin creates for Theon, isn't told until the fifth book ("A Dance With Dragons"), but considering how much airtime they devoted this season, it's possible it will be bumped up all the way to Sunday's finale.

You know nothing: Jon Snow is virtually unscathed (besides a few eagle scratches) when he abandons Ygritte in episode nine. Her reaction in "Swords" is more befitting of a wildling than her struck-dumb TV counterpart: She shoots him in the leg with an arrow as he flees. From the preview we know that Ygritte returns in the finale -- but will she stick around for season four after his betrayal?

Storming the city: While the writers dialed up the graphic horror of the Red Wedding and Theon's torture, they showed some restraint when Khaleesi's men stole into Yunkai. In the book series, they gain entry via the town's sewers. That's some real devotion to their queen!

Image: Daenerys Targaryen

HBO

All hail the Mother of Dragons!

Mother tongue: Now back to the finale's title. "Mhysa" presumably refers to Daenerys' successful taking of Yunkai, a Ghiscari slaver city-state. When the city's slaves shout "Mhysa" to the Mother of Dragons in "A Storm of Swords," her translator Missandei explains, "It is Ghiscari, the old pure tongue. It means 'Mother.' "

Could it also refer to Catelyn Stark, Melisandre or even Talisa? We'll find out Sunday -- or next season!

Source: http://www.today.com/entertainment/throwing-book-game-thrones-could-tv-changes-impact-finale-6C10245219

the secret life of bees full moon aubrey o day johan santana viktor bout ncaa hockey role models