The Democratic candidate describes himself
as one, but it can be hard to detect the traditional hallmarks of
socialism at his increasingly popular rallies
Political Truth.
Whether you like it or not.
Whether you like it or not.
Saturday, July 11, 2015
How Could China’s Economic Collapse Lead To President Bernie Sanders?
Democrats Prove They’re The REAL ‘Family Values’ Party With Latest Senate Proposal
Why Trump Has Become The Best Thing Possible For The Party — The Democratic Party
Wisconsin Republicans Seek To Eliminate Days Off For Workers Along With The Living Wage Law
All Republican cabal pretender hopefuls decline speaking invite to America’s largest annual gathering of Latino leaders
Fox News 'Doctor' Says It’s OK For Men To Hit Women, Because Of ‘Gender Equality’
Quack Keith Ablow thinks society now believes it’s OK for men to hit women.
New Social Studies Textbooks In Texas Do Not Mention KKK Or Jim Crow Laws
Bet You Can’t Guess Who’s Using Undocumented Workers For His New Hotel
The hypocrite’s name rhymes with Ronald Grump…
Ann Coulter To Republicans: 'Drive Up The White Vote; That's Your Base'
Ann Coulter, the hack who spewed
“Adios, America!,” appeared on the “Joyce Kaufman Hate Show” on Monday to
offer her advice to the current Republican pretender candidates to
“drive up the white vote” rather than trying to expand their base.
Kaufman, a fellow lunatic fringe, anti-i... MORE
Crybaby Brownback Legalizes Discrimination In Kansas By Executive Order
Ryan Reynolds: I Support Gay Marriage Because ‘I’m Not A Monster’
Hell Freezes: Fox News Hack Actually Condemns Anti-Gay Pastor For Flying Christian Rag Above US Flag
This is what happens when Fox News is faced with having to choose
between patriotism and religious freedom when a 'christian' pastor flies
the 'christian' rag above the American flag in protest of same-sex
marriage.
How wingnut pseudo-christianity promotes what it claims to hate
Friday, July 10, 2015
The Daily Drift
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
Europe
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
Asia
China - India - Indonesia - Iran - Japan - Korea - Malaysia - Singapore - Sri Lanka - Thailand - Vietnam
Africa
Egypt - South Africa
The Pacific
Australia - Philippines
Here’s The Proof That Donald Trump Is Destroying The Republican Cabal’s Chances In 2016
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
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.
Sincerely,
Elijah E. Cummings
Ranking Member
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.
LOL: Did Boehner really suggest immigration reform is a top priority?
by Kerry Eleveld
Doh!
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. [...]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.
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.”
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?”Actually, John, I think we can just stop at, "What the hell?"
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.”
McConnell Tries To Rig The Courts By Blocking Dozens Of Obama Judicial Nominees
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
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."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.
"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."
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 defends being offensive by being offensive.
Read more
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.
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.
Texas couple sues county clerk for refusing to issue marriage license
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
In 2010 Rush Limbaugh Vowed To Leave The U.S. If Obamacare Survived 5 Years
Fox 'News' Anti-Tax Zealots Don't Want To Fund Infrastructure
A sane person cannot possibly inject reason into this bunch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




