Tuesday, 27 August 2013
Ken Cuccinelli may be the darling of the spittle flecked Christofascists who want a Christian theocracy in Virginia and the knuckle draggers of the Tea Party, but the recent polling suggests that Cuccinelli - or Kookinelli, as I prefer to call him - isn't gaining need traction among moderates and independents to win in November (I hope this trend continues). In stark contrast, Republican Chris Christie appears headed towards a landslide reelection in New Jersey. Some suggest that Kookinelli should learn a thing or two from Christie. I would argue that such a transformation is impossible for Kookinelli, especially given his documented record of extremism. A piece in The Daily Beast looks at the night and day differences between the two GOP candidates. Here are highlights:
Chris Christie and Ken Cuccinelli are both New Jersey natives, Republicans, and their party’s gubernatorial nominee in their respective states. Beyond that, they share little else.Christie, the governor of New Jersey, is a moderate conservative cruising to reelection; Cuccinelli, currently the attorney general of Virginia, is the darling of the GOP base and not much more. Christie has a double-digit lead over his Democratic challenger, State Senator Barbara Buono; Cuccinelli is down by about five points to former Democratic National Committee Chair, Clinton crony, and alleged grifter Terry McAuliffe, according to the latest pair of polls.
Christie’s strength in the reliably blue Garden State and Cuccinelli’s weakness in the Old Dominion are about persona, policy, and political reality. Christie knows that he’s the governor of a state that has consistently gone for Democratic presidential candidates over the last two decades. On the other hand, Cuccinelli fantasizes that Virginia voted for John McCain and Mitt Romney, and that ethnic-slurring George Allen made it to the Senate.But Cuccinelli’s problems go deeper than that. Right now, he is underperforming even Romney’s showing in Virginia. Romney lost the state, but still managed to win its upscale voters and white women—Cuccinelli is losing both blocs to McAuliffe.
Cuccinelli owned stock in Star Scientific, the very same company whose chief, Jonnie Williams, showered both McDonnell and Cuccinelli with gifts—gifts that Cuccinelli has refused to return in kind or in cash. In all, only $18,000 or so is involved, and yet Cuccinelli cannot find it in himself to cut a check. Not surprisingly, McAuliffe hammers away on this sore point, leaving Cuccinelli trailing and the story festering.More worrisome for Republicans is Cuccinelli’s incapability of eliding over hot-button social issues. As Virginia’s outgoing Republican Lt. Governor Bill Bolling sees it, Cuccinelli is a “rigid ideologue who thrives on conflict and confrontation and tends to be drawn to the more controversial and divisive issues of the day.”
Christie, meanwhile, is tradition-minded but not mired in debates over ultrasound wands or sodomy. He flatly stated that sexual orientation is a matter of biological predisposition. . . . . He hasn’t dabbled with birtherism, in contrast to Cuccinelli.
Christie is of the modern world; Cuccinelli less so. For Republicans in Virginia and nationally, that is a problem. As one Republican White House veteran and Virginian put it, “the race is between a crook and a kook, and I expect the crook to win.”Sadly for Cuccinelli, while voters may say “ugh” about “the Macker,” they have yet to walk away from him. Much as Cuccinelli may try to talk about taxes and roads, not enough voters are buying. A well-funded McAuliffe ad blitz is cementing an image of Virginia’s attorney general as fixated on social issues.Cuccinelli’s struggle is compounded by the fact that Virginia’s demographics dramatically shifted, making it emblematic of the New South. Indeed, nothing tells the story better than a recent Quinnipiac Poll showing Hillary with comfortable leads over Christie and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in a hypothetical 2016 presidential matchup. She polls ahead of Christie by nine, and crushes Cruz by almost 20 points.
The times are changing, and the question for Cuccinelli and the Republicans is whether they can change with them. The GOP cannot continue to behave as if the whole country were a Republican primary—not if it endeavors to recapture the presidency.
Monday, 26 August 2013
Before the Russian Revolutions of 1917 - first the February Revolution and then the Bolshevik Revolution in October/November - one of the mainstays to the retardation of Russia's modernization and movement towards a constitutional monarchy was the Russian Orthodox Church. Now, while modern developed countries around the world are rejecting anti-gay bigotry and discrimination in favor of modern scientific knowledge on sexual orientation, Vladimir Putin - much like his Tsarist predecessors - is listening to the idiocy and ignorance of the revived Russian Orthodox Church hierarchy and pushing an anti-gay and anti-modernity agenda. Putin is stupidly focused on the short term goal of hanging on to power at any cost with no thought or concern for the long term damage done or the lives ruined by the state sponsored bigotry that he has endorsed.
In their quest to save the Russian monarchy, Nicholas II and Alexandra unwittingly set the stage for the revolutions of 1917 and the ultimate fall of Russia to the Bolsheviks and the ensuing civil war between the Whites and the Reds which damaged Russia so severely that economic output did not return to 1913 levels until the eve of World War II. In the intervening years, millions of Russians perished. By embracing the far right and the Russian Orthodox Church, Putin is repeating the same mistakes and making Russia a laughing stock in the process. Now, as the Moscow Times reports, efforts are in motion to establish state sponsored "ex-gay" programs to turn Russian gays straight. Here are highlights on this lastest idiocy from Russia:
Degtyaryov said that the Duma is also considering a program to provide anonymous and voluntary counseling for gay and bisexual people who want to be heterosexual.
"Many want to return to a normal life, to become heterosexual like 95 to 99 percent of our citizens," Degtyaryov said.
He also said that failure to forbid homosexuals from donating blood is a type of "sabotage."
LGBT activist Nikolai Alexeyev said that . . . . There will be a lot of noise, and zero implementation of the law. Our politicians are so detached from reality that they no longer have any connection to the people. They just imagine gay people everywhere," Alexeyev told reporters.
Unlike many states in America, the state of New Mexico never enacted explicit gay marriage bans through either statutes or an anti-gay amendment to the New Mexico Constitution. As a result in the wake of the U. S. Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Windsor - which among other things correctly identified anti-gay animus as the real motivation behind DOMA - several counties in New Mexico have started issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples. And as reported previously on this blog, the New Mexico attorney general has announced that he will not oppose the issuance of such licenses. To further confuse the mix of legal directives, now a judge has ordered county clerks to proceed with the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples. Here are highlights from BuzzFeed:
A New Mexico judge has ordered the county clerks of Bernalillo and Sante Fe counties to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples who apply and are otherwise qualified.
Because the clerk in Santa Fe County already began issuing licenses last week, as did the clerk of Dona Ana County, the addition of Bernalillo County into the mix makes a third county in the state where licenses will be issued to same-sex couples.
Issuing a peremptory writ of mandamus, Judge Alan Malott found Monday that the couples suing for a right to marry in one of the only states in the nation without either marriage equality or an explicit ban on such marriages have a “significant likelihood of success” on the merits of their lawsuit. In reading his ruling in open court Monday, Malott said he ordered that:New Mexico law, Malott found, “does not preclude nor prohibit issuance of a marriage license to otherwise qualified couples on the basis of sexual orientation or the gender of its members.”.To the extent it is found to do so, “those prohibitions are unconstitutional and unenforceable under” New Mexico’s constitution, he ruled.Bernalillo County Clerk Maggie Oliver and Santa Fe County Clerk Geraldine Salazar “shall comply with and perform” their duty to issue such licences.Malott is a district court judge in the Second Judicial District of New Mexico and was appointed to the bench by former Gov. Bill Richardson.
Oliver and Salazar are “enjoined and restrained from refusing to issue” such licenses.
New Mexico Attorney General Gary King, meanwhile, has told that state’s Supreme Court in a third court challenge that any attempt to prohibit same-sex couples from marrying is unconstitutional.
It was not immediately clear who, if anyone, would appeal either last week’s or Monday’s court rulings. The question is relevant because neither ruling creates a final, definitive ruling about state law — a ruling that only could come from the state’s Supreme Court.
A piece in Slate makes a good case for why we should be taxing churches - all of them. To the list of taxed organizations should be added in my opinion all of the quasi-religious organizations such as NOM, FRC, AFA, etc. , which are nothing more than propaganda organizations for extreme religious beliefs and which actively work against the rights and well being of other citizens. Some might say that churches provide charitable relief to the poor and so forth. If they can document these efforts, give them an exemption for funds actually spent on these endeavors but not on lavish church buildings and activities that do nothing to further the general welfare. Here are highlights from the piece:
Amelia Thomson-Deveaux has a great piece about religious groups that are trying to remove restrictions on church-based electioneering. She suggests that rather than gutting the rules, there's a simple fix, "Religious leaders who want the liberty to endorse candidates can give up their churches’ tax deduction."
I would go one further. Let's tax churches! All of them, in a non-discriminatory way that doesn't consider faith or creed or level of political engagement. There's simply no good reason to be giving large tax subsidies to the Church of Scientology or the Diocese of San Diego or Temple Rodef Shalom in Virginia or the John Wesley African Methodist Episcopal Zion church around the corner from me. Whichever faith you think is the one true faith, it's undeniable that the majority of this church-spending is going to support false doctrines. Under the circumstances, tax subsidies for religion are highly inefficient.What's more, even insofar as tax subsidies do target the true faith they're still a pretty bad idea. The basic problem with subsidized religion is that there's no reason to believe that religion-related expenditures enhance productivity.
Upgrading a church's physical plant doesn't enhance the soul-saving capacity of its clergy. You just get a nicer building or a grander Christmas pageant. There's nothing wrong with that. When I was young I always enjoyed the Grace Church Christmas pageant. But this is just a kind of private entertainment (comparable to spending money on snacks for your book club—and indeed what are Bible study groups but the original book clubs?) that doesn't need an implicit subsidiy.
Meanwhile, nobody thinks churches and other religious institutions should silence themselves on the important issues of the day. On the contrary, discussing moral action is at the heart of many religious enterprises. And much moral action plays itself out in the arena of politics. So trying to say that churches should get subsidy when they don't endorse candidates is de facto a kind of subsidy to religious doctrines whose views happen to lack strong partisan implications. So if your faith says "abortion should be illegal and spending on the poor should be increased and it's too bad neither candidate supports that" you're golden, but if your faith says "abortion should be legal and spending on the poor should be increased so good for Barack Obama" suddenly you're in trouble. That's perverse. Just make everyone pay taxes.
Yes, taxing churches would put some parishes and congregations out of business. But why should I be indirectly subsidizing a religion that hates me or teaches in my opinion false views and lies? Put churches out in the market place and let them compete like every other business - religion is, in truth big business, just look at Pat Robertson and the many sleazy televangelists who fleece people via cable TV on a weekly basis. If their "product" sells, they will survive. If not, then they can end up on the trash heap of history.
The following is a cross posting of an op-ed I wrote at LGBTQ Nation that looks at GOP attorney general Mark Obenshain's dishonest effort to paint himself as a moderate. The man is just as extreme as Ken Cuccinelli and the utterly insane "Bishop" E. W. Jackson. Here's the piece in its entirety:
There has been a great deal of media coverage of the GOP gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli who has a bizarre fixation on reinstating Virginia’s “crimes against nature statute,” is a climate change denier, and who has shown himself to be ethically challenged at best as he has taken gifts and campaign contributions for those who have sought a quid pro quo from the Attorney General’s office, which Cuccinelli currently occupies.
In fact, Jackson makes AFA’s Bryan Fischer and FRC’s Tony Perkins appear to be fairly rational in comparison.
Lacking in similar coverage has been the GOP nominee for Attorney General, Mark Obenshain, who, if one knows his background and voting record in the Virginia General Assembly is every bit as extreme and – I would argue insane – as Cuccinelli and “Bishop” Jackson.
Despite his extremism as evidenced by his past record, Obenshain has been trying to reinvent himself as a “moderate” and even claimed that he doesn’t support discrimination against anyone (more on this later).
As a recent article in the Virginian Pilot noted, the attorney general race deserves much closer attention than it is currently receiving for several reasons.
First, the next attorney general will help frame the national perception of Virginia, and his name is likely to appear at the top of the 2017 ballot because historically Virginia’s attorney general has run, or resigned to run, for governor in every election, including this one, dating to 1993.
Second, under Virginia law, the Attorney General interprets Virginia’s statutory law and determines which laws meet constitutional muster under both the Virginia Constitution and the United States Constitution.
For example, Obenshain has pledged to continue fighting President Barack Obama’s Affordable Health Care Act (a.k.a. “Obamacare”), either by filing briefs in a pending legal challenge or by filing a new lawsuit.
Also, his Democrat opponent, Mark Herring, has said he wouldn’t defend Virginia’s anti-sodomy statute because it’s clearly unconstitutional while Obenshain will likely seek to defend it despite trying to pretend to be noncommittal.
Like Cuccinelli, Obenshain refuses to recognize the full scope of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lawrence v. Texas and is so thoroughly under the thumb of the Christofascists at The Family Foundation (an affiliate of Focus on the Family and registered hate group, Family Research Council) that he will no doubt refuse to accept the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuits’s decision striking down Virginia’s sodomy statute for a second time.
Why do I come to this conclusions? Obenshain’s record in the Virginia General Assembly confirms that he is every bit as extreme as Ken Cuccinelli and “Bishop” Jackson.
Here’s an overview of Obenshain’s record:
1. Obenshain has previously introduced a bill that would have required any woman in Virginia who has a miscarriage without a doctor present, to file a report it within 24 hours to the police or otherwise risk going to jail for a full year. Obenshain’s bill read in part as follows:
When a fetal death occurs without medical attendance upon the mother at or after the delivery or abortion, the mother or someone acting on her behalf shall, within 24 hours, report the fetal death, location of the remains, and identity of the mother to the local or state police or sheriff’s department of the city or county where the fetal death occurred. No one shall remove, destroy, or otherwise dispose of any remains without the express authorization of law-enforcement officials or the medical examiner. Any person violating the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
For those unfamiliar with Virginia law, a Class 1 misdemeanor cares a 1 year jail sentence and a fine of $2,500.00.
2. Obenshain has supported a “personhood” bill that would outlaw all abortions and grant full constitutional rights to a fetus from the moment of conception.
3. In 2013 Obenshain sponsored a bill requiring limited types of photo identification as part of the Virginia GOP’s active effort to disenfranchise minority voters. Acceptable forms of ID include a government-issued photo ID that includes their address, a photo ID from a Virginia college or university, or a workplace ID featuring a photo. Regular Voter ID cards would not be sufficient.In short, despite his recent pretenses, Obenshain is anti-gay, anti-minority and anti-women’s rights.
4. Obenshain has consistently voted against Democratic measures that would assure employment non-discrimination protections for homosexual state employees under Virginia’s anti-discrimination law.
5. In January, 2013, Obenshain walked off the Senate floor rather than support former Richmond prosecutor Tracy Thorne-Begland, who is openly gay, for a Richmond General District Court judgeship. In 2012, other GOP extremists in the House of Delagate blocked Thorne-Begland’s appointment but were out maneuvered by the Richmond Circuit Court judges who appointed him on an interim bases after Thorne-Begland received unanimous backing from the five largest mega-law firms based in Virginia.
If Virginians want a quasi-theocracy in Virginia, they can vote for Obenshain and his fellow extremists on the GOP ticket. If, instead, they believe in the principles of Thomas Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers from Virginia, their choice is clear: vote for Mark Herring for Attorney Genaral, Terry McAuliffe for Governor, and Ralph Northam for Lt. Governor.
[A]fter three years of congressional dysfunction brought on by the rise of a radicalized brand of conservatism, it’s time to call the core questions:
Will our ability to govern ourselves be held perpetually hostage to an ideology that casts government as little more than dead weight in American life? And will a small minority in Congress be allowed to grind decision-making to a halt?
Congress is supposed to be the venue in which we Americans work our way past divisions that are inevitable in a large and diverse democracy. Yet for some time, Republican congressional leaders have given the most right-wing members of the House and Senate a veto power that impedes compromise, and thus governing itself.
On the few occasions when the far-right veto was lifted, Congress got things done . . . . All these actions had something in common: They were premised on the belief that government can take practical steps to make American life better.
This idea is dismissed by those ready to shut down the government or to use the debt ceiling as a way of forcing the repeal or delay of the Affordable Care Act and passing more draconian spending reductions. It needs to be made very clear that these radical Republicans are operating well outside their party’s own constructive traditions.
Before their 2010 election victory, Republicans had never been willing to use the threat of default to achieve their goals.
The very fact that everyone now accepts the term “Obamacare” to refer to a measure designed to get health insurance to many more Americans is a sign of how stupidly partisan we have become.
The health-care exchanges to facilitate the purchase of private insurance were based on a Heritage Foundation proposal, first brought to fruition in Massachusetts by a Republican governor named Mitt Romney. Subsidizing private premiums was always a Republican alternative to extending Medicare to cover everyone, the remedy preferred by many liberals.
But that was then. The right wing’s recent rejection of a significant government role in ending the scandal of “a health-care system that does not even come close to being comprehensive and fails to reach far too many” — the words were spoken 24 years ago by the late Sen. John Chafee, a Rhode Island Republican — tells us why Congress no longer works.
The GOP has gone from endorsing market-based government solutions to problems the private sector can’t solve — i.e, Obamacare — to believing that no solution involving expanded government can possibly be good for the country.
Behind all of the GOP posturing is something else: Greed. The base of the GOP which constantly blathers about its religiosity and Christian ideals in truth doesn't give a damn about other citizens. They don't want to pay anything toward the common good and basically hate everyone other than themselves. They are a scourge on America and the world.
Sunday, 25 August 2013
The Republican Party of Virginia has nominated the most extreme - and my opinion mentally ill - slate of statewide candidates in Virginia's history thanks to Ken Cuccinelli's maneuver to have the nominating process done through a state wide convention dominated by Christofascists and Tea Party lunatics. Anyone sane should have seen that many long time Republicans simply would not be able to hold their noses and vote for individuals better suited for incarceration in a mental institution that state wide elected office. Among those fleeing this GOP created nightmare is Boyd Marcus (pictured at left), a long time GOP operative who simply could not stomach the thought of Ken Cuccinelli in the Governors mansion. The fall out of this notable defection continues as noted in a column in the Richmond Times Dispatch. Here are column excerpts:
To Virginia Republicans, he is the “Prince of Darkness.” To veteran reporters, he is the “smiling assassin.” His watchwords, from Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” were framed on his office wall: “Cry ‘Havoc!’ and let slip the dogs of war.”
Boyd Marcus runs Republican campaigns. He can run opponents into the ground with tough talking points and slasher direct-mail. He ran state government as Gov. Jim Gilmore’s chief of staff. He ran off allies as partisan enforcer of the budget-busting no-car-tax plan.
Marcus is on the run from a Republican Party he no longer recognizes. He is doing the unthinkable: crossing over to the Democrats. He’s taking a job, paying up to five-figures a month, as a strategist for gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe. It follows a months-long courtship, direct and indirect, that accelerated after the fight over new road taxes.
Marcus, a reflexive Republican, said in a written statement he is supporting McAuliffe, a reflexive Democrat, because the candidate is a pragmatic bipartisan. Marcus also cited McAuliffe’s business credentials . . . .
The Marcus defection is no laughing matter. For Republicans, it feeds a troubling narrative about Ken Cuccinelli that he, alone, composed: The Republican candidate for governor — heartthrob of tea partiers and Rand Paul-ites who have no use for suburban, business-oriented R’s such as Marcus — does not work or play well with others. This is a dominant feature in the broad-strokes portrait Democrats are painting of Cuccinelli in their nonstop television and online advertising.
Cuccinelli depicts the Marcus break as a grab for cash by a guy who could use some. Further, Cuccinelli says Marcus is motivated by spite, having seen Bolling, who was waiting in line to run, lose the nomination to someone who jumped in front.
“If there’s one thing people don’t like, it’s a Benedict Arnold,” said Chris LaCivita, Cuccinelli’s lead adviser. “You’re either a sore loser or a sellout. Boyd Marcus happens to be both.”
Cuccinelli can spin all he wants. The bottom line is that he's a detestable individual who is unfit to be governor. Marcus sees this and it drives Cuccinelli crazy (or at least crazier).
In my opinion, Donald Trump is among the most detestable, ego-maniacal, blow hard s one will ever find. He is in a tempestuous love affair with himself and knows no limits in pomposity. And, now New York State has accused him of marketing a fraudulent scheme called "Trump University" that defrauded the gullible out of money. I sincerely hope that the State of New York wins the case. Trump, not surprisingly, claims that the lawsuit is politically motivated. Anything to distract and blow a smoke screen. Here are highlights from a piece in the Washington Post:
New York’s attorney general sued Donald Trump for $40 million Saturday, saying the real estate mogul helped run a phony “Trump University” that promised to make students rich but instead steered them into expensive and mostly useless seminars, and even failed to deliver promised apprenticeships.While Trump's program is higher profile than many of these real estate "universities" and "boot camps," there are a plethora of these programs that charge thousands of dollars but deliver little or nothing of substance and disseminate "expert prepared" forms that are mediocre at best. The only one who gets rich from these programs are those putting on the supposedly educational programs.
Trump shot back that the Democrat’s lawsuit is false and politically motivated.
Attorney General Eric Schneiderman says many of the 5,000 students who paid up to $35,000 thought they would at least meet Trump but instead all they got was their picture taken in front of a life-size picture of “The Apprentice” TV star.
“Trump University engaged in deception at every stage of consumers’ advancement through costly programs and caused real financial harm,” Schneiderman said. “Trump University, with Donald Trump’s knowledge and participation, relied on Trump’s name recognition and celebrity status to take advantage of consumers who believed in the Trump brand.”
The lawsuit says many of the wannabe moguls were unable to land even one real estate deal and were left far worse off than before the lessons, facing thousands of dollars in debt for the seminar program once billed as a top quality university with Trump’s “hand-picked” instructors.
Schneiderman is suing the program, Trump as the university chairman, and the former president of the university in a case to be handled in state Supreme Court in Manhattan. He accuses them of engaging in persistent fraud, illegal and deceptive conduct and violating federal consumer protection law. The $40 million he seeks is mostly to pay restitution to consumers. He dismissed Trump’s claim of a political motive.
Schneiderman’s lawsuit covers complaints dating to 2005 through 2011. Students paid between $1,495 and $35,000 to learn from the Manhattan mogul who wrote the best seller, “Art of the Deal” a decade ago followed by “How to Get Rich” and “Think Like a Billionaire.”
At the seminars, consumers were told about “Trump Elite” mentorships that cost $10,000 to $35,000. Students were promised individual instruction until they made their first deal. Schneiderman said participants were urged to extend the limit on their credit cards for real estate deals, but then used the credit to pay for the Trump Elite programs. The attorney general said the program also failed to promptly cancel memberships as promised.
When not insisting that Barack Obama is a Muslim who was not born in the United States, the Tea Party crowd is busy fantasizing about impeaching Obama. Never mind that they have no legal grounds for doing so. It's simply because they cannot stand the man. His real offense? He's black. He embodies all the fears and resentments of angry whites who see their privileged position in society eroding and the white majority position in the population declining. Soon, they will be merely like everyone else or, and this is what terrifies them, less than everyone else. There's a good reason the Tea Party is so strong in the South: since the beginning of the nation, one might be nothing, but if you were white in the South, you were assured a superior position in Southern society in most circles (not all, of course, my New Orleans belle grandmother so "poor white trash" as the lowest of the low since, unlike blacks, they did not face racial barriers to self improvement). These people are steadily losing that once assured position to black, Hispanics, Asians, etc., and it has become an obsession embodied by Obama. In the New York Times Maureen Dowd looks at the GOP obsession to impeach Obama and rightly concludes that it's really all about race. Here are excerpts:
ON the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, Kerry Bentivolio, a Michigan [Republican] congressman, has a dream, too: to impeach the nation’s first black president.Bentivolio graciously conceded that he’d have to come up with some grounds first. “I went back to my office and I have had lawyers come in,” he said. “And these are lawyers, well — Ph.D.’s in history — I said, ‘Tell me how I can impeach the president of the United States. What evidence do you have?’ You’ve got to have the evidence.”The Tea Party congressman, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, hopes to find e-mails linking the White House to the I.R.S. examination of groups with a “Tea Party” label seeking tax-exempt status.“I stood 12 feet away from the guy and listened to him and I couldn’t stand being there,” he said of President Obama,. . . .Bentivolio is the perfect avatar of the impeachment fever gripping a G.O.P. that’s unmoored from reality, given that he once admitted in a court deposition, “I have a problem figuring out which one I really am, Santa Claus or Kerry Bentivolio.” That’s why he sometimes used the pronoun “we.”He’s been playing Santa Claus — as part of a business he started 19 years ago called Old Fashion Santa — with his own six reindeer.The Free Press reported that Bentivolio, no Edmund Gwenn in “Miracle on 34th Street,” left a teaching job in 2011 “after complaints he bullied students, even telling one class on its first day that his goal was to make all the students cry once during the year.” How much more gratifying to bully the president.Not content with fighting off a popular immigration overhaul or threatening to shut down the government and set off the first federal default, hard-core Congressional Republicans want to nullify the election. Unlike when the Republicans did their nutty impeachment of Bill Clinton — (Newt Gingrich is back, starring in the “Crossfire” reboot) — they don’t even control the Senate. And as David Axelrod told me, there isn’t a “scintilla of justification.”
Earlier this month, the president’s motorcade pulled into the Orlando Hilton and was greeted by about 50 protesters holding signs saying “Kenyan Go Home,” “Impeach Obama” and “Obama Lies.”This month has been rife with efforts among the G.O.P. “wise men,” using every channel possible — polls, op-eds, cable, Twitter — to try to talk sense to the goons of August. When Condi Rice is a “wise man,” you know you’re in trouble.The Democrats never impeached W. and they had real grounds: starting a war on false premises and sanctioning torture. “The Republican Party is in a constant struggle between its ego and its id,” Axelrod says, “and the id has mostly won out lately.”It isn’t the president who should leave. It’s the misguided lawmakers trying to drive him out. For some of the rodeo clowns clamoring for impeachment around the country, Barack Obama’s real crime is presiding while black.
As the Richmond Times Dispatch reports, speculation continues on whether or not Bob McDonnell and/or Maureen "Marie Antoinette" McDonnell in connection with the more than $266,000 in gifts, cash payments and political contributions received from Jonnie R. Williams and Star Scientific. As noted to date, part of Taliban Bob's defense is that he did not know who much loot his greed driven wife received from Williams. Meanwhile, there seems to be no explanation from Ms. McDonnell on why she acted like Emelda Marcos in her pursuit of designer clothes on lavish shopping trips to New York City. Personally, I find it beyond belief that something of wasn't done for Williams/Star Scientific in return for such lavish spending. As for McDonnell's feigned lack of knowledge, it's what I have called the Sergeant Schultz defense. I don't buy it. Here are highlights from the Times Dispatch:
Attorneys and law professors are uncertain whether Gov. Bob McDonnell’s legal troubles could lead to a federal indictment.
But if McDonnell is indicted and declines to step down, Republican legislative leaders privately are steeling themselves to ask the governor to resign to spare the state from distraction as the government gears up to produce a two-year budget by December.
Andrew G. McBride, who spent seven years as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, and three in the main Department of Justice, said the case doesn’t fit exactly a classic public corruption model — an official act in exchange for some form of compensation.
“At the same time, it has some egregious facts that might well lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office to indict.
“Or, I could very much see a situation, and this is authorized by the U.S. attorney’s manual, where they trade non-indictment of both the governor and the first lady in exchange for the immediate resignation of the governor.”
The coming weeks could be decisive. A decision or announcement could be made within two weeks to avoid getting too close to the November election.
Williams, the Star CEO, is facing his own potential legal troubles. Leading the defense team for Williams are Richard Cullen, chairman of McGuireWoods and a former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia; and Toby Vick, a former federal prosecutor.
Lawyers say he could have trouble with the income tax laws for cash gifts made to the McDonnells.
Federal investigators are probing whether McDonnell or his administration provided any benefit to Williams and his company in exchange for the more than $166,000 in gifts, loans and cash payments Williams provided to the first family — in addition to nearly $110,000 in campaign and political action committee donations. The governor has maintained that Star Scientific has not received any special treatment from his administration.
There's more to the piece for those interested. Again, no one gives that much money without expecting something.
Saturday, 24 August 2013
 |
| Click image to enlarge |
Perhaps there is some hope for my former state of Alabama yet. I frequently lament that Alabama is far more insane now that it was in the late 1970's when I lived there and George Wallace was governor (I got to meet Wallace once). In a move that frankly took me by surprise, the Alabama GOP voted down a rule change aimed at expelling the president of the state College Republicans organization for committing the heresy of supporting gay marriage. One can only assume that the Christofascist behind the proposed rule change failed to ladled out enough Kool-Aid to addle the minds of the governing board of the state GOP. Talking Points Memo looks at the surprising and welcome move. Here are highlights:
The Alabama Republican Party voted Saturday against a proposed rule that would have removed a junior member from its steering committee because of her support of gay marriage, the Associated Press reported.
The measure was aimed at Stephanie Petelos, the chairwoman of the Alabama College Republicans, who had made public comments in support of the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act. Petelos told the AP she hopes her ordeal "doesn't scare or shy anyone away from the party."
Bonnie Sachs, an executive committee member who proposed the rule change, told the AP that steering committee members need to serve "in such a way that we don't go to the media with an agenda that we may have." Other committee members said they didn't share Petalos' view on gay marriage, but did respect her First Amendment right to expressing that view.
"We're not the Taliban. We're not the Third Reich," committee member Clay Barclay told the AP.
Perhaps the GOP isn't yet the Taliban or Third Reich, but that is exactly the type of regime that the Christofascist who drafted the 20112 GOP party platform would like to implement. Candidly, I can see FRC's Tony Perkins happily playing a role equivalent to that of Joesph Goebbels in the Third Reich. Or if not Perkins, then Gary Bauer.
One of the worse gay haters and homophobes in the United States Senate is GOP Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe who I suspect in truth would favor establishing a Christofascist ruled theocracy in America after an over throw of the U.S. Constitution in substance. There seems to be no end to the man's anti-gay batshitery. Now he is claiming that Pentagon policy allowing gay service members to marry is harming heterosexual couples. Like most of what comes out of Inhofe's mouth its crazy bullshit. Inhofe over looks one important fact: unlike gays, straights can marry in every state in America. It's a huge difference. Think Progress looks at this batshitery erruption. Here are highlights:
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) blasted a proposed Pentagon policy aimed at giving same-sex couples the time to travel to states where they can legally marry on Thursday. Inhofe, who takes great pride in having no LGBT relatives, wrote to Sec. of Defense Chuck Hagel that doing so would amount to “special uncharged leave benefits” for same-sex partners.
Following the Supreme Court’s June ruling striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the Department of Defense has been working to update its systems to ensure it treats same-sex marriages equally, as required by the ruling. Since just 13 states and the District of Columbia have statewide marriage equality, the military is reportedly considering granting a few days of uncharged leave to soldiers and sailors who need to travel to a state where they can legally marry.
Inhofe, the ranking minority-party member of Senate Armed Services Committee, objects to the idea, suggesting it is an illegal benefit and that it would amount to discrimination not to offer the same amount of leave to those entering into opposite-sex unions:
Inhofe’s claim that he supports fair and equal treatment seems to conflict with his record. His official Senate website boasts that he has “consistently supported and defended traditional marriage between one man and one woman as a cornerstone to the strength of our society,” and that he strongly opposes “the Obama Administration’s attack on traditional marriage and attempts to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act.” Inhofe voted for the unconstitutional DOMA law in 1996 and co-sponsored a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages.
Of course, if his concern about “disparate treatment” is sincere, the solution is obvious: he should work toward making sure same-sex couples, especially those who serve their country, are free to marry in all 50 states. He could start with his own state of Oklahoma,
It seems that with each passing day more information on the endless scope of the NSA's domestic spying and the NSA's violations of legal constraints unfold. And sadly, Barack Obama can't seem to get ahead of the unfolding revelations and continues to come across as lame and belatedly trying to do damage control. Now, as BuzzFeed reports, the New York Times is teaming up with The Guardian to do a series of stories that will likely drop some additional bomb shells on the full extent of the police state spying that has been utilized against American citizens. Here are details from BuzzFeed:
The New York Times is in the Snowden game. The paper — which NSA leaker Edward Snowden deliberately avoided over his fear that it would cooperate with the United States government — is now working with the Guardian on a series of stories based on documents that detail National Security Agency cooperation with its British counterpart, the Government Communications Headquarters, known as GCHQ.
“In a climate of intense pressure from the UK government, The Guardian decided to bring in a US partner to work on the GCHQ documents provided by Edward Snowden,” Guardian spokeswoman Jennifer Lindenauer said in an email. “We are continuing to work in partnership with the NYT and others to report these stories.”
The London-based newspaper has been under intense British government pressure this summer, its editor, Alan Rusbridger, revealed earlier this week.
The decision to publish the revelations concerning the British intelligence service jointly with the Times may give the Guardian leverage in its battle with the British government, which is trying to prevent the stories’ publication. It may also relate to the stronger protections for free speech and press freedom under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; Britain has no such protections, and its Official Secrets Act is aimed at keeping government secrets secret. Sources at both papers declined to discuss the motives beyond the spokeswoman’s reference to the “climate” of pressure.
The Guardian’s Rusbridger has used the Times’s megaphone before, to spectacular effect: When the British paper’s coverage of the phone hacking scandal at News Corp. appeared to hit a dead end, a collaboration with the the Times revived it, and helped lead to criminal charges against top News Corp. executives.
Snowden said he did not go to the Times because the paper bowed to Bush Administration demands to delay a story on warrantless wiretapping in the interest of national security; he was afraid, he said, the paper would do the same with his revelations.
Now, Times reporter Scott Shane is at work on a series of stories expected to be published next month jointly with the Guardian, a source familiar with the plans said.
Now the Times or an agent for the paper, too, appears to have carried digital files from the United Kingdom across international lines into the United States. Discussions of how to partner on the documents were carried out in person between top Guardian editors and Times executive editor Jill Abramson, all of whom declined to comment on the movement of documents. But it appears likely that someone at one of the two papers physically carried a drive with Snowden’s GCHQ leaks from London to New York or Washington — exactly what Miranda was stopped at Heathrow for doing.
I suspect these stories will prove very embarrassing not only to the British government but also to American politicians and bureaucrats.
As promised, the theocrats and Christofascists at Liberty Counsel - which is affiliated with Liberty University, another huge blight on Virginia's image - have filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block New Jersey's newly enacted ban on subjecting minors to fraudulent witch doctor like "ex-gay" therapy. As noted before, maintaining the myth that gays can change their sexual orientation is a crucial part of the Christofascists' effort to block gay rights and anti-discrimination protections. Never mind that every legitimate medical and mental health association in America condemns the therapy. And never mind that there is a long history of courts and statutes protecting minors form abuse and/or dangerous religious based practices. Would that courts would begin imposing sanctions on Liberty Counsel and Matt Staver (pictured above) for the frivolous cases that are routinely filed. The Washington Blade looks at the lawsuit. Here are details:
Liberty Counsel filed the 46-page complaint before the U.S. District Court of New Jersey against Christie, who signed a law on Monday barring sexual orientation conversation therapy for minors within his state, as well as other state officials.
The lawsuit alleges the law violates freedoms of speech and religion under the U.S. and New Jersey Constitutions. Additionally, the lawsuit contends the law violates parental rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
The group filed the lawsuit on behalf of two Christian counselors who practice sexual orientation conversion therapy and two fringe psychological groups that have endorsed it: the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality, or NARTH, and the American Association of Christian Counselors.
“This law went into full effect immediately, upon being signed by Governor Christie on August 19, 2013, and thus time is of the essence to obtain judicial relief because plaintiffs, their clients, and the members of the plaintiff associations are currently suffering immediate and irreparable injury to their most cherished constitutional liberties,” the filing states.
Mat Staver, founder and chair of Liberty Counsel, said in a statement on the day the lawsuit was filed that the law is “a tyrannical overreach of government authority.”
“With this law, parents may face Child Protective Services investigating their home and even law enforcement taking their children if they seek change therapy,” he said said.
“Ex-gay” conversion is widely discredited and refuted by major mainstream psychological groups, such as American Psychological Association. In June, the largest ex-gay group, Exodus International, closed its doors after its executive director Alan Chambers issued an apology acknowledging “the pain and hurt others have experienced” through failed attempts at conversion therapy.
Still, plaintiffs in the lawsuit contend its effective.
One of the plaintiff counselors, Tara King, . . . . holds a Masters Degree in Christian counseling from Liberty University . . .
The other plaintiff counselor in the lawsuit is Ronald Newman, a licensed psychiatrist who obtained advanced degrees in psychology from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.
Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, which has spoken out about “ex-gay” therapy and its dangers, criticized the lawsuit as a waste of time for the judicial system.
“The Liberty Counsel has filed a frivolous lawsuit that confuses religious liberty with license to abuse LGBT youth,” Besen said. “The claim is without merit, relies on perpetuating junk science, and is in defense of a fraudulent product. With evidence and facts on our side, the Liberty Counsel is wasting time and money — similar to the clients of ex-gay therapists.”
Wayne - who I have worked with for a decade to expose ex-gay frauds like ex-gay poster boy Michael Johnston and JONAH founder and former NARTH board member Arthur Goldberg as an ex felon - sums it up well. And yes, parents should be subjected to child protective services investigations if they place their children in "ex-gay" programs.
Regional embarrassment and racist Pat Robertson has let off another explosion of verbal diarrhea. This time he is blaming Barack Obama for "inciting black-on- white violence." The data to support this claim? There is, of course, none. And its all an delusion in the mind of a man who seems increasingly out of touch with any kind of objective reality who daily panders to the sense of outrage of the white supremacists of the GOP and conservative Christian groups. These people just cannot get over their hate and bigotry and go off every time they remember a black man is in the White House. As I have said before, it's a wonder that today's GOP city and county committee meetings don't start with all attendees donning white robes and hoods. And for non-Virginians, it is important that they remember that Robertson is historically the largest GOP donor in Virginia. Right Wing Watch has these details:
Pat Robertson today, while discussing the shooting of an Australian baseball player in Oklahoma by three teenagers, two of them black and one white, accused President Obama of inciting anti-white violence. The 700 Club host said, “We are having a tremendous amount of this black-on-white violence and I have a feeling that instead of bringing racial harmony, having an African-American president has exacerbated the problem.”
“He seems to be wanting to bring division among people instead of bringing them together; he is one of the most divisive leaders this country has ever had,” Robertson continued. “It just seems he wants to rub the edges raw every chance he gets.” Robertson argued that Obama is trying to divide people by race and class: “There’s always something there to stir up controversy.”
- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/robertson-obama-inciting-black-white-violence#sthash.InZVuMwo.XNB1TTht.dpuf
“He seems to be wanting to bring division among people instead of bringing them together; he is one of the most divisive leaders this country has ever had,” Robertson continued. “It just seems he wants to rub the edges raw every chance he gets.” Robertson argued that Obama is trying to divide people by race and class: “There’s always something there to stir up controversy.”
- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/robertson-obama-inciting-black-white-violence#sthash.InZVuMwo.XNB1TTht.dpuf
Pat Robertson today, while discussing the shooting of an Australian baseball player in Oklahoma by three teenagers, two of them black and one white, accused President Obama of inciting anti-white violence. The 700 Clubhost said, “We are having a tremendous amount of this black-on-white violence and I have a feeling that instead of bringing racial harmony, having an African-American president has exacerbated the problem.”“He seems to be wanting to bring division among people instead of bringing them together; he is one of the most divisive leaders this country has ever had,” Robertson continued. “It just seems he wants to rub the edges raw every chance he gets.” Robertson argued that Obama is trying to divide people by race and class: “There’s always something there to stir up controversy.”
Of course, this is the same top Virginia GOP donor who has said: Gays Destroy Society, Want Christians in Jail; that gays are really straights with "chromosomal damage", that Planned Parenthood backs genocide and inspired Hitler, that "Wild" Liberals Support "Society of Death"
For the record, back in my GOP activist days I got to meet Robertson in person. In my opinion, he is an arrogant egomaniac who is having a tempestuous love affair with himself. Obnoxious doesn't even begin to describe him. His mere presence - not to mention Regent University and CBN - are a huge negative for Hampton Roads.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
