Political Truth.
Whether you like it or not.

Friday, July 10, 2015

The Daily Drift

Hey, wingnuts, yeah we're talking to you ...!  
The Truth Be Told is read in 204 countries around the world.

  Republicans - Go Ahead Get Stung ... !
Today is - Step On A Bee Day
Don't forget to visit our sister blog Carolina Naturally

Some of our readers today have been in:
The Americas
Argentina - Bolivia - Brazil - Canada - Colombia - Jamaica - Nicaragua - Peru - Puerto Rico
United States - Venezuela
Bosnia/Herzegovina - Bulgaria -Croatia - Czech Republic - England - France - Georgia -Germany
Iceland - Iceland - Ireland - Italy - Netherlands - Norway - Poland - Portugal - Russia - Scotland
Slovakia - Slovenia - Spain - Switzerland -Turkey - Ukraine - Wales
China - India - Indonesia - Iran - Japan - Korea - Malaysia - Singapore - Sri Lanka - Thailand - Vietnam
Egypt - South Africa
The Pacific
Australia - Philippines

Here’s The Proof That Donald Trump Is Destroying The Republican Cabal’s Chances In 2016

donald trumpA quick look around at the mass Republican implosion on the Sunday shows provided ample evidence that Donald Trump is destroying the Republican cabal.
Mike Huckabee tried to avoid the question on CNN’s State of the Union, “Well, honestly, Donald Trump needs no help from Mike Huckabee to get publicity. He’s doing a really good job of that. So, I think what I have been doing is focusing on what my own views of immigration happen to be, rather than weighing in on getting in this battle of, are we with Trump or against Trump? Look, I’m for some reasonable approaches to immigration that start with a secure border. I have committed to get that done within a year.
Rick Santorum said that Trump was wrong but then agreed with him on CBS’s Face The Nation, “And I think Donald points to a very important thing, which is we have a serious problem of illegal immigration in this country that is undermining American workers. We have 12 million illegal immigrants in this country that are flattening out wages, lowering the standard of living for people who are here legally, both — mostly by the way, the most biggest impact of illegal immigrants is our legal immigrants, who have actually played by the rules and are coming to this country because we said we want you to come in here. And they’re the ones being punished by all of this illegal immigration. So while I don’t like verbiage he’s used, I like the fact that he is focused on a very important issue for American workers, and particularly illegal immigrants in this country.”
On Fox News Sunday, Chris Christie tried to claim that Hillary Clinton wants illegal immigrants to vote, “Because these folks are coming across the border, Shannon, not to vote, like Hillary Clinton would lead you to believe. They’re coming to work. And if they’re not able to be employed if they come here illegally, if every employer uses E-Verify and if they violate the late, there are fines that are so significant that the profit they make off hiring lower-wage workers and discriminating against American workers won’t be worth their while. You’ll see a real diminishment of anybody trying to come over the southern border.”
Ted Cruz actually defended Trump on Meet The Press, and then promptly self-destructed on the immigration question, “I salute Donald Trump for focusing on the need to address illegal immigration. The Washington cartel doesn’t want to address that. The Washington cartel doesn’t believe we need to secure the borders. The Washington cartel supports amnesty and I think amnesty’s wrong. And I salute Donald Trump for focusing on it. He has a colorful way of speaking. It’s not the way I speak. But I’m not gonna engage in the media’s game of throwing rocks and attacking other Republicans. I’m just not gonna do it.”
Rick Perry did the best job of clearly speaking out against Trump on ABC’s This Week, “Well, everybody gets to pick and choose who they want to be for. But the fact is I’ve said very clearly that Donald Trump does not represent the Republican cabal. I was offended by his remarks. Listen, Hispanics in America and Hispanics in Texas, from the Alamo to Afghanistan, have been extraordinary people, citizens of our country and of our state. They have served nobly. And to paint with that broad a brush that Donald Trump did is — I mean he’s going to have to defend those remarks. I never will. And I will stand up and say that those are offensive, which they were.”
When Rick Perry is the voice of reason in the discussion, the Republican cabal has got big problems.
Through his racist comments and his rise in the polls, Donald Trump has pushed the immigration issue back to the front and center of the Republican primary.
The problem is that the Republican cabal’s position on immigration is largely viewed by the rest of the country as wrong. Donald Trump is destroying the cabal’s chances in 2016 by further pushing Hispanic voters into the Democratic column.
The Republican cabal does not want to talk about immigration. They want to avoid the issue at all costs. Their position on immigration will cost them votes in states across the country in 2016.
Donald Trump has doused the cabal in gasoline and lit the match. But the biggest reason the Republican cabal is crumbling is that a sizable percentage of their voters agree with the racist bigotry of Donald Trump.

Republicans Get Busted Trying to Take Down Hillary Clinton with Pure Lies

Hillary Clinton Texting
The press hasn’t learned yet, apparently. On Monday July 6th, Democrats busted Republicans for leaking yet another fake Benghazi email story to the press. They titled their press release, “Politico Ran Bogus Leak in Front-Page Story.”
Representative Elijah E. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, sent a letter to Chairman Trey Gowdy warning, “it now appears that someone who was given access to the Select Committee’s documents leaked doctored information to the press in order to make unsubstantiated allegations against Secretary Clinton.”
Oh, gee. This is so new, how could anyone in the press have known to be on the look out for total fabrications based on emails they were not allowed to see but had to take the word of a Republican on? I mean, it only happened in a huge scandal revealed on May 14, 2013 when CNN’s Jake Tapper discovered that the Benghazi emails reported by ABC’s Jonathan Karl had been edited to make Obama look bad. Karl had written that these emails had been reviewed by ABC. But it turns out that wasn’t true. The emails were basically looked at by a Republican who handed their notes to Karl, who reported them as if he had read them himself.
Jonathan Karl and ABC tried that same trick a year later, but got busted.
This leads us to today, where just as predicted on these pages, Republicans have nothing on Secretary Hillary Clinton and they can’t beat her in a fight for the White House based on policy or platforms, so they are going to keep making stuff up. This is why Democrats had to bust Republicans on June 17 of this year after they refused to release the full Blumenthal transcripts.
Here’s the letter sent by Rep. Cummings to Rep. Gowdy:
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Documents released recently by the Benghazi Select Committee demonstrate that a Member of the Committee, a staffer on the Committee, or someone who has been given access to the Committee’s documents inaccurately described to the press email exchanges obtained by the Committee in a way that appeared to further a political attack against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
On June 18, 2015, Politico ran a front-page story entitled Benghazi Panel Probes Sidney Blumenthal’s Work for David Brock.The anonymous source for this story appears to have been attempting to support a line of political attack that many Republicans have been making recently against Secretary Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal, Media Matters, and the White House.  Unfortunately, the Politico reporter apparently relied only on “a source who has reviewed the email exchange” when she reported the following:
While still secretary of state, Clinton emailed back and forth with Blumenthal about efforts by one of the groups, Media Matters, to neutralize criticism of her handling of the deadly assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, sources tell POLITICO.
“Got all this done. … Complete refutation on Libya smear,” Blumenthal wrote to Clinton in an Oct. 10, 2012, email into which he had pasted links to four Media Matters posts criticizing Fox News and Republicans for politicizing the Benghazi attacks and challenging claims of lax security around the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, according to a source who has reviewed the email exchange.  Blumenthal signed off the email to Clinton by suggesting that one of her top aides, Philippe Reines, “can circulate these links,” according to the source.  Clinton responded: “Thanks, I’m pushing to WH,” according to the source. 
The emails were not included in documents originally turned over by the State Department.
            Now that the emails quoted in this story have been released, it is clear that this source provided the following inaccurate information:
  • First, the source claimed that Secretary Clinton wrote “Thanks, I’m pushing to WH” in response to an email from Mr. Blumenthal on October 10.   In fact, she did not make that statement in response to this email.  Secretary Clinton was responding to a completely different email more than a week earlier, on October 1.
  • Second, the source claimed that Secretary Clinton was responding to a suggestion from Mr. Blumenthal that Philippe Reines circulate links to four Media Matters articles that refuted the way the “right-wing media” was covering Republican statements about the Benghazi attacks.  In fact, Secretary Clinton was responding to an email from Mr. Blumenthal forwarding an article from Salon.com reporting that Republicans were planning to claim inaccurately during the presidential debates that the White House had advance knowledge about the Benghazi attacks and failed to act on it.  The article included no reference to Mr. Reines at all.
  • Third, the source claimed that Secretary Clinton’s email saying “Thanks, I’m pushing to WH” was not turned over by the State Department.  In fact, that email was turned over to the Select Committee by the State Department on February 13, 2015, marked with Bates number STATE-SCB0045548-SCB0045550.  The Select Committee has had that email for four months.
            It appears that this source fed Politico an inaccurate characterization of these emails and that Politico accepted this mischaracterization without obtaining the emails themselves.  The source apparently took an email that was produced to the Select Committee in February, isolated Secretary Clinton’s statement about the White House, removed it from the original email exchange about the presidential debates, and then added it to a different email exchange involving Media Matters.  The source then apparently misrepresented that the State Department had withheld this new hybrid document from the Select Committee.  
            Unfortunately, this is only the latest in a reckless pattern of selective Republican leaks and mischaracterizations of evidence relating to the Benghazi attacks.
            In 2013, another source provided an inaccurate characterization of an email from National Security Council official Ben Rhodes, including words that simply were not there, in order to misrepresent the White House’s role in editing the intelligence community’s talking points.  As CNN later reported, this mischaracterization “made it appear that the White House was primarily concerned with the State Department’s desire to remove references and warnings about specific terrorist groups so as to not bring criticism to the department.”   
            Similarly, former Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa mischaracterized a State Department cable in 2013 by claiming that Secretary Clinton “outright denied security in her signature in a cable, April 2012.” It was later revealed, however, that the cable had only a pro-forma stamp of her signature, like millions of cables that go out from the State Department every year.  The Washington Post Fact Checker gave this claim “four pinocchios, concluding that “Issa presented this as a ‘gotcha’ moment, but it relies on an absurd understanding of the word ‘signature’.”
            These abuses are reminiscent of those seventeen years ago, when the Speaker of the House, Rep. Newt Gingrich, demanded that the Chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, Rep. Dan Burton, issue an apology to the House of Representatives and fire his chief investigator for releasing inaccurate, selectively edited audio recordings during an investigation of Webster Hubbell.  These tapes had been manipulated and provided to the press and the American people in order to cast an inaccurate and negative light on then-First Lady Hillary Clinton.
            In the Select Committee’s one-year progress report n May, you proclaimed:  “serious investigations do not leak information or make selective releases of information without full and proper context.”  Yet, it now appears that someone who was given access to the Select Committee’s documents leaked doctored information to the press in order to make unsubstantiated allegations against Secretary Clinton.  Since you have repeatedly refused my requests for the Select Committee to adopt rules—including protocols governing the release of documents obtained as part of the investigation—it is unclear how you propose to prevent this type of abuse from happening again in the future.  


                                                                        Elijah E. Cummings
Ranking Member
Tip: If a Republican aide comes to you as a source and promises to tell you what is in emails, especially if these emails are allegedly about Benghazi, don’t take their word for it.
Even if we didn’t have a trail of objective sources refuting the Republican fabrications once the facts were obtained (but the lie had already done its job by permeating the barely informed voters among us), we have logic. While it’s impossible for anyone to refute lies when they don’t have facts to prove the accusation is a lie, the problem starts when the press believes the lie without proof. Why are the standards any different, especially when there is a long history of Republicans outright lying on this issue. The standards should be tougher when making an accusation than when proving it’s not true, otherwise the press is just inviting being used as a political football by whichever side is willing to lie the most. This process encourages lies.
Family members have asked Republicans to stop their politicization of the Benghazi tragedy, but Republicans don’t care. They have asked and been answered so many times that if they were really looking for information, they completed that task long ago. They can’t let go because this is all they have against Hillary Clinton in 2016.
That means they are going to keep trawling for reporters who are willing to take their word on Benghazi emails.

Beating a dead horse


LOL: Did Boehner really suggest immigration reform is a top priority?

by Kerry Eleveld

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) (2nd R) addresses reporters after a House Republican caucus meeting at the U.S. Capitol in Washington December 2, 2014. Also pictured are Repuplican House Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) (L), House Majority Leader Kevin McIf  Boehner is really telling audiences that immigration reform is a top priority for the republican cabal, it's certainly going to come as a shock to his wingnut base, not to mention everyone else in America. Maybe that's why he mentioned it while he was abroad—just sort of a slip of tongue while he was overseas. Arthur Beesley reports that Boehner told an Irish audience that immigration reform is at the top of his agenda.
Boehner has told a Dublin audience of his determination to overcome Republican resistance to immigration reform. Mr Boehner also told how Taoiseach Enda Kenny has harangued him on the matter, telling him how the lack of reform has left some Irish immigrants listening to a parent’s funeral by phone. His remarks indicate he may yet move to confront opponents of reform within his own Republican cabal, which is in the vanguard of resistance to it and has a majority in the House. [...]
Although he has consistently refused to put immigration reform to a House vote, he said certain colleagues thought the matter would be resolved by sticking their heads in the sand. “It doesn’t work that way.”
It also doesn't work to go overseas and say you're gonna do something that you could have solved in the previous Congress. Remember that, John, when you watched a perfectly good bipartisan immigration bill die a long, slow death in the House after it had already gained Senate approval? Boehner was apparently shocked to find that white Europeans care about U.S. immigration policy. Here was Boehner's own account of a conversation he had with Kenny.
Mr Boehner said he was seated at lunch between the Taoiseach and President Obama. “The Taoiseach says: ‘John, John, John.’ He says: ‘How’s immigration reform coming?’ ” Mr Boehner replied: “What the hell do you care about immigration reform?”
Mr Kenny: “Oh John, John. You don’t realize there are about 50k of my fellow Irishmen came to the US and never quite made it back across the pond. You know their cousins have got to hold up the cell phone at their parents’ funeral so their kids in Chicago or Detroit or wherever can listen to the funeral. John, John this is a serious problem.”
Actually, John, I think we can just stop at, "What the hell?"

McConnell Tries To Rig The Courts By Blocking Dozens Of Obama Judicial Nominees

mcconnell whines about obama 60 minutes
Mitch McConnell is blocking dozens of President Obama’s judicial appointments in an attempt to rig the courts.
According to Politico:
The republican-misled Senate is on track this year to confirm the fewest judges since 1969, a dramatic escalation of the long-running partisan feud over the ideological makeup of federal courts.

The standoff, if it continues through the 2016 elections as expected, could diminish the stamp that President Barack Obama leaves on the judiciary — a less conspicuous but critical part of his legacy. Practically, the makeup of lower-level courts could directly affect a number of Obama’s policies expected to face legal challenges from conservatives.

Republicans appear willing to absorb criticism that they’re interfering with the prerogative of a president to pick his nominees in the hopes that the republican cabal can get its own judges installed in 2017, with one of their own in the White House. In the meantime, federal courts could be left with dozens of unfilled vacancies. More than two dozen federal courts have declared “judicial emergencies” because of excessive caseloads caused by vacancies.
It isn’t a coincidence that Republicans are challenging nearly everything that President Obama does via executive action in court while blocking his judicial nominees.
Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans are abusing their confirmation power to rig the courts. Their scheme hinges on the increasingly far-fetched idea that Republicans will take back the White House in 2016.
What will McConnell do if the Democratic nominee wins the presidential election? Will they continue to block judicial appointments for the next four to eight years? As usual, Republicans have not thought their plan through.
If Democrats take back the Senate majority in 2016, McConnell and the Republican cabal will regret their plan because Democrats aren’t going to forget, and payback will be severe.
Senate Republicans are proving that they have no interest in governing. Their only concern is preventing President Obama from getting anything done.

Rand Paul does not understand taxes or slavery

by Joan McCarter
U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) speaks with Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity during an interview after he confirmed his candidacy for president during an event in Louisville, Kentucky, April 7, 2015. Earlier on Tuesday, Paul initially announced his candid
It's as if the last few weeks of discussion about the Confederate flag, what it stands for, and our nation's sordid history have gone completely unnoticed by Rand Paul. Which is actually pretty damned likely. He recently spoke in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and attempted to wax philosophical.
"Now you can have some government, we all need government," the Kentucky senator said while discussing Thomas Paine and the role of government at the local public library. "Thomas Paine said that government is a necessary evil. What did he mean by that?" Paul said he believes that "you have to give up some of your liberty to have government," saying he was "for some government."
"I'm for paying some taxes," continued Paul. "But if we tax you at 100% then you've got zero percent liberty. If we tax you at 50% you are half slave, half free. I frankly would like to see you a little freer and a little more money remaining in your communities so you can create jobs. It’s a debate we need to have."
No, Paul, paying taxes doesn't make you a slave, not even a little bit. Being a slave makes you a slave. Anyone who would be president of this country needs to be able to get that one right.

Trying to sneak in the back door ...

Ted Cruz & Glenn Beck Agree: America Facing Imminent Destruction

And still more from the land of Utter Delusion: 
The (closeted) Butt Buddies Edition
While much of Ted Cruz’s interview with Glenn Beck last week focused on the supposed dangers of marriage equality, the two did find time to condemn the “liberal media” and warn of America’s looming downfall. Cruz claimed that while “left-wing reporters” may seem... MORE

Ann Coulter: More Americans Will Be Killed By Mexicans Than By ISIL Or Sharks

Ann Coulter: More Americans Will Be Killed By Mexicans Than By ISIS Or Sharks (VIDEO)
Ann Coulter defends being offensive by being offensive.
Read more 

New Report Reveals Republican-Aligned Extremists Are The Greatest Threat To Americans

From the "Tell us something we didn't already know" Department:
There is hardly a bigger motivator than fear, and it is a fact not lost on Republicans who prey on Americans’ fear of all things not wingnut, but especially those foreign “extremists.” Of course, some Americans are acutely aware that the biggest threat to their safety, and the nation, is from American extremists in the white supremacist, anti-government, and fanatical 'christian' bowel movements. Whether it was the white supremacist who massacred nine African Americans in church, several predominately Black churches set on fire across the South, or armed militias seeking to start a war against the United States government, most people comprehend that homegrown extremists pose the greatest threat to America.
In fact, some Americans may recall that it was just six years ago in 2009 that the Department of Homeland Security released a report warning that the greatest threat to Americans and national security was from domestic extremists. The report elicited such outrage from Republicans, wingnuts, and religio-wingnut covens that the DHS all-but apologized for reporting empirical data, and then retracted the report and terminated the team tasked with investigating non-muslim violent extremism on American soil. However, a research organization in Washington is not backing down like the DHS did and issued its findings that mirror the 2009 DHS report results that Americans should be terrified of homegrown extremists that, by the way, are not Muslims.
The new report from New America, released a little over a week after a Confederate extremist gunned down nine people in Charleston, finds that since the September 11, 2001, “nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, anti-government fanatics and other ‘non-Muslim’ extremists than by radical Muslims.” According to the New York Times, this real and present danger to Americans, and national security, is not a new revelation to the nation’s police and sheriffs. A survey released just last week revealed that not only is there a bigger threat from homegrown extremists in the “conservative” movement than from “radical muslims,” the domestic extremist threat to Americans is very “familiar to police officers.” In fact, three-quarters of police and sheriffs listed anti-government extremism as a greater threat to their communities than “Al Qaeda-inspired” violence.
When the DHS issued its report on countering violent wingnut extremism in 2009, religio-wingnut extremists such as the American Family Association (AFA) and Family Research Council (FRC), as well as the American Center for Law and Justice and Concerned Women for America were insane-angry and claimed President Obama used the DHS to attack christians. The religio-wingnut “legal terrorist” cabal, Liberty Counsel, concluded that the President targeted christians and then handed out cards to its members to show DHS and law enforcement officials they were in solidarity with violent wingnut extremist cabals.
In February, six months before this latest report, Ted Poe (R-TX) referred back to the 2009 DHS report and complained to a Family Research Council host that “the Obama administration is more aggressive toward Republicans, wingnuts, christians, and concerned about them being threats to the country, which they’re not, than they are about the real threats to 'his' country.” Of course, the DHS report, New America report, and three-quarters of police and sheriffs heartily disagree with Poe’s contention. In fact, according to recent religio-wingnut clergy closely aligned with Republicans calling for violence against other christians, gays, and marriage equality supporters, Poe’s assertion is patently false; and he knows it.
One religio-wingnut extremist with close ties to both Mike Huckabee and Rand Paul used biblical scripture and catholic dogma as the foundation for calling for the execution of LGBT people and their christian supporters. The maniac, Theodore Shoebat, appeared with Republican pretender candidates Huckabee and Paul, as well as with Trent Franks (R-AZ), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), and Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) in a recent anti-gay film. Shoebat said that “Opinions expressed in favor for homosexuality and other deviancies (such as cannibalism), are worthy of capital punishment to purely illustrate that christianity is so much against the license to do evil — even if it is done in private — that it prohibits any approval of it.”
Shoebat, a self-described “christian militant” that the DHS and New America reports seemed to specifically warn about claimed that homosexuality is seditious because it represents a threat to “the building block of society,” marriage. He claims that, “The sodomite, the atheist, the fanatic feminist, the muslim — all such must be deemed as criminals and enemies to civilization, for they war against the delusion. They should be told to leave their wicked ways under coercion, and if that does not work, then death is the only solution.” It is noteworthy that although Republicans do not particularly call for violence or death sentences, they have incited those kinds of actions with their fear-mongering claims that christians face an existential threat because Constitutional equality extends to all Americans.
Another group of dangerous lunatic fringe extremists, anti-LGBT 'christian' preachers, leveled warnings that god would take vengeance on America and cited the 'christian' dissenters on the Supreme Court to call for stoning to death ministers who performed same-sex marriages, and the execution of all LGBT people.  Steven Anderson, of delusional word baptist cult, agreed with Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, Mike Huckabee, Piyush “Bobby” Jindal, Rand Paul, and other Republicans that the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling was invalid because it was against dog’s law and that the ruling meant that christians were going to be punished.
After calling for stoning deaths, Anderson reiterated the christ-like love for all humanity his religion’s namesake preached by boasting that “I hate them (gays) with a perfect hatred.” He then spewed for christians to “have the guts to stand up to our culture that now accepts homos,” and asked, “where’s the hope, where’s the love and the grace? It isn’t there.” So there it is in a nutshell; perfect christian hatred, calls to stone to death non-compliant preachers and gays, hope, love, and the grace that any semi-sane human being would label perfect religio-wingnut extremism.
This new report on the threat of wingnut extremism is only different from the old report on the threat of wingnut extremism in that now religious Republicans have openly aligned themselves with the lunatic fringe extremists Americans should fear most. There is a good reason the religio-wingnuts and Republicans were ballistic when the Department of Homeland Security released its report on the threat from wingnut extremists in 2009; the DHS exposed them for what they would become when their drive for theocracy hit a 14th Amendment speed-bump in the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling.
It is just a matter of time before there are more extremist attacks against Americans and it will come from the evangelical extremists that Republicans have joined forces with and worked into religious frenzy that because gays have Constitutional rights christians face an existential threat. History shows that religious frenzy, coupled with religious extremism, never ends well and it appears that is precisely what extremist Republicans aligned with evangelical fanatics hope comes to pass. Based on the New America report, they will get their hope fulfilled.

ISIL and Wingnuts: Twins


Texas couple sues county clerk for refusing to issue marriage license

Rainbow Texas, via Wikimedia CommonsThey’re going to get married eventually. The only question is how inconvenient Texas wants to make it.

Texas A.G. Ken Paxton Orders State Officials to Violate Texas’ Religious Freedom Law

It is prescient that the top law enforcement officer in Texas, Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, is either completely ignorant of the provisions ensconced in the Texas RFRA,…
Only in 21st Century on orders from the United States coven of catholic bishops (USCCB), evangelical fundamentalist clergy, and the Republican cabal is the idea that religious freedom means eliminating Constitutionally-guaranteed equal and civil rights from other Americans. It is beyond dispute that the Founding Fathers and Constitution’s framers never meant that any person’s religious freedom allowed them to deny other Americans their Constitutional civil rights, because if that had been their intent they would have created a theocracy with the christian bible as the law of the land. If that had been the case, they would have elucidated, in the starkest terms, that ‘free exercise of religion” meant that a citizen clutching a bible to their bosom had unquestioned authority to control the lives of other Americans. Really, if the Founders had any foresight into the  21st Century evangelical mindset, and the USCCB’s twisted ugly interpretation of the 1st Amendment’s religious freedom clause, they would have included a subsection that forbade any American, state legislature, or Republican Congress from using religious freedom to deny other Americans’ their equal and civil rights.
What is astonishing, and it is truly stunning, is that where the Founding Fathers and Constitution’s Framers fell woefully short of protecting future generations from religious tyranny in the 1st Amendment, Texas legislators saw the danger of religious fanaticism and wrote their own Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The reason the Texas RFRA is the model for the entire nation, is the important provision written into the law that forbade fake christians from using “their religious freedom” to abridge any other Texans’ civil rights; including the right to marry the person they love. It is unbelievable, but true.
The Texas version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act includes an important clause stipulating that “a person with religious objections to a particular law or employment obligation cannot invoke RFRA to override civil rights laws and statutes.” In fact, in the case of marriages, no matter who applies for a marriage license, the Texas Family Code, Section 2.205 specifically asserts that any Texan with the authority to perform marriages in the state are expressly “prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, religion, or national origin against any applicant who is otherwise competent to be married.”
It is prescient that the top law enforcement officer in Texas, Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, is either completely ignorant of the provisions ensconced in the Texas RFRA, or he is aware of the law’s protection of Texans’ civil rights and still says they do not apply to the LGBT community because…bible, god, religious freedom, judicial tyranny, and opposition to the U.S. Constitution. After the Supreme Court ruling affirming that the Constitution’s 14th Amendment guarantees equal and civil rights for all Americans, including gays wanting to marry, Paxton did what christofascist Republicans across the nation pledged to do and informed Texas officials that the Texas RFRA guaranteed their religious freedom to ignore the High Court ruling, the Constitution, and Texas’  RFRA and deny gays the right to marry on religious objection grounds.
The Supreme Court ruling that “graciously” extended  equal protection and due process protections under the 14th Amendment to LGBT Americans apparently does not apply in Paxton’s religious mind. Last week, according to “an official opinion” issued by Texas’ Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, attorney general Paxton ruled that state employees such as county clerks and their employees still have Texas-sized religious freedom to disobey the Supreme Court ruling, ignore the 14th  Amendment, and violate the Texas’ Religious Freedom Restoration Act based on their bigoted “religious objections” to gays marrying the person they love.  The Paxton interpretation of the High Court ruling, U.S. Constitution, and Texas RFRA informed him that state employees can refuse to issue a marriage license to same-sex couples if doing so is religiously objectionable.
As if he did not appear ignorant enough, Paxton actually supported his “official ruling” by citing the same Religious Freedom Restoration Act that theocratic Republican states passed specifically to discriminate against gays seeking to marry. The federal RFRA requires only that pursuing a “compelling government interest” must not “substantially burden” an individual’s religious exercise if that government interest can be pursued by “less restrictive means.” The High Court granting 14th Amendment equal and due process rights to same-sex couples, or Texas officials issuing marriage licenses does not “substantially burden” any individual’s free exercise of religion; particularly when their job issuing marriage licenses does not abridge their right to pray, worship, or frequent the local tax-exempt mega-church.
Still, Paxton, like most Republicans and evangelical fanatics, is not going to be deterred from attempting to use religion to discriminate against same-sex couples because in his mind the Constitution, Supreme Court rulings, and the Texas RFRA are a violation of religious freedom.  However, Paxton has no religious objection to other Texas marriage provisions that some people, especially religious people, would certainly find objectionable.
For example, One Texas law states that a child can get married at 14 if a judge gives them permission. According to the Texas Family Code, Sec. 2.103, any minor who is 14 years old can get court authority to supersede their parent’s objections and freely receive a state marriage license. Under another Texas law, two people can get an “informal marriage license” if they ever lied and told someone they were married even though they were not “officially” wed.  Texas Family Code, Section 2.401 states that “if a couple has declared at some general time that they are, in fact, married, and then tell other folks that they are married,” the local county clerk’s office has to issue an “informal marriage license” even if they were never married.
Now, what if a county clerk or state employee has deeply-held religious objections to 14 year olds getting married against their parent’s objections, or object to two people getting a marriage license after lying about being married while they lived in sin? In Texas it is just too bad; state law says they have a right to marry and according to the Texas RFRA a state employee cannot use their religious objection to abridge any Texans’ civil right to marry.
However, if the Supreme Court rules that according to the Constitution two people of the same gender want to marry, despite the Texas RFRA forbidding any Texas’ official from using their religion to refuse to issue a marriage license, the state’s attorney general supports violating the Constitution, a Supreme Court ruling, and Texas’ RFRA because he believes his religion is the law of the land.

Texas Passed A Bill That Forgot ‘Where And How’ To Store All Their Gold

EPIC FAIL – Texas Passed A Bill That Forgot ‘Where And How’ To Store All Their Gold (VIDEO) “Houston, we have a problem,” just took on a whole new meaning. And it’s not just Houston we’re talking about here, either. Texas...

In 2010 Rush Limbaugh Vowed To Leave The U.S. If Obamacare Survived 5 Years

In 2010 Rush Limbaugh Vowed To Leave The U.S. If Obamacare Survived 5 Years– Bon Voyage, Rush (VIDEO)In the heady days of 2010, when President Obama’s signature healthcare overhaul was still being intensely fought over, wingnut hate shrieker Rush Limbaugh ... better known as Lush Dimbulb...

Tehran Tom Cotton Still Working Hard For War With Iran

Organized Religion To Blame For Rise In Mental Health Problems

‘Religious Trauma Syndrome’
Organized Religion To Blame For Rise In Mental Health Problems: ‘Religious Trauma Syndrome’
“Religious indoctrination is hugely damaging…”
Read more

Fox 'News' Anti-Tax Zealots Don't Want To Fund Infrastructure

Fox 'News' Anti-Tax Zealots Don't Want To Fund Infrastructure
A sane person cannot possibly inject reason into this bunch.

Fox News Makes Its Viewers Believe Russia Could Have Invaded California And Alaska on July 4th

Fox News Makes Its Viewers Believe Russia Could Have Invaded California And Alaska on July 4th (VIDEO)
Fox News is at it again. They made their viewers believe, if only for a short while, that California and Alaska were at risk of being invaded by Russia.
Things like this are why Fox viewers are the most ignorant and most ill informed people on the planet.
Hell. those that watch NO news at all are less ignorant and more informed than Fox viewers.