Update on Elizabeth Lauten who has resigned her position as communications director for Rep. Steven Fincher, a Tennessee Republican.
Seems Lauten has an arrest record of her own, must have slipped her mind as she scolded the Obama daughters for their dress and mannerisms at the turkey pardoning ceremony.
Elizabeth Lauten was arrested in December 2000 for misdemeanor larceny, according to court records. Lauten, then 17, was collared for stealing from a Belk department store in her North Carolina home town.
Because Lauten was a first-time offender, her case was handled via the District Court’s deferred prosecution program, which resulted in the charge’s eventual dismissal after the future scold stayed out of trouble for a prescribed period.
Since Lauten was just another teenager caught shoplifting at the mall, it appears unlikely that she was publicly pilloried for her lack of class, nor were her parents criticized as poor role models. Seems there was no loud mouth, rude skank attacking teenagers and parents in North Carolina at the time of her arrest.
Lauten, who graduated from Eastern Carolina University with a degree in Classics, first worked in Washington with lobbying firm Fierce, Isakowitz & Blalock, before taking a job with former Illinois Republican Rep. Joe Walsh. Was there ever a lower class congressman than Joe Walsh?
She then became press secretary to Rep. Fincher, the position she held until resigning monday morning. A May 2013 Roll Call article describes how Lauten visited 40 Capitol Hill offices to share her “social-media savvy” during a recess week.
Citizens For Responsibilty and Ethics in Washington (CREW) named Rep. Steven Fincher, Republican, Tennessee (her boss) as one of 2011’s “Most Corrupt” members of congress.
After a weekend of outrage on social media, NBC announced that had told them by phone that she was in the process of resigning her position.
In the backlash that followed her statement, Tom Adelsbach, a graphic designer, tweeted an unflattering photo of a woman he claimed was Lauten, holding a beer bottle in her mouth with no hands.
It had almost 900 re-tweets as of Monday evening, with many responding positively to his caption saying that the picture showed Lauten “displaying the “class” that she said the Obama Daughters weren’t able to.”
The original story follows.
GOP Staffer Elizabeth Lauten Attacks Obama's Daughters As 'Classless' Americans
You have to be a very low minded individual to attack Obama's daughters for being teenage girls, but we're talking about a GOP staffer and that's what she did. This high ranking republican demonstrates the mind set of the GOP and shows their poor judgement and lack of common sense. Watch the right wing circle the wagons around this low life idiot and defend her. Elizabeth Lauten should be looking for a job come monday morning.
I'm old enough to remember the vile things the GOP said about Chelsea Clinton and Amy Carter. The GOP are just a nasty bunch of hot heads. What will the republican leader Rush Limbaugh have to contribute to this attack on children? Republicans really are the ugly Americans you have heard about! They are classless senseless assholes and happy to behave as such.
Is nothing off-limits for the GOP and their talking heads when it comes to criticizing Barack Obama and his family? Rush Limbaugh regularly attacks Michelle Obama with as much vitriol as possible because she's worried about what types of foods American children are eating, but Rep. Stephen Fincher's staffer took it a step further and attacked Obama's teenage daughters for being teenagers.
For most people, Sasha and Malia Obama's spiritless appearance at this year's White House turkey pardon was a lesson about humility, showing how even the world's most powerful man is still just "ugh, Dad" to his teenage daughters. But one Republican House staffer saw something else entirely: two girls dis-honoring America with their slutty clothes and brazen teen-ery.
Predictably, Lauten's bizarre rant about how the president's 13 and 16-year-old children looked like bar slags was poorly received, drawing fire after a screenshot was shared on Twitter by The Root's Yesha Callahan. As some noted, the comments seemed particularly ironic given the numerous alcohol-related charges racked up by Bush's daughters during the last Republican presidency.
Was that a scolding on what constitutes class from the spokeswoman of an elected GOP official as she publicly blasting minors on her Facebook page? Are you behaving with class when you over-analyze and insult teenage girls?
In exchange for a lesson to the Obama girls on class, might I offer Lauten a word about using common sense and professionalism? Perhaps it would have ben wise for Lauten,—a woman with a few years experience in social and on line media and who should have expected scrutiny as the communications director for a U.S. congressman—to refrain from attacking the president’s children.
But that snippet wasn’t even the worst part of her rant.
“Your mother and father don’t respect their positions very much,” Lauten continued. “Or the nation for that matter, so I’m guessing you’re coming up a little short in the ‘good role model’ department.”
Yes, because teenagers who roll their eyes are an indication of bad parents and a lack of proper guidance. This, of course, means everyone’s parents sucked. Should teens in need of guidance look up to Lauten, a grown woman who, again, publicly attacks children on Facebook? Is this a proper role model? You tell me.
Lauten wasn’t done though.
“Stretch yourself,” she demanded of the Obama girls. “Rise to the occasion. Act like being in the White House matters to you. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at a bar. And certainly don’t make faces during televised, public events.”
I don’t know what’s worse here: treating teenagers who act like teenagers as though they committed treason or implying that girls don’t deserve respect because of the length of their skirts. Way to uphold rape culture, Lauten. And why is she even discussing 13- and 16-year-old girls being at a bar anyway? They’re the Obama sisters, not the Bush twins.
Whenever a GOP operative acts in a horrible fashion they always tell you that they really pray hard and realize how poor their behavior was and then apologize. Under normal circumstances and without hours of prayer they cannot even approach the simple value judgement of not attacking children. This woman has no soul.
I reacted to an article and quickly judged the two young ladies in a way that I would never have wanted to be judged myself as a teenager. After many hours of prayer, talking to my parents and re-reading my words on line, I can see more clearly how hurtful my words were. Please know that these judgmental feelings truly have no pace in my heart. Furthermore, I'd like to apologize to all of those who I have hurt and offended with my words, and pledge to learn and grow (and I assure you I have) from this experience.
You're an adult woman who attacked two teenage girls for just being teenagers. What's to learn? Elizabeth's apology should be to the Obama family and especially to the children. Those are the people she attacked and insulted. Your conduct and behavior is par for the course for republicans.
Here's the photo of the President pardoning the turkeys as is done each year by democratic and republican administrations. The only difference this year is one loud mouthed ignorant woman spewing her hate on line. Happy holidays Elizabeth.
Republicans Now Controll the House and Senate
The voters have spoken and Republicans are in charge of the House and Senate. What does this mean for the next two years? Tuesday to thursday work weeks for the House and Senate and lots of long breaks with nothing getting done. If it's not something big business wants it won't get addressed. Lets just say that for those of you who didn't find the time to vote you will be learning why voting is important to freedom. No action on immigration, enviromental protections, worker safety, equell pay for women, affordable school loans and just about anything else the country needs. A better than average chance of a government shutdown. Welcome to GOP control.
The Gutting of Dodd-Frank.
When Republicans take control of the House and Senate, many of their members will call for the outright repeal of the Dodd-Frank financial reforms. But according to a
former congressional aide close to the issue, the more serious threat to the regulations will come in the guise of moderate tweaks—nefarious “nothing to see here” amendments that Republicans will use on complicated or delayed provisions. The regulation of financial institutions that are not banks, for example, was difficult to explain to the public and rally support around, but it was absolutely critical in targeting the likes of AIG. It now appears to be at risk. The Volcker Rule, which outlaws some of the banks’ riskiest behaviors, could also be vulnerable. It has an implementation deadline of July 21, 2015, and Republicans will do whatever they can before then
to tweak or delay it.
Also worth watching is the retirement of current Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson. He was reluctant to bring any Dodd-Frank-related measures back to the floor, since he fears (quite reasonably) that doing so would give Wall Street an opportunity to defang the legislation. But both of his potential replacements have different plans. Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown, a fiery opponent of the banking industry, would almost certainly introduce additional financial regulation (which is necessary, but would have trouble getting past the House), and Republican Senator Richard Shelby will likely push hard to weaken Dodd-Frank. If what Shelby brings to the floor is sufficiently disguised, says the former congressional aide, the question is what the Republicans will end up “getting by the White House.”
A Keystone Showdown—And Possible Shutdown
In terms of environmental policy—and perhaps only in terms of environmental policy—the Obama administration has had an impressive few years. It regulated how much carbon power plants could spew, increased renewable energy, and improved fuel-efficiency standards, putting the nation on track to cut greenhouse-gas emissions 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. At the same time, domestic oil production in the United States is higher than it has been since the Reagan administration; our output is approaching levels similar to Saudi Arabia.
A Republican-controlled Congress next term wouldn’t be content even with producing that much oil and gas. The GOP’s top priority is simple—force President Obama into finally approving, or vetoing, the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that’s vilified by environmentalists because of the crude oil from Canadian tar sands it would carry to Gulf Coast refineries. After that, Republicans will try to chip away the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate pollution granted by the Clean Air Act. Their first target: the EPA’s new power plants rule, which won’t be finalized until 2015. Mitch McConnell believes he can stall the
EPA with his Coal Country Protection Act, which requires an additional review of the rule’s impact on the economy before the agency can proceed.
Of course, Obama will be tempted to veto these attempts to wipe out his signature programs. But he might not have an easy choice. McConnell has suggested that he’d use riders on must-pass appropriations legislation, risking future government shut-downs to get his way. And with James Inhofe—who believes that climate change is “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated”—likely poised to become the chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, McConnell would have some strong backup.
The Continuance of NSA Snooping
The provisions that justify much of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) controversial collection of bulk telephone metadata will expire on June 1, 2015—unless the White House and Congress strike a deal to replace them. But will they want to? Laura Murphy, a lawyer at the ACLU, believes that Obama is open to modifying the current laws. “I
think his closest advisers have told him that these programs have not thwarted any significant terrorist attacks,” said Murphy, “and the cost to rights is greater than the benefit to national security.” But given the continued threat of ISIS and the recent domestic security breaches at the White House, it’s hard to predict where exactly the president will be on surveillance reform next spring. It’s also hard to predict what Congress will have the stomach for. Mike Rogers, the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, is set to retire. Mark Udall, a key anti-metadata crusader, was not re-elected. And if Republicans take over the Senate, Patrick Leahy, an NSA skeptic, will lose his position as chair of the Judiciary Committee. He is likely to be replaced by ranking Republican Chuck Grassley, whose record on surveillance questions is more mixed. (He voted to extend the provisions that allow for bulk metadata collection the last time they were scheduled to sunset, in 2011.) Those are a lot of hits for the anti-surveillance side to take. On the other hand, it’s not as if either party really wants to be seen supporting the NSA these days. What will ultimately happen, then, largely depends on the political mood right around the time of the debate in the spring and early summer.
Strategic Slashes to Obamacare
Republicans know that they can’t repeal the Affordable Care Act so long as Obama has the veto pen. That’s why Senate Republicans are more likely to focus on Obamacare’s most politically vulnerable pieces. Two quickly come to mind: a tax on medical devices and the so-called “risk corridors” program, which insulates insurers from large losses and which Republicans say is a taxpayer bailout of the insurance industry. And if they seek to overturn these provisions, they may attract some Democratic support from unlikely places. Progressive stalwarts like Massachusetts’s Elizabeth Warren and Minnesota’s Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar have spoken out against the device tax—perhaps because their states are home to major device makers. But taking a run at either one of these provisions would present complications, too.
The device tax will raise about $30 billion in revenue over the next decade. Strip it out and there’s a new hole in the deficit. Striking risk corridors from the law, meanwhile, would
alienate the insurance industry (which has been counting on the subsidies) and potentially a lot of voters (who would end up paying higher premiums).
If Republicans are willing to risk such consequences, they’ll have an opportunity to force the issue. As Edwin Park, vice president for health policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, Congress must raise the debt ceiling again sometime in 2015. That’s an opportunity for budget extortion. But if Republicans decide they don’t want another stand off with the White House, they might train their sights on another vulnerable Obamacare provision—one they could probably kill in the regular course of legislative business. Namely the “employer mandate,” the requirement that medium and large businesses provide insurance to full-time employees (or pay a fine if they don’t).
The requirement has no friends on the right, and it doesn’t even have that many on the left or among mainstream economists. The one catch is that the employer mandate raises even more money than the device tax—anywhere from $46 to $149 billion over ten years. If Republicans voted to nix the mandate without replacing the revenue it generates, Obama would have an easy excuse for vetoing it—and he almost certainly would.
Confirmation Chaos
In the history of the United States, there have been 168 filibusters of presidential nominees. Eighty-two of them—nearly half—have occurred during Obama’s presidency.
And now he’s facing the possibility of a Republican Senate for the first time. Which means that many of the more than 200 (and counting) nominees awaiting confirmation in the next Senate session could be put in a state of permanent limbo. These aren’t just for piddling back-office jobs, either. We currently don’t have a surgeon general, though
we do have Ebola and Enterovirus. (The nominee, Dr. Vivek Murthy, has been languishing since November 2013 due to his support for gun control.)
The country is still waiting for the Senate to confirm an ambassador to Argentina, a chief financial officer of Veterans Affairs, a Social Security Administration commissioner, and a National Transportation Safety Board chairman.
Then there’s the judicial system: Obama has 53 district judgeships to fill and seven positions on the Court of Appeals. Currently, the ideological balance is even: 533 of all sitting district court judges were nominated by a Democratic president, compared to 530 by a Republican. Obama has the chance to tilt the balance strongly in the
Democrats’ favor, but don’t count on that happening. During his first term, Obama’s district court nominees endured longer confirmation times and lower confirmation rates than those under George W. Bush or Bill Clinton. According to the Brookings Institution’s Russell Wheeler, 68 percent of Obama’s appointees to the district court had to
wait more than 180 days, whereas under Clinton it was only 8 percent. And that was with a Democratic Senate. It’ll be hard for the president—who “has already been nominating middle-of-the road candidates,” says Wheeler—to confirm anyone who so much as looks like a liberal.
Anyway we get the government we vote for and like it or not we got the next two years of hell to go through.
Amherst County Virginia Democratic News
ACVDN
Amherst Democratic News
Republicans Now Controll the House and Senate
The voters have spoken and Republicans are in charge of the House and Senate. What does this mean for the next two years? Tuesday to thursday work weeks for the House and Senate and lots of long breaks with nothing getting done. If it's not something big business wants it won't get addressed. Lets just say that for those of you who didn't find the time to vote you will be learning why voting is important to freedom. No action on immigration, enviromental protections, worker safety, equell pay for women, affordable school loans and just about anything else the country needs. A better than average chance of a government shutdown. Welcome to GOP control.
The Gutting of Dodd-Frank.
When Republicans take control of the House and Senate, many of their members will call for the outright repeal of the Dodd-Frank financial reforms. But according to a
former congressional aide close to the issue, the more serious threat to the regulations will come in the guise of moderate tweaks—nefarious “nothing to see here” amendments that Republicans will use on complicated or delayed provisions. The regulation of financial institutions that are not banks, for example, was difficult to explain to the public and rally support around, but it was absolutely critical in targeting the likes of AIG. It now appears to be at risk. The Volcker Rule, which outlaws some of the banks’ riskiest behaviors, could also be vulnerable. It has an implementation deadline of July 21, 2015, and Republicans will do whatever they can before then
to tweak or delay it.
Also worth watching is the retirement of current Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson. He was reluctant to bring any Dodd-Frank-related measures back to the floor, since he fears (quite reasonably) that doing so would give Wall Street an opportunity to defang the legislation. But both of his potential replacements have different plans. Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown, a fiery opponent of the banking industry, would almost certainly introduce additional financial regulation (which is necessary, but would have trouble getting past the House), and Republican Senator Richard Shelby will likely push hard to weaken Dodd-Frank. If what Shelby brings to the floor is sufficiently disguised, says the former congressional aide, the question is what the Republicans will end up “getting by the White House.”
A Keystone Showdown—And Possible Shutdown
In terms of environmental policy—and perhaps only in terms of environmental policy—the Obama administration has had an impressive few years. It regulated how much carbon power plants could spew, increased renewable energy, and improved fuel-efficiency standards, putting the nation on track to cut greenhouse-gas emissions 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. At the same time, domestic oil production in the United States is higher than it has been since the Reagan administration; our output is approaching levels similar to Saudi Arabia.
A Republican-controlled Congress next term wouldn’t be content even with producing that much oil and gas. The GOP’s top priority is simple—force President Obama into finally approving, or vetoing, the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that’s vilified by environmentalists because of the crude oil from Canadian tar sands it would carry to Gulf Coast refineries. After that, Republicans will try to chip away the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate pollution granted by the Clean Air Act. Their first target: the EPA’s new power plants rule, which won’t be finalized until 2015. Mitch McConnell believes he can stall the
EPA with his Coal Country Protection Act, which requires an additional review of the rule’s impact on the economy before the agency can proceed.
Of course, Obama will be tempted to veto these attempts to wipe out his signature programs. But he might not have an easy choice. McConnell has suggested that he’d use riders on must-pass appropriations legislation, risking future government shut-downs to get his way. And with James Inhofe—who believes that climate change is “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated”—likely poised to become the chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, McConnell would have some strong backup.
The Continuance of NSA Snooping
The provisions that justify much of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) controversial collection of bulk telephone metadata will expire on June 1, 2015—unless the White House and Congress strike a deal to replace them. But will they want to? Laura Murphy, a lawyer at the ACLU, believes that Obama is open to modifying the current laws. “I
think his closest advisers have told him that these programs have not thwarted any significant terrorist attacks,” said Murphy, “and the cost to rights is greater than the benefit to national security.” But given the continued threat of ISIS and the recent domestic security breaches at the White House, it’s hard to predict where exactly the president will be on surveillance reform next spring. It’s also hard to predict what Congress will have the stomach for. Mike Rogers, the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, is set to retire. Mark Udall, a key anti-metadata crusader, was not re-elected. And if Republicans take over the Senate, Patrick Leahy, an NSA skeptic, will lose his position as chair of the Judiciary Committee. He is likely to be replaced by ranking Republican Chuck Grassley, whose record on surveillance questions is more mixed. (He voted to extend the provisions that allow for bulk metadata collection the last time they were scheduled to sunset, in 2011.) Those are a lot of hits for the anti-surveillance side to take. On the other hand, it’s not as if either party really wants to be seen supporting the NSA these days. What will ultimately happen, then, largely depends on the political mood right around the time of the debate in the spring and early summer.
Strategic Slashes to Obamacare
Republicans know that they can’t repeal the Affordable Care Act so long as Obama has the veto pen. That’s why Senate Republicans are more likely to focus on Obamacare’s most politically vulnerable pieces. Two quickly come to mind: a tax on medical devices and the so-called “risk corridors” program, which insulates insurers from large losses and which Republicans say is a taxpayer bailout of the insurance industry. And if they seek to overturn these provisions, they may attract some Democratic support from unlikely places. Progressive stalwarts like Massachusetts’s Elizabeth Warren and Minnesota’s Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar have spoken out against the device tax—perhaps because their states are home to major device makers. But taking a run at either one of these provisions would present complications, too.
The device tax will raise about $30 billion in revenue over the next decade. Strip it out and there’s a new hole in the deficit. Striking risk corridors from the law, meanwhile, would
alienate the insurance industry (which has been counting on the subsidies) and potentially a lot of voters (who would end up paying higher premiums).
If Republicans are willing to risk such consequences, they’ll have an opportunity to force the issue. As Edwin Park, vice president for health policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, Congress must raise the debt ceiling again sometime in 2015. That’s an opportunity for budget extortion. But if Republicans decide they don’t want another stand off with the White House, they might train their sights on another vulnerable Obamacare provision—one they could probably kill in the regular course of legislative business. Namely the “employer mandate,” the requirement that medium and large businesses provide insurance to full-time employees (or pay a fine if they don’t).
The requirement has no friends on the right, and it doesn’t even have that many on the left or among mainstream economists. The one catch is that the employer mandate raises even more money than the device tax—anywhere from $46 to $149 billion over ten years. If Republicans voted to nix the mandate without replacing the revenue it generates, Obama would have an easy excuse for vetoing it—and he almost certainly would.
Confirmation Chaos
In the history of the United States, there have been 168 filibusters of presidential nominees. Eighty-two of them—nearly half—have occurred during Obama’s presidency.
And now he’s facing the possibility of a Republican Senate for the first time. Which means that many of the more than 200 (and counting) nominees awaiting confirmation in the next Senate session could be put in a state of permanent limbo. These aren’t just for piddling back-office jobs, either. We currently don’t have a surgeon general, though
we do have Ebola and Enterovirus. (The nominee, Dr. Vivek Murthy, has been languishing since November 2013 due to his support for gun control.)
The country is still waiting for the Senate to confirm an ambassador to Argentina, a chief financial officer of Veterans Affairs, a Social Security Administration commissioner, and a National Transportation Safety Board chairman.
Then there’s the judicial system: Obama has 53 district judgeships to fill and seven positions on the Court of Appeals. Currently, the ideological balance is even: 533 of all sitting district court judges were nominated by a Democratic president, compared to 530 by a Republican. Obama has the chance to tilt the balance strongly in the
Democrats’ favor, but don’t count on that happening. During his first term, Obama’s district court nominees endured longer confirmation times and lower confirmation rates than those under George W. Bush or Bill Clinton. According to the Brookings Institution’s Russell Wheeler, 68 percent of Obama’s appointees to the district court had to
wait more than 180 days, whereas under Clinton it was only 8 percent. And that was with a Democratic Senate. It’ll be hard for the president—who “has already been nominating middle-of-the road candidates,” says Wheeler—to confirm anyone who so much as looks like a liberal.
Anyway we get the government we vote for and like it or not we got the next two years of hell to go through.
Amherst County Virginia Democratic News
ACVDN
Amherst Democratic News
No comments:
Post a Comment