Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is running for president and he isn’t doing very well. That’s probably best demonstrated by the fact you just had to copy/paste and Google search “Sen. Lindsey Graham.”
Graham, who is next in line of the totally nationally successful McCain and Lieberman triumvirate spoke at the highly anticipated Republican Jewish Coalition in Washington, D.C. today.
Graham’s speech was something else. Part attack on Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, part doom and gloom lecture on the failings of the Republican party, Graham’s address made quite the impression in the room.
“It’s not about turning out evangelical Christians, it’s about repairing the damage done by incredibly hateful rhetoric driving a wall between us and the fastest-growing demographic in America,” Graham said according to Jezebel, referencing Trump. “It’s about looking Hispanic Americans in the eye and saying, ‘We get it, be part of our cause.”
But it was Graham’s comments on the GOP at large that has many people buzzing.
“He took issue with Cruz’s preceding remarks that Republicans need to vote in strength, and low turnout is why the party failed to win in 2008 and 2012.
“How many of you believe we’re losing elections because we’re not hard-ass enough on immigration?’ Graham asked the crowd, to light applause. ‘Well, I don’t agree with you.'”
WATCH: Lindsey Graham bashes hardline conservatives on immigration and abortion
Graham also questioned hardline conservatives on the issue of abortion, saying that the party needed to support an exception in the case that a woman was raped.
Otherwise, the party would continue to be alienate the “majority” of the county on the abortion issue.
H/T: The Hill
Cover Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)
What Do You Think?
About the AuthorRich Robinson is the CEO and publisher of Rise News. He is also a journalist and a native of Miami. Robinson graduated from the University of Alabama and can be followed on Twitter @RichRobMiami.
You Might also like
By John Massey
On March 28th, Eurasia Net, reported that Turkmenistan launched large unannounced exercises “in the dead of night”.
These movements consisted of: Land, Air, Naval, Air Defense, and Special Operations forces.
But what the heck were they doing with all of that firepower?
The Turkmen Military is largely a land based force based on the Soviet Model, as evidenced by utilization of the “Motor Rifle Division”, of which there are four, as well as breaking aid defense into its own branch.
As such, training and morale tend to be low, but utilization of massive amounts of artillery, T-72s, the infamous ZSU-23-4 “Shilka, and other highlights of the 1980s make up for the doctrinal rut Turkmenistan finds itself in.
After all, a country that has a holiday to celebrate its neutrality is not likely to pick a fight.
One can rule out a show of force to intimidate a state actor.
Turkmenistan, unlike Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, is largely devoid of conflict with its neighbors. It has friendly ties with both Russia and China, and provides the United States with an air corridor to Afghanistan, which makes deterring one of these actors unlikely.
The move could possibly be an attempt to reassert claims over the Caspian Sea, the dispute over these maritime borders with Azerbaijan, Iran, and Kazakhstan have been largely diplomatic in nature. It seems unlikely this is a shift to more bellicose policy regarding control of the Caspian Sea, as the Turkmen navy is composed of a few coastal defense craft.
It is conceivable that this exercise is not a demonstration of power against a state aggressor, but rather a demonstration to both Turkmen and Turkmenistan’s concerned neighbors, of Ashgabat’s border defense capacity.
Recent skirmishes have occurred along Turkmenistan’s Afghan border, including several Taliban militants being stuck being Turkmen and Afghan forces.
This is not an isolated incident, and Ashgabat has responded with the construction of fixed fortifications along the border.
Of perhaps greater concern than Turkmenistan’s formerly cordial neighbors, is the developing Islamic State (IS) affiliate in Afghanistan.
While there are only 1-3,000 IS fighters in Afghanistan, the appearance of weakness along the border may draw the attention of Moscow, who would understandably be concerned.
Thus, it seems likely that this show of force by Turkmenistan is a message to Moscow of Ashgabat’s ability to rapidly mobilize against a Iraq/Syria style IS takeover.
Is is not clear if Moscow will be convinced by this display, who has historically assisted Ashgabat in border control.
In any event, we should pay attention to what happens in Turkmenistan in the coming months.
RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in public affairs. You can write for us!
Photo Credit: Gilad Rom/Flickr (CC by 2.0)Post Views: 773
What Do You Think?
By James Kardys
The war between Donald Trump and Ted Cruz is over.
The former has unofficially clinched the Republican nomination, and Cruz is back in the Senate, preparing his 2018 bid for re-election. However, as one war ends, another one begins.
No, I am not speaking about the war between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, who is very likely to be the Democratic nominee.
I’m speaking about the war between Hillary Clinton and a still-defiant Bernie Sanders, who is fighting to the death to gain the upper hand as the last few primaries, notably the critical California primary, emerges.
This war has reached levels as to where Sanders has now officially endorsed Tim Canova, DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s opponent in the Democratic primary for Florida’s 23rd Congressional District, in response to Schultz’s perceived bias in favor of the Clinton campaign.
However, it is not the Debbie Wasserman Schultz issue that should be of concern if you are a Democrat and/or a liberal.
What should be of concern, in this case, is if Bernie Sanders could end up giving the White House to Donald Trump, because some of his supporters declined to vote for Clinton out of spite.
Like this? You can write for us too!
This does not seem like a far-fetched scenario here.
According to a poll jointly conducted by the Washington Post and ABC News that was published on Tuesday, 31% of Sanders supporters say they may not or will not support Clinton in the general election. 64.5% of that 31% (or 20% of all Sanders supporters) say that they will vote for Trump.
When you take into account that 43.4% of all Democrats support Sanders (according to the latest RealClearPolitics average), this translates into 13.5% of all Democrats refusing to vote for Clinton, and 8.7% of all Democrats voting for Trump.
And remember, this poll was taken before the convention, whose outcome is now going to be determined by superdelegates, because of how close the race has been.
Many Democrats may not know this, so if they see the convention fight play out on national television, these numbers are likely to go up.
In response to this development, I ran a theoretical scenario where Trump manages to unite the Republicans, but the disgruntled Sanders supporters carry out their threats at the above rates in every state.
Here’s what plays out, based on the latest RCP averages in individual states (and assuming that the RCP averages assume that Clinton unites the party):
-Trump wins every swing state, except possibly Nevada (which has no recent poll data on the site).
He also wins Connecticut, a state that is normally considered to be a Democratic-leaning one, and comes within two points of winning New Jersey, Oregon, and Wisconsin, three other Democratic-leaning states.
He may also win New Mexico, another Democratic-leaning state that could come into play in this scenario, but does not have recent poll data on RCP.
This leaves him with as many as 349 electoral votes (assuming he wins Nevada and New Mexico), and Clinton with as few as 189.
In the process, New Hampshire votes Republican for the first time since 2000; Connecticut, Michigan, and Pennsylvania vote Republican for the first time since 1988; and Minnesota votes Republican for the first time since 1972.
In other words, Clinton would be blown out of the water.
If you are a Democrat and/or a liberal, this should be a wake up call for you.
If you are a Republican and/or a conservative, this should be a wake up call for you.
Sanders is becoming the spoiler that may determine the election. It is time for the candidates who want to win to go after his voters.
RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in public affairs. You can write for us.
Cover Photo Credit: Phil Roeder/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)Post Views: 594
What Do You Think?
By Chris Beacham
MSNBC anchor Melissa Harris-Perry on Saturday insinuated that she had issues with the Star Wars series because of, in her view, racially motivated subtext related to the character of Darth Vader.
“While he was black he was terrible and bad, awful and used to cut off white men’s hands, and didn’t actually claim his son. But as soon as he claims his son, goes over to the good, takes off his mask and he is white — yes, I have many feelings about that.”
Harris-Perry also said that the fact that actor James Earl Jones voiced the character, and is black, is important for framing her views as well. As a casual Star Wars fan, I can testify that Ms. Perry has no real understanding of the mythology she is so offended by.
Perry also seemed to feel that wookies, like Chewbacca, are black. This is nuts.
First of all, the moment she is referencing where Vader is unmasked is from Return of the Jedi, the third film in the original trilogy and the sixth episode of the saga.
If one were to analyze the films in the order they were released, the second film of the originals, The Empire Strikes Back, is when it was first revealed that Darth Vader is really Luke Skywalker’s father.
In the chronological order, the audience would know from the prequels that Darth Vader is truly Anakin Skywalker, the father of Luke and Leia Skywalker.
Darth Vader claims Luke as his son in The Empire Strikes Back, in which he is not unmasked. This makes Perry’s claim that the moment Vader claims his son he “becomes white” completely false. One can also assume Vader wanted to claim his son throughout, but did not have the opportunity to confront Luke until this moment in the story.
It is also important to look at diversity throughout all six films. Using Perry’s twisted views on color, race, and implicit meanings in storytelling, we can use multiple instances that prove her views to be false.
Throughout the original three films, every person who works for the empire is white. For one, the stormtroopers, soldiers of the evil fascist empire, have white suits and masks. Darth Sidious, the true mastermind behind the rise of the empire, who Vader also answers to, is white.
Darth Sidious was once Chancellor Palpatine, a corrupt politician in the galactic senate, and he was white then, too. Although there is a minor skin tone change once he becomes Sidious, he is still caucasian, and arguably more evil than Vader. Yes, Vader does cut off a hand, but so does the evil Count Dooku in Attack of the Clones, and he is white.
The character Lando Calrissian, who originally betrays Han Solo and Princess Leia as part of a deal with Vader, develops a guilty conscience and assists in saving Han Solo from his imprisonment from carbon freeze in Jabba the Huts lair is black. He also aids in destroying the second Death Star. Lando stands out as one of the great heroes of the original films.
“The facts do not support her views. Dark and light representing good versus evil are established storytelling motifs that have been around for centuries.”
In the prequel films, arguably the coolest and most powerful Jedi is Mace Windu, played by none other than Samuel L. Jackson. Mace Windu fights valiantly in the Clone Wars, kills the evil bounty hunter Jengo Fett, and is the first Jedi to confront Palpatine about his corrupt intentions.
It is also worth mentioning that he is one of the few Jedi who is suspicious of Anakin Skywalker and his future allegiance to the Republic. In my opinion, this makes him one of the most intelligent Jedi. Windu’s demise is at the hands of (the white) Palpatine and (the also white) Anakin Skywalker, as he fights for justice and the Republic.
Last but not least, Anakin Skywalker turns to the dark side before he becomes Darth Vader. With this, he is not wearing a black suit or mask. Even with the Vader suit, since we know beneath it is the father of Luke and Leia, we know that he is white.
The Star Wars films, which George Lucas has admitted were originally made for children, is about as pure as you can get (even for those of us who believe Gredo did not shoot first).
To state that there are malicious racial intentions with this story, which is about morality and good versus evil, continues this ridiculous trend in this country to be offended by as much as possible. It is unfortunate that our culture is so politically correct and hyper-sensitive that people seem to be insulted by everything.
One can respond: “It’s her opinion. It’s how she sees it and she can be offended”. I disagree.
There is no valid justification to be offended by something as pure and child-like as Star Wars, especially now with one of the heroes of the new film The Force Awakens being a black character.
The facts do not support her views. Dark and light representing good versus evil are established storytelling motifs that have been around for centuries. The PC police needs to leave this one alone.
As for Chewbacca being a black guy, just give me a break.
Cover Photo Credit: JD Hancock/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)Post Views: 706
What Do You Think?