Quick Note: Republicans - They Just Can't Stop the Stupid

Texas State Senator Donna Campbell (R) and the Alamo, still under Texas ownership

In 2014, the U.S. Department of the Interior nominated a group of five former Spanish missions in San Antonio, Texas to the UN's Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) hoping to gain designation as a combined world Heritage Site.  One of the missions in the group is the Alamo.

The designation would bring international recognition and maintenance support; and, with proper promotion, could generate large sums of money for the San Antonio economy from visiting domestic and international tourist groups. Twenty-two of the current 1000 world heritage sites are located in the U.S., including the Grand Canyon, the Statue of Liberty and Yellowstone. 

For obvious reasons, World Heritage Site status is welcomed by governments around the world. Not so much for one Texas State Senator.

Donna Campbell (R)--obviously confused over what a World Heritage Site designation means and apparently too lazy to do any research on the subject--has introduced legislation that would ban foreign ownership of the Alamo.  Her proposed bill would prohibit Texas from signing "any ownership, control, or management" of the Alamo over to "an entity formed under the laws of another country."

In a speech before the Texas legislature, she said, "In the charge to the battle, the battle cry was 'Remember the Alamo,' and since then, the Alamo has been recognized as hallowed ground in Texas, and a shrine of Texas liberty.  The Alamo is a story of Texas, and it should be owned, operated, and maintained, controlled by Texans."

David Crockett, a political scientist at Trinity University in San Antonio and a distant relative of the Alamo's famous Davy Crockett, addressed the fact that Ms. Campbell is not the first conservative politican or even the first person to see the United Nations as a foreign threat to American autonomy.  He attempted to give her the benefit of the doubt by saying, "It's possible that she has tapped into that concern of some of her constituents." 

When it was pointed out to Ms. Campbell that the U.S. Department of the Interior was in no way planning to sell the Alamo to the U.N. or to anyone, she doubled down on her warning, telling the Houston Chronicle they should remember that "UNESCO starts with UN."

Mr. Crockett added, "The other option is she herself really does believe that there is a threat posed by internationalist forces to reduce sovereignty of the U.S."

Being a card carrying Stupid Conspiracy theorist earns you gold-card membership status in the modern Republican party.  Donna Campbell should be receiving her gilded ID any day now.

Quick Note: The Funny Side of the DHS Shutdown

A new U.S. citizen displays her official naturalization certificate

The Department of Homeland Security is scheduled to close-down this evening.  This morning, in a last minute desperation vote, the House cleared the way for a stop-gap measure to keep the DHS open and funded for three weeks while Congress continues to work on the spending impasse. 

Final passage of the extension is uncertain, however, after Democrats announced their opposition to it being only a three-week extension and far-right Republicans expressed their opposition to the removal of wording designed to undo the president's executive actions granting work permits to millions of U.S. immigrants. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has called a recess as he seeks to round up enough votes to pass the extension bill.  

The House originally passed a funding bill for the DHS in January, a bill that included wording reversing the President's recent executive action on immigration.  When the Senate took up that bill, Democrats filibustered it, saying they would only support the bill if the immigration prohibitions were removed.

Senate Republicans, with the bitter taste of their own medicine in their coffee cups, capitulated and agreed to remove the immigration prohibitions, sending their clean bill to the House earlier this week.  Speaker Boehner, after first trying bombast, this morning stopped his temper tantrum long enough to allow the House to consider the Senate's bill, which brings us to the on-going House recess and vote scramble.

For now, the clock continues to run, the shutdown edges closer and Republicans continue to beat their drum about the evil, tyrant president living in the big house on Pennsylvania Avenue who won't let them run the country the way they want to.  Even if the three-week extension passes, on March 19 we will probably be having the same conversation over DHS funding, immigration reform and executive action that we are having today...just another crisis in a long list of Republican engendered crises.

But you know what should really make us laugh? The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency, while part of the DHS, is not really part of the DHS budget.  USCIS is 95 percent funded through applicant fees. Only 5 percent of their budget is allocated through federal spending, and that 5 percent is allotted to E-Verify, a federal program that validates already issued work permits.  So, if Republicans in Congress are eventually successful in forcing a shutdown of the DHS in their snit over President Obama's executive actions on immigration, the only section of the DHS that will be left open, fully funded and fully staffed will be the exact section of the DHS in charge of carrying out the president's actions: the USCIS' office that processes citizenship and immigration applications and work permits.

Smooth move, Republicans! Very smooth.

Quick Note(s) -- Stupid Adults, Passing Stupid On to Their Kids

#1 Utah - Young Men Learning to Sexualize Young Women

It's attitudes like this that create politicians like South Carolina's Thomas Corbin.

Fifteen year old Gabi Finalyson is a student at Lone Peak High School in Utah.  She bought the dress she is wearing in the photo above in Paris during a family trip.  She said it reminded her of Audrey Hepburn.  

Her high school dictates that girls' dresses hang below their knees, have at least a 2" shoulder strap and do not reveal any cleavage. Gabi's classic beaded dress met all those rules; however, when she wore the dress to a school dance, she was told she could not enter unless she wore a coat or sweater because her shoulders were exposed.

God forbid some high school boy should be forced to control himself after glimpsing a naked female shoulder.

Gabi complied because, when you're a teenager, high school dances are important events.  "I still stayed at the dance because it had been something I looked forward to, but I did feel really embarrassed and ashamed.  It was hard for me because that was a night I was supposed to feel really beautiful and special...It made me feel like I wasn't good enough."

Gabi's mother, Kristy Maxfield Kimball, blamed religious rules followed by observant Mormons for the humiliation her daughter was forced to feel.  "Makes me wonder if this really isn't about wanting girls to dress in LDS garment-worthy clothing.  Let's stop this insanity.  Girls' bodies are not sexual objects, and religious perspectives should not be imposed at a public school."

Ms. Finalyson herself put it best: "Maybe instead of teaching girls that they should cover themselves up, we should be teaching boys that we're not sex objects that they can look at."

Fundamentalism--whether in religion (any religion) or in our courts--always puts the blame on women. Why is that?  When are we going to start teaching our boys that self-control is exactly that--the unaided control of self?  

It's called respect--for yourself and for others--and there is nothing sexual about it.

#2 Illinois - Cheat? Get Caught? Blame It On Racism

Politicians call this gerrymandering--it's still cheating no matter what color you are or to which political party you belong.

Last year's U.S. Little League World Series was won by a team of  black 12-year-olds from the South side of Chicago.  Their reign lasted just six months.

On February 11, Jackie Robinson West was stripped of its title by Little League Baseball International.  The kids did nothing wrong.  They played their hearts out, while the adults--who are supposed to be leaders and role models--tried to get away with cheating the system.  Now these kids are paying the price.

It seems that team organizers recruited players from outside their designated area; and, when league officials were told about this, the team's adults introduced a falsified map of their district in an attempt to cover up their cheating.

Darold Butler, the team's manager was suspended and the team was put on probation until its leadership is replaced.

Rather than accept responsibility for attempting to game the rules and apologizing for the damage done to these young players, local minority leadership and at least one team parent immediately blamed racism.  

The Reverend Jesse Jackson called the decision untimely and inappropriately harsh, while the Reverend Michael Pfleger said, "I can't help but question whether the same thing would have been done with another team from another place--another race."

Team parent Venisa Green told the Chicago Tribune, "It's amazing to me that whenever African-Americans exceed the expectations, there is always going to be fault that is found in what we do.  Little League says that they teach character and they teach courage.  Well, this isn't an act of courage and this sure isn't an act of character."

No, cheating is cheating; and trying to blame the consequences on the color of your players' skin is not doing these kids any favors.  If you want these young people to grow up to be responsible, successful adults, they need strong, honest leaders willing to be role models and acknowledge that what they did was wrong.

That's called courage, that's called teaching character. 

Quick Note: Jehovah's Witness "How-To Kit" -- Keep 'em Home and Keep 'em Stupid

Tony Morris

Tony Morris is a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses Governing Body.  Last month, he hosted a segment on the JW on-line television network condemning higher education.  

Some quotes:

"All too often, our young people have met with spiritual disaster, especially after leaving home and living on a university campus...Young people, ask yourself: Why am I considering additional education?  Is it because I'm pursuing a specific skill or trade to support my service to Jehovah?  Or have I been pressured by the system into believing that higher education will somehow make me a more respected person or lead me to a better life?" 

How about choosing to pursue higher education because it can make me a person who can think, a person more able to understand and appreciate the world in which I live, a person more able to engage in the modern world, a person less prone to prejudice, a person who may eventually find the cure for cancer, or who may someday paint the 21st Century's Mona Lisa, maybe even the person who will bring the world's governments together in a true peace?  Or maybe simply a person less likely to make asinine statements like those Mr. Morris spouts?   

And what is wrong with education leading to "a better life?"  Listening to Mr. Morris, it sounds like he's telling parents that the best future to which their children should ever aspire is landing a minimum wage job at McDonald's.  

"If we are in continued association with those who do not believe the same, it can erode our thinking and convictions." 

That's the sort of thinking that brings us intolerant groups like the Westboro Baptists...and a lot of far-right Republicans.

"I have long said, the better the university, the greater the danger.  The most intelligent and eloquent professors will be trying to reshape the thinking of your child, and their influence can be tremendous.  One mom, I recall, asked me to try and help her son who was attending a prestigious-name university in Rhode Island.  After visiting him, I later had to inform her that her son now believed in evolution.  She refused to believe it until he finally told her himself.  How sad."

How much twisted thinking did it take to get to the point where Mr. Morris thinks we honor the Creator by refusing to use our God-given intelligence?  Or does Mr. Morris really believe that when God created man in his image, He made us whole and complete...and stupid? 

Now that's sad.  

Budgets and Social Security, the Republican Perspective

The Republican mind at work: 

• Grandma is old.  
• Grandma doesn't work and lives on Social Security. 
• Living on Social Security makes Grandma poor. 
• Grandma is just another lazy person who refuses to take care of herself and expects the government to support her.
• Poor, lazy people don't vote Republican. 

Ergo: Social Security is a safe place to cut spending to balance the budget because it will have no negative repercussions on my party.

Quick Note: It's Sunday

Something the intolerant, conservative, far-right "faithful" should probably think about.

Quick Note: The GOP Has a Better Idea (Stop Me If You've Heard This Before)

The Affordable Care Act was signed into law on March 23, 2010.  On March 24, Congressional Republicans began trying to dismantle it, promising they would be presenting a newer, better plan very soon.  

I have always wanted to ask the GOP, "Wouldn't it have been a more economical use of your time to have suggested your better plan while the original ACA was being put together?"  I mean, they were in the building after all.

It has now been nearly five years and we have heard the GOP plan was "being developed in committee," that it was "nearing completion," that they had a "few more details" to work out, and that a a vote would happen "in the near future."  Announcing is a GOP specialty.  Actually following through has proven to be a bit more elusive.

In November 2012, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told ABC news that with President Obama's re-election, it was clear the people had decided that "Obamacare is the law of the land."  Then he promptly called for a vote to repeal the law.  That effort continues today with vote number 54 (or 56, depending on who is counting) happening just this week.

In January 2014, GOP leadership in Washington told the media that they were beginning meetings to discuss the possibility of an alternative. I guess the "few more details/near future" plan was off the books by then.

It is now February 2015, and the wait is finally over!  Senators Richard Burr (R-North Carolina) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) along with Representative Fred Upton (R-Michigan) have unveiled their "Patient Choice, Affordability, Responsibility and Empowerment Act."

Well, sort of.  They have a snappy(?) title, but, as of Wednesday, nothing has actually been written into legislative language; however, these three legislators were happy to boast about some aspects of their Republican healthcare improvement plan.

• The "Obamacare" expansion of Medicaid will be eliminated. (The country's poor will be returned to their pre-2010, no-healthcare-for-you status.)
• Tax subsidies to help Americans purchase a healthcare plan will be scaled back. (The middle class may or may not still be required to purchase healthcare, but they'll have to do that on their own--maybe by instituting No-Meal-Mondays for themselves and their families.)
• Federal regulations outlining "essential benefits" will be reduced, most noticeably in the area of women's health care where insurers will no longer be required to offer maternity care. (Should this go under the "Vote for Us Because We Love Women" column or the "War on Women" column?  You choose.)

These legislators, (and other Republicans before them), have called maternity care "non-essential" because, in their words, having children "is a choice."  At the same time, they continue fighting to eliminate a woman's power to do the actual choosing by strictly limiting access to birth control and banning abortion.   

Knowing the GOP's track record for talking big but doing nothing, it is doubtful there will be anything to actually vote on for some time to come; but the Washington Post reported that "health policy aides for Burr, Hatch and Upton said this plan could be the basis for the party's long-term vision for health reform."

Lord, help us.

Quick Note: Francis, the Rainbow Pope

Transgendered man Deago Neria Lejarraga was born a woman though he always felt his body "absolutely didn't correspond with how I felt in my soul."  

After undergoing sex reassignment surgery, Mr. Lejarraga was ostracized by the Catholic church in which he was raised and called the "devil's daughter" by his parish priest.

When Mr. Lejarraga read about Pope Francis' call for the church to reach out to those who felt marginalized, he decided to write a letter, hoping for a Papal note of understanding and encouragement.  Instead of a note, Pope Francis phoned him personally and invited Mr. Lejarraga and his fiance to the Vatican for a private visit.

Mr. Lejarraga reported that, during his visit, the pope hugged him, telling him not to despair, that there is "a place in the house of God for him."

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions.  

Thank you, Pope Francis, for reminding us that His mansions are decorated in all the colors of the rainbow. 

Quick Note: Homeland Security Funding About to Run Out: Republican Response? "Meh"

Funding for the Department of Homeland Security runs out at the end of February. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services exist under the umbrella of the DHS.  Congressional Republicans have spent much of their short time in Washington trying to find a way to stop President Obama's recent executive action on immigration and to reverse earlier actions including his allowing young people who were brought to this country as children and have grown up here to remain in the U.S.  

First the GOP proposed defunding all immigration services, but they were told the President's latest action was totally paid for by immigration and green card application fees--Congress couldn't touch it. 

Next they proposed rewriting the rules for the entire department, putting all the funds under congressional jurisdiction in order to redirect any application fees to other divisions--thus leaving no funds to pay for the President's action.  That idea was passed by the House, but is unlikely to make it through the Senate.

Lately, seeing the DHS funding deadline swiftly approaching and with all positive movement on the issue stalled, Republicans have begun floating another idea: Let the deadline pass without doing anything at all.

A border security bill that was scheduled to be brought up in the House this week is now on hold until late February or perhaps March--after the funding deadline has passed.  Representative Matt Salmon (R-Arizona) said he feared the border security bill would become some kind of "bargaining chip," so "I don't want to do the vote until after February 27."

Because, God forbid the GOP should be caught "bargaining" compromising in anyway.

Representative Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Florida) told Politico that since most of the 280,000 employees in the DHS are considered "essential," they will continue to work anyway, even if Congress fails to provide them with paychecks. "It's not the end of the world."

I'm willing to bet that those 280,000 employees who have families to feed and mortgages to pay would disagree.

Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, echoed Mr. Diaz-Balart's opinion, explaining that, if the funding deadline is missed only 13.6 percent  (that's almost 40,000 people!) of the department's employees will actually be furloughed.  The rest will continue to "function no matter what happens."  He joined several other Senate Republicans in saying they really don't care if March 1 arrives without a new funding bill in place.

Appearing on Newsmax TV's American Forum, Senator Johnson accused the President of playing politics.  He also said he agreed with a 25 page memo entitled "Immigration Handbook for the New Republican Majority" written by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) in which he urges his fellow party members to block all funding for the President's executive action on immigration.

Nope, no political games being played by anyone in the GOP.  Riiiiight.

When Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was asked about the approaching deadline, he said the Senate would try to pass a funding bill but "if we're unable to do that, we'll see what happens."

So much for "governing responsibly." 

The laissez-faire attitude among congressional Republicans--not only toward the people who depend on their jobs to provide for their families--but for the American people as a whole is unconscionable.   

And, until Barack Obama won the White House, unknown in American politics.

Quick Note: Not a Person of Faith? Todd Ross (R) Wants to Deny You the Right to Marry

On Tuesday, I wrote about Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern (R) and how she is attempting to circumvent the fact that same-sex marriage is now legal in her state by introducing three bills that would make complying with that law illegal.  You can read my post here.

Oklahoma State Representative Todd Ross

On the same day I was writing about Ms. Kern, another Oklahoma legislator, Representative Todd Ross (R) was filing H.B. 1125.  Under Mr. Ross' bill, the only people who could obtain a marriage license and legally marry in the state of Oklahoma would be people of faith.  All marriage licenses would have to be approved by a member of the clergy.  And not just any clergy will do, only a Christian priest, minister, preacher or Jewish rabbi would be granted
power by the state to sign marriage licenses. This would seem to say that, if you are not a Christian or a Jew, you would not be permitted to marry in Oklahoma.

As for the rest of Oklahoma couples, Mr. Ross told KSWO-TV that if "they don't have a spiritual basis for a marriage and don't want to have a clergy member or a priest or someone involved in the spiritual aspect, then they can file an affidavit of common-law marriage."  

Mr. Ross is either unaware or doesn't really care, (I can easily believe either one), that Oklahoma is one of the majority of U.S. states that do not recognize common-law marriage.

 Republican legislators in Oklahoma seem to be overdosing on whatever additive the GOP prescribes for its members' drinking water.

Quick Note: I Stand with Bernie!

Governor Scott Walker (R-Wisconsin), Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida), Governor Chris Christie (R-New Jersey) plus wanna-bes Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Mike Huckabee and, of course, Sarah Palin are attending, along with a throng of other congressional and state Republican hopefuls and conservative hangers-on.  Jeb Bush was invited but declined citing a scheduling conflict. 

At the risk of being politically incorrect...the conference is sort of like a 21st Century white man's slave auction.  In this iteration, grown men voluntarily put themselves on the auction block and take turns telling the Kochs whatever it is they want to hear. Then, one guy gets purchased; and he gets to go home to serve these billionaire brothers in any way they choose by saying whatever they tell him to say, voting however they tell him to vote, and doing whatever they tell him to do whenever they tell him to do it. 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) cut debate on the Keystone XL pipeline short on Friday over objections from Democrats so that Senate Republicans could present themselves to their money-men without a delay.

I guess, because governing "responsibly" is less important than sucking up to a couple of billionaires.

Quick Note: McCain's Keystone Amendment Does WHAT?!

Senator John McCain (R-Arizona)

With all the hoopla over President Obama's State of the Union speech and the not-quite-as-advertised "identical" Republican dual language rebuttals, a surprising piece of news coming out of the Senate got swept to the side.

Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) has introduced an amendment to the Keystone XL pipeline bill that would effectively gut the Jones Act, part of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920.  His proposal would remove the requirement that ships operating exclusively in American waters be built in the U.S. and crewed by U.S. citizens or legal U.S. residents.

According to the U.S. Maritime Administration, there are 23,450 shipbuilding jobs in Mississippi alone, jobs that add $2 billion to that state's GDP each year--employment and state income that would disappear under Mr. McCain's proposal.

The amendment would also mean that foreign oil companies with off shore rigs in our coastal waters, rigs that are now manned by American oil workers, could replace their entire crews with foreign employees, putting even more Americans out of work.

Tom Allegretti, chairman of the American Marine Partnership said, "The McCain amendment would gut the nation's shipbuilding capacity, outsource our U.S. Naval shipbuilding to foreign builders and cost hundreds of thousands of family-wage jobs across this country.  The shipbuilding requirement, which Senator McCain seeks to eliminate, is in place to ensure that the United States maintains the industrial capacity to build its own ships, to protect and defend the American homeland.  It is hard to believe that Congress would endorse a change to the law that would outsource U.S. jobs and reduce national security by effectively creating dependence on foreign countries to build out ships."

Thomas Curelli, first vice president of the Great Lakes Maritime Task Force in Toledo, Ohio replied to Senator McCain's proposal this way: "Why would anyone subject an industry that produces such superior products to unfair competition from government-subsidized shipyards throughout the world?   It's not just about the new construction we'd be losing, it's all the work related to keeping the vessels in service.  Without construction, we cannot sustain this industry."

Coming from a man who is gung ho for increasing our military spending every time there is a budget vote and who is always ready to involve the U.S. in a seemingly never-ending series of foreign conflicts, a man whose party has been on a "Where are the jobs?" rampage for six years, I can only echo Mr. Curelli, "Why, Mr. McCain? WHY?!"

Quick Note: SOTUS, Just Another Republican Opportunity to Cheat

President Obama giving the State of the Union Address on January 20, 2015

The Republican response to the State of the Union address was supposed to be an identical speech, presented in two languages.  In a written announcement, the GOP told the media that Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) would give the official Republican rebuttal in English and Representative Carlos Curbelo (R-Florida) would deliver the identical "Spanish Language translated address of Sen. Joni Ernst (sic) response."  At least that's what the GOP said; the reality was a bit different.

The irony of Ms. Ernst, who is a proponent of English-only would have to share the spotlight with a Spanish-speaking congressmen was delicious in itself, but the details of the two "identical" speeches were even tastier.

In truth, Ms. Ernst, a fierce opponent of immigration reform failed to make any mention--not a single word--of the President's remarks on immigration reform (because, well, white people, you know.) while Mr. Curbelo made it sound like the Republicans were chomping at the bit to get immigration reform passed if only the President would cooperate (because, well, you know, We-Heart-Immigrants-Especially-Hispanics).

Despite Ms. Ernst's silence on the subject, Mr. Curbelo's "identical" speech told the Spanish speaking audience, "We should also work through the appropriate channels to create permanent solutions for our immigration system, to secure our borders, modernize legal immigration, and strengthen our economy.  In the past, the president has expressed support for ideas like these.  Now we ask him to cooperate with us to get it done."

When the Republican deception was caught, neither Ms. Ernst nor Mr. Curbelo nor their aides were available for comment.  Michael Steel, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) responded this way, "As in previous years' State of the Union responses, Senator Ernst...and Congressman Curbelo...spoke of the GOP vision of commonsense solutions and greater opportunity for everyone in this country framed by their unique stories and experiences.

Yeah, right.   

Dear GOP, why the need for deception?  You either believe in something or you don't. You either support something or you don't.  If you believe your position is correct, then have the guts to stand up and say so--to everyone! Or maybe you just don't believe in anything at all?

Quick Note: Church Hosts then Halts Gay Woman's Funeral

Vanessa Collier, left with her wife, Christina Higley and their daughters

On Saturday, January 10, friends of Vanessa Collier gathered inside New Hope Ministries in Lakewood, Colorado for a funeral service to remember her and to celebrate her life.  New Hope Ministries had been chosen because it was non-denominational and its geographic location was central to Ms. Collier's widespread family and friends.

Following an hour of open viewing of the casket, where photos of Ms. Collier with friends and family were displayed, and minutes into the service, Pastor Ray Chavez halted the memorial and stated that it could not continue until all evidence of Ms. Collier's life as a gay and married mother were removed from the sanctuary.  Mr. Chavez said there could be no images of Vanessa with her wife Christina and no video showing this loving family's life together.

The photos and the video along with a check to pay for the service and the name of the minister who would officiate had been in Mr. Chavez' possession for a week prior to the day the memorial was scheduled, so Mr. Chavez could have quietly denied the request to use his church.  Instead, he chose to accept their money and falsely welcome them into his sanctuary in order to halt the service in a way that would impose the most pain and humiliation on the people who loved this woman.  

Those in attendance were in shock.  Eventually, they picked up their programs, the flowers and Ms. Collier's casket and carried them across the street to a funeral home where the service continued, albeit in cramped quarters with very little seating for the hundred or so mourners.

The Denver Post attempted to talk to "Pastor" Chavez, but he refused to comment, choosing instead to demonstrate his cowardice by hanging up the phone.

On Monday, about four dozen friends and family members of Vanessa Collier held a demonstration on the sidewalk outside New Hope Ministries.  They were kept from stepping onto church property by security guards hired by the church.

Ms. Collier's family is still waiting for a refund of the money they paid to Mr. Chavez and his Church-of-the-Holy-Hypocrisy for the use of his sanctuary.

Jesus wept.

Quick Note: India Says It Will "Cure" Homosexuality with Yoga

The state of Goa in India is creating a program that, according to the Ramesh Tawadkar, Minister for Sports and Youth Affairs, will help young, gay people to lead "a normal life."  The state's government will set up "camps" where they will treat gay, bisexual and transgender young people.

"We will tell them what to do and how to get over same-sex feelings."

Along with counseling, yoga guru Baba Ramdey will bring his yoga institute to the camps where these young people "will be free from this habit most definitely."

Coming to a conservative church near you?! 

Putting aside how cruel this plan is, I couldn't help but picture a room full of gay men in yoga pants and wonder if Mr. Tawadkar and Mr. Ramdey had really thought this whole idea through.

Quick Note: Obama, Paris, Fox News, Social Conservatives & Misogyny -- Connecting the Dots

By now, everyone who doesn't live in a cave has seen photos and video of the massive demonstration of solidarity in Paris last weekend following the horrifying terrorist attack at Charlie Hebdo.  European leaders linked arms and marched through the capital joining millions of French citizens.  

Our Ambassador to France was there, but the President was not.  Fox News has been ranting about his absence non-stop since then.

Should President Obama have been there? Yes, I believe so; but Fox News would have been ranting anyway, because, well, it's what they do best.

In an interesting side-note,  an ultra-conservative newspaper in Israel published the iconic photo showing European leaders lined up together, but with one huge difference.  The Israeli newspaper edited out all the female leaders.  (Their newspaper photo department must have been a dull place to work during the Golda Meier years.)

This supports my belief that, no matter how you characterize yourself--Christian, Jewish, Muslim (or Republican)--when it comes to social issues, if you identify with the far-right, conservative spectrum of your rubric, misogyny is in your DNA.

And when you're weak, hate--whether it's directed at a President, another religion, a gay person, a magazine or women-- is a powerful crutch to mask your own fear.

Quick Note: "Christian" Self-Help Book Ends Atlanta Fire Chief's Career

Former Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran

Atlanta Fire Chief, Kelvin Cochran, wrote a Christian self-help book., "Who Told You You Were Naked?" intended to be used as a Bible study aide.  

In one section, he defines "uncleaness" as "whatever is opposite of purity; including sodomy, homosexuality, lesbianism, pederasty, bestiality, all other forms of sexual perversion."  

In another he writes, "Naked men refuse to give in, so they pursue sexual fulfillment through multiple partners, with the opposite sex, the same sex, and sex outside of marriage and many other vile, vulgar and inappropriate ways which defile their body-temple and dishonor God."

Rather than use the book appropriately within his church and belief circle, he decided to pass copies out to co-workers, including those who worked under him.  Gay rights supporters took offense and brought the book give-away to Mayor Kasim Reed's attention last November.  The Mayor immediately suspended Fire Chief Cochran and began an investigation of the Chief's actions. 

In announcing the suspension, Mr. Reed said, "I profoundly disagree with and am deeply disturbed by the sentiments expressed in the paperback regarding the LGBT community.  I will not tolerate discrimination of any kind within my administration."

Last week, Mayor Reed formally fired Kelvin Cochran, saying that he questioned Mr. Cochran's judgment and management capabilities.  "This is not about religious freedom.  This is not about free speech.  Judgment is the basis of the problem."

Mr. Cochran responded to his firing this way: "It's ironic that the city points to tolerance and inclusion as part of its reasoning. What could be more intolerant and exclusionary than ending a public servant's 30 years of distinguished service for his religious beliefs?"

Why is is that religious bigots are the first ones to yell "foul" when faced with the consequences of their own bigotry?  No one is telling Mr. Cochran or his church they must support or accept homosexual members.  No one is trying to prohibit Mr. Cochran from writing any hateful thing he wants to put in print.  Atlanta's mayor is saying that choosing to share your hate with co-workers--especially those who need your good opinion in order to keep their jobs--is not an acceptable management style.

Proselytizing on the public dime is not America's way--at least not yet.

Of course, state religious leaders are up in arms about this. Georgia Baptist Convention President Robert White said, "It's a frightening day in the United States when a person cannot express their faith without fears of persecution following."

I wonder if Mr. White was equally frightened by Georgia's public, open, and ultimately unsuccessful persecution of same-sex partners by fighting to deny them the right to marry?  And don't get me started on Georgia's fight against legal abortion--a fight based entirely on one side's religious views without respect or acknowledgement that not everyone goes to the same church--even in Georgia. 

A so-called "religious freedom" law has been pre-filed in Georgia's State House of Representatives in anticipation of the session that starts on Monday.  State Representative Ed Setzler (R) cites the Cochran case as one of a number of "outright examples of individuals' religious beliefs being deemed unacceptable by government entities."

The separation of church and state has been in place for 238 years for a reason. 

Last January, the Orange County, Florida School Board voted to allow Bibles to be passed out in their schools.  The Satanic Temple sued for equal representation and a state judge agreed.  So this school year, students are not only bringing home the Good Book in their backpacks, but a copy of "The Satanic Children's Big Book of Activities" as well.

Be careful what you wish for, Georgia.

Quick Note: Bryan Fischer on Charlie Hebdo "God Did It to Punish Christians"

Bryan Fischer took to his radio show this past week and told listeners that the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo was God's way of punishing Christians for committing blasphemy.   He called Muslims a "pagan, evil, foreign, wicked nation" that God has chosen to use in order to punish Christians.

As Stephen D. Foster Jr. of AddictingInfo.org wrote:  "At a time when we desperately need mutual peace among the religions of the world, Fischer is actively portraying Muslims as the villainous instrument God supposedly uses to punish Christians who break commandments...

...Religious satire is protected free speech and always should be.  If God is the creator of all things, that means he granted us a sense of humor, meaning an all-powerful deity should be able to take a joke.  Apparently, Bryan Fischer was not granted such a gift, as he is incapable of taking a joke.  Probably because he is one."

Mr. Foster, I don't know whether to wince or cheer.  

Hate is hate, whether it comes from a radicalized Muslim jihadist or a self-styled "Christian" evangelical who chooses to ignore the verses in the Bible that declare "God is Love." 

Quick Note: The New, Responsible GOP: Where Dismantling Trumps All

This month marks the beginning of having a Republican majority in both Houses of Congress, the beginning of their promise to prove they are capable of "governing responsibly."  So, how is it going so far?

1. Dismantling "Obamacare"
On Thursday, the House passed legislation that would redefine full-time employment under the Affordable Care Act as someone who works 40 hours/week instead of the current 30 hours.  Their argument is that, at the 30 hour threshold, employers can easily cut workers back to 29 hours to avoid having to provide employer mandated healthcare.   

Apparently, it has never occurred to these geniuses that it would be just as easy to cut 40 hours to 39 in order for employers to gain the same result.  

And, how does a change from 30 hours effect government spending?  The Congressional Budget Office said this legislation will move 1 million people onto government insurance programs raising federal spending by $53.2 billion over the next decade.  And, according to government statistics, since more than half of American workers actually put in a 40 hour work week, the threat of all of them losing employer provided healthcare would add even more to government spending.

Representative Kevin McCarthy (R-California) had this to say, "Mr. President, you say you care about those who have fallen on hard times.  show it, and sign this bill.  You care about low-income workers, about working women, and about small businesses.  Then show it, and sign this bill."

No explanation was offered on how denying health care to low-income workers, working women or those who have fallen on hard times is supposed to improve their lot in life.

2. Dismantling the President's Executive Action on Immigration
Disappointment reigned when Republicans found out they couldn't stop the president's executive action by defunding the Department of Homeland Security because Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency charged with carrying out the president's order, is completely funded by the fees it collects from immigration applications.  No congressional approved funds are used.

What's a Republican to do?  Enter Representative Mick Mulvaney (R-South Carolina) and Representative Harold Rogers (R-Kentucky).  They are developing legislation that would change the way fees are processed by depositing them directly into the main Homeland Security budget and then allowing Congress to allocate their use.

3. Dismantling Environmental Regulations
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) has vowed to halt the Environmental Protection Agency's attempt to curb pollution from power plants through new regulations that were approved by executive action last year.  

One of the loudest and proudest climate deniers is Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), new chairman of the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee, who claims the earth has experienced "no warming for the last 15 years."

With attitudes like these, it is no surprise that one of the first pieces of legislation to be passed was the Keystone XL pipeline.  The President has promised to veto it, and Republican leadership is already busy drumming up support for overriding that veto; but it is all still a publicity stunt.  Nothing can be done until a lawsuit currently making its way through Nebraska's court system reaches its conclusion.  It may look good to GOP supporters and they can rant about the President stopping it, but it's nothing but stage dressing, and they know it.

4. Dismantling Social Security
The funds budgeted to pay for those on Disability Social Security is running low.  Over a period of years--years overseen by both Republican and Democratic presidents--money was transferred without debate from the main Social Security account to cover this shortfall.

On the first day of the 114th Congress, buried in a list of new rules, Republicans voted to stop the transfer unless there is a tax increase or spending cut to cover the dollar amount.  

Now everyone knows that a Republican led Congress is never going to pass a tax increase; so, by the end of 2016, 11 million disabled Americans will see their monthly payments reduced by one-fifth.

5. Dismantling Roe v. Wade
The House began its tenure by voting to ban abortions at 20 weeks, in direct contradiction of current U.S. law.

The War on Women continues.  

6. Dismantling the Hope of Bi-Partisanism
Heritage Action, the political arm of the Heritage Foundation, the breeding ground for conservative ideals, is planning a two-day Republican conference next week to push right-wing legislators to be more aggressive on far-right issues.  The conference will feature Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), neither known for their belief in working with the other side.

The foundation has issued a booklet saying that they intend to convince attendees to embrace the "reform conservative movement;" and Jim DeMint, former Republican senator from South Carolina and current president of the Heritage Foundation said the purpose of the conference is to show congressional Republicans that "there's a pathway for bolder ideas."

One of the issues on the docket is the re-thinking of across-the-aisle ideas that were evident in last month's spending bill.  Proposals on how to address student loan debt, health care and the tax code will also be taken up.

The conference is being billed as "Opportunity for All, Favoritism to None;" but, in light of the fact that it will be held just days before Republicans and Democrats leave Washington for a joint retreat meant to promote working together in Washington, I would suggest that it would be more accurate to call it "We Heart Bi-Partisanism As Long As We Don't Have to Do It."

Quick Note: Everything this new Republican-led Congress has either accomplished or proposed is focused on dismantling, blocking or denying.  Where are the new ideas to move the country forward?  Where are the new attempts to raise the living standards of the citizens these men and women represent?  Where is the responsibility? 

They seem only to want to return the country to some time in the past, when healthcare was only for those who could afford it, when immigrants came only from Europe, when polluting the environment was accepted practice, when Social Security was just a twinkle in FDR's eye and when women died from back alley abortions. 

What they want is a world where a black man could never be president.

Quick Note: When the Pope and the President Join Forces, GOP is the Odd Man Out

President Obama and Pope Francis at the Vatican last September

It seems that Pope Francis is making some Republicans uncomfortable. Recently, Sister Simone Campbell, the sister who organized the "Nuns on a Bus" tours was quoted as saying "Pope Francis' message and tone are making Catholic Republicans a little uncomfortable.  He's stirring the concern on issues like poverty and the economy."

The unease has also been noticed by the conservative-leaning Washington Times and by The Hill, a publication created for and about Congress.

The Washington Times noted that, in the case of several issues of importance to his presidency and his party, "President Obama increasingly is finding a key policy ally in the Vatican, with Pope Francis standing virtually shoulder to shoulder with the White House."

The Hill took a more negative view, reporting that the pope "is increasingly driving a wedge between conservatives and the Catholic Church."

The article made note of Pope Francis' hand in easing the relationship between Cuba and the U.S.,  continuing: "Francis's agenda, which also includes calls to address income inequality and limit climate change, is putting him at odds with Republicans, including GOP Catholics in the United States."

Republicans and especially Republican Catholics are going to find 2015 particularly uncomfortable as Pope Francis is reportedly planning to focus a good deal of energy on urging his church and its members to join in the fight against climate change--an issue that American Republicans continue to insist is a Democratic hoax being perpetrated against business interests without a shred of real evidence.  The pope's position cannot help but enfeeble the conservative argument that, even if the planet is warming, it is part of God's plan and so should be allowed to play out according to His will. 

Is it possible to say you know God's will better than the man who stands at the head of your church?  Can you claim to be a good and faithful Catholic and still tell the Pope he is wrong?

It will be interesting to see how Republicans like Marco Rubio (R-Florida), John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) juggle the dissonance between what the Pope says and what their party tells them to say.  In the meantime, I get all warm and fuzzy thinking how much it must rankle the GOP to see President Obama and Pope Francis writing on the same page.