Sure, Mr. Johnson…
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), who got into a heated exchange with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a Senate hearing on the deadly Benghazi attack, on Thursday said he shouldn’t have speculated that Clinton showed emotion to get out of answering tough questions.
“I did not accuse of her crying, no,” Johnson said on CNN. “I was responding to a question, Soledad. I probably speculated, and I shouldn’t have.”
Johnson told BuzzFeed on Wednesday that Clinton “just decided before she was going to describe emotionally the four dead Americans, the heroes, and use that as her trump card to get out of the questions. It was a good way of getting out of really having to respond to me.”
Clinton, in the exchange, asked Johnson what difference it makes whether the attack sprang out of a spontaneous protest or was a premeditated assault.
On Thursday, Johnson said, “The bottom line here, again, is the reason it makes a difference is the American people deserve the truth from their President and from this administration, and they haven’t gotten it yet.”
I’d sure like to know what color is the sun on his planet?
It appears most conservative brains are programmed to disregard facts and real life consequences when it comes to just about everything. Apparently money and power are the only things they concede.
Tea party-backed Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) says that the right to own high-capacity ammunitions magazines like the 100-round drum that was used to kill at least a dozen people in Colorado last week is a “basic freedom” that is protected by the U.S. Constitution.
Fox News host Chris Wallace on Sunday asked Johnson why people needed military-grade weapons like the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle and large ammunition clips used by the shooter in Aurora, Colorado where at least 12 were killed and 58 were wounded.
“The left always uses the term ‘assault rifle,’ and they’re really talking about semi-automatic weapons that are used in hunting,” Johnson explained. “That’s what happens in Wisconsin. These are rifles that are used in hunting. Just the fact of the matter is this is really not an issue of guns. This is about sick people doing things you simply can’t prevent. It’s really an issue of freedom.”
“Does something that would limit magazines that can carry 100 rounds, would that infringe on the constitutional right?” Wallace wondered.
“I believe so,” Johnson insisted. “There are magazines — 30-round magazines — that are just common all over the place. You simply can’t keep these weapons out of the hands of sick, demented individuals that want to do harm.”
Continue reading here…
The fact that corporations like Koch Industries have purchased legislation to favor their interests is no surprise to anyone.
Naming the top five United States senators that do Koch’s bidding is indeed a big deal. Those guys need to be voted out of office or maybe even impeached.
In my opinion, selling democracy should be a felonious offense.
Five senators and 39 representatives received a perfect 100 percent score from the Koch brothers’ Astroturf group Americans For Prosperity for the first half of the 112th Congress. AFP judged Congress on their votes to protect the Koch brothers’ right-wing petrochemical empire on such issues as the repeal of President Obama’s new health care law, preempting EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases, Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget to end Medicare, ending ethanol subsidies, several Congressional Review Act resolutions of disapproval to overturn new regulations and the fiscal year 2012 appropriations bills.
The Koch Five are Sens. Tom Coburn (R-OK), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Ron Johnson (R-WI), who have received a combined $187,400 in campaign contributions from the Koch empire:
|THE KOCH FIVE
The Kochs were the top contributors to Ron Johnson’s successful campaign to unseat Russ Feingold in 2010. Like first-termers Rubio and Johnson, Coburn has a perfect lifetime Koch score.
This Think Progress post is a couple of days old, but former Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold’s message is refreshing and unique!
In fact, when Feingold comes back to the senate (…and he will), I expect him to lead the charge…
As a part of the Republican victory in Congress following November’s election, a number of long-time Democratic Party lawmakers lost their seats, the victims of a national wave of discontent fed by a struggling economy. One of those who lost was Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), who served four terms in the U.S. Senate before losing to Oshkosh businessman Ron Johnson.
Feingold, who will teaching law at Wisconsin’s Marquette University this Spring, sat down with The Nation’s John Nichols for a wide-ranging interview that covered the former senator’s thoughts on his time in the Senate and what he plans to do in the future. At one point, Feingold told Nichols that, while he lost his recent election, the “broader struggle” for social justice has to continue. Nichols followed up by asking Feingold what he meant by the “broader struggle” and what progressives should do now. The senator replied that progressives must confront the fact that “this entire society is being dominated by corporate power” and that progressive must mobilize against what he calls “the Gilded Age on steroids”:
NICHOLS: What do you mean when you refer to “the broader struggle”? What should progressives do now?
FEINGOLD: I don’t know how it could be more stark or clear: this entire society is being dominated by corporate power in a way that may exceed what happened in the late nineteenth century, early twentieth century. The incredible power these institutions now have over the average person is just overwhelming: the way they can make these trade deals to ship people’s jobs overseas, the way consumers are just brutalized and consumer protection laws are marginalized, the way this town here—Washington—has become a corporate playground. Since I’ve been here, this place has gone from a government town to a giant corporate headquarters. To me, the whole face of the country—whether it be the government, the media, agriculture, what happens on Main Street—has become so corporatized that the progressive movement is as relevant as it was one hundred years ago, maybe more so. It’s the same issues. It’s just that [corporate] power, because of money, international arrangements and communications, is so overwhelming that the average person is nearly helpless unless we develop a movement that can counter that power. I know we’ve all tried over the years, but this is a critical moment. We need to regenerate progressivism and make it relevant to what’s happening right now. But there’s no lack of historical comparison to a hundred years ago. It’s so similar; the only real difference is that corporate power is even more extended. It’s the Gilded Age on steroids.