Former 'Family Values' CA Legislator Ashburn Comes Out In Favor Of Gay Rights

How many members are there in this club? The one comprised of Republican/"Family" values politicians and Religious leaders who spent their careers doing everything they can demonize gays and deny them basic human rights only to be gay themselves. I'm not psychiatrist, but i'm guessing it has to do with some sort of self-loathing they feel for what they really are. It seems the most vehement often are most likely to be trying to cover up their true selves. It's sad b/c they've been told "it's wrong" so they go to the extreme to prove their bona fides with the anti-gay crowd and deny what they are.

In my own experience, it's the ones who appear to be least secure in their own sexuality that seem to be the most outwardly homophobic (I mean that in the literal sense of "feaful" of homosexuality).

We manipulate ...you decide

watch the whole video...both versions

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/24/fox-obama-applause-speech/

This is why the "right" is so woefully ill-informed. It's not their fault, they really think Fox is a news organization.

Here you can watch Stewart catch them to it too

http://www.examiner.com/x-15870-Populist-Examiner~y2010m5d24-Cadet-applause-missing-from-Fox-News-video-of-Obama-West-Point-speech

This is what passes for rational thought among the right

A friend made a comment on FB that stated that illegal immigration in AZ had resulted in a "Massive Crime". I responded that crime is down DRAMITICALLY over the past 4 years while illegal immigration is suposedly exploding. Violent and property crimes down to levels from the 60's and 70's.

Another person responded, first conceeding that this was accurate and then claiming the proof that illegal immigration caused the "massive crime" was b/c the falling crime rate was not falling as fast as in other parts of America.

So, according to the logic of the right "massive crime" waves can be defined by historically low levels of crime, but those historically low levels not being lower...that is "massive crime". How exactly do you have a rational discussion with someone who "thinks" like that?

YOu can oppose illegal immigration on it's merits, you don't have to rely on hyperbole and outright lies to make the case. Although, I didn't realize that all those Canadian widow snowbirds living in Sun City overstaying their visas were such a crime risk, nor the Russian Software Engineer working beyond her H1-B visa. But i guess that's what they're saying.

Arizona...like 1950's Alabama with less humidity

So, the summer of Insanity in AZ continues with AZ banning "ethnic studies". Does this mean that AZ schools can't teach about Columbus Day, St. Patrick's Day? In fact, the way I read the law it would seem that most history would be banned, like how do you teach about WWII without bringing up one ethnic group versus another.

i can blog from my Droid

See

"Drill baby drill" crowd: Care to comment?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/04/29/louisiana.oil.rig/index.html?hpt=C1

All the Republicans were for drilling off shore...off someone else's shore. No one wanted it off their own coast. I wonder what the Drill Baby Drill crowd will say about this. This ain't going to help the cause. I guess we can ask Governor Bobby how he feels now. For that matter, ask Obama.

Supposedly 70% of Arizonians support new immigration bill?

Got this an email about the Rasmussen Poll from a teabagger.


I wish you'd make up your mind on polls. When they show that most Americans support a Public Option for health care it's irrelevant, when most Americans support a women's right to chose, it doesn't matter. When polls show that a vast majority of Americans feel that George W. Bush's unnecessary war was a complete disaster, "we dont' run the country by polls". But as soon as one support you, you're Mr Populace. I wonder what the polls showed in Alabama about segregation in 1950. (In a statewide referendum in Alabama in 2004 to remove the segregation in education language, long since Unconstitutional, from the Alabama Constitution changing the language LOST...yep 6 years ago. Arizona's racism is directed toward Latinos.)

it's clear from the most vocal supporters of this measure that they don't know what it entails. It's is legalized racial profiling. BY DEFINTION. If the purpose is to stem the tide of illegals from Mexico by definition it means that cops will be pulling over latinos and asking for their papers. They sure as hell won't be asking for Canadians who live here in the summer to verify their visa status. They won't be asking Russian software engineers to show their H1-Bs.

if the governor is serious about not tolerating racial profiling, she's completely made the law useless because without racial profiling you can't very well be checking the status of every brown skinned person in Arizona. COnsidering 30% of Arizona is hispanic that's a lot of innocent people who need to verify their right to be where they are for the arbitrary whims of cops. It also makes that 70% approval number very suspect.

SO, if the police pulled you over as you walked down the street, could you PROVE you're here legally? Your driver's license doesn't prove shit, so you're ready to go to jail or will you be carrying your passport and birth certificate with you.

Again, all you good Teabaggers are always bitching about freedom but that "freedom" only applies to white, Christian, straight people. if it's the government screwing gays or dark skinned people, that's not about freedom b/c they're not really "americans" are they?. Really, is it America where we ask people to show their papers for no other reason than they look Mexican. (What does a person with an expired visa look like? What does a person with a Green Card look like? What does an American citizen look like?)

Oh yeah, and the Arizona Police Chiefs Association said this will do NOTHING to impact illegal immigration, it will make their jobs harder and take resources away from stopping real crime.

Remember when ARizona wouldn't pass the MLK Jr. holiday? It took the NFL saying they wouldn't hold the Super Bowl here any more to get them to overcome their racism. Racist state laws are bad for business and for a state that depends so heavily on tourism, it will be the reality that racist laws impact tourism that will cause a change.


Finally, I know you hate the Constitution but:
Under the Constitution's "supremacy clause," the Constitution and federal law trump state law. Article 1 of the Constitution, which spells out Congress' powers, specifically gives U.S. lawmakers authority to establish a "uniform Rule of Naturalization" and to regulate commerce with other nations.

Arizona...national joke

My old Bushie aquaintance says that the new AZ law doesn't allow police to demand their status unless they believe a crime has occurred, but in a fantastic case of circular logic, the crime they need to be suspected of is being illegally in the country.

Oh if that were only the case.

The crime you speak of is that the person looks like they don't hold US Citizenship, a visa, are a refugee, an asylee or otherwise vaild reason to be in the US? How exactly can you tell that from looking at someone? I ask you. In fact, the law REQUIRES that police ascertain whether the person is in the country legally. REQUIRES if there is suspicion (again, how can you guess a person's citizenship/visa status from looking at them?)

I don't know why I keep making this mistake, but I thought that for all the talk about Obama's socialist government and "intrusiveness" and "freedom" that you might be offended by cops pulling any person for them to prove that they are a citizen or have a visa, but I often forget that the "Freedom" you speak of is The freedom of White, Christain, Straight Men to be free from paying taxes while sucking at the government teat without the slightest acknowledgement of their own hypocrisy.

Actually, you might want to put that on a sign and carry that at the next Tea Bagger rally.

Welcome to Arizona...a little taste of Johannesburg circa 1979

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/19/arizona.immigration.bill/index.html?hpt=T2

How would I prove my immigration status if I got pulled over? Am I to carry my birth certificate with me?

Is there anything more totalitarian than having a police officer demand "your papers"?

The sanctity of marriage

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/TV/04/15/larry.king.divorce/index.html?hpt=Sbin

Pro-Christian bias in the MSM

Despite all the right fringes constant catterwalling about how "Christians are always under attack", the reality is much different...as usual. In case you needed more proof of the Mainstream media bias toward Christians and a gripping fear at offending them, notice that this terrorist group (of Christians) has not once been called a Terrorist organization nor have I even heard the words "terrorist" mentioned in reference to them. You can be DAMN sure that if this was a Hindu/Muslim/Buddhist group or Individual they'd be called a "terrorist" in every article and not a "militia" with all its Constitutional referenced romance. if these charges aren't terrorism, nothing is: seditious conspiracy, attempted use of weapons of mass destruction, teaching the use of explosive materials and possessing a firearm during a crime of violence. Shameful.

Yet when that guy lost his shit at Fort Hood he was instantly branded a terrorist based on his name not the reality of that guy's past as a pissed off loner(Don't believe me? You can read the article in Esquire about Ft. Hood http://www.esquire.com/features/fort-hood-shooting-0310?click=main_sr from last month that tells the story that Fox "News" ignored)

More good news

Obama on his way to fixing Bush's recession

(the incendiary subject line just to get the base fired up)



Manufacturing growing at fastest pace since ’04
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36131832/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/

__________________________

WASHINGTON, April 1 (UPI) -- First-time claims for U.S. Unemployment Insurance benefits fell for the fifth consecutive week, the U.S. Department of Labor said Thursday. Claims fell by 6,000 to 439,000 last week, and in the past five weeks they've dropped by an average of 12,000 per week. The U.S. jobless rate remained unchanged at 9.7 percent. State statistics lag one week behind the national report. The biggest increases in claims for the week ending March 20 were reported by Illinois with...


___________________________

Dow average up for fifth straight week as oil tops $85 a barrel
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- U.S. stocks on Thursday started the second quarter on an upbeat note, with oil and other commodities rallying as economic reports from the U.S., Asia and Europe combined to lift hopes of a global recovery.

Greenwald on another right wing hypocrisy

How today's "Conservatives" love big government

From the Libertarian Party Press release about the current CPAC summit going on today

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 18, 2010

Contact: Wes Benedict, Executive Director
E-mail: wes.benedict@lp.org
Phone: 202-333-0008 ext. 222

Libertarians criticize CPAC conservatives

WASHINGTON - As the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) holds its annual conference, Libertarian Party Executive Director Wes Benedict offered the following statement:
I'm sure we'll hear an awful lot about "limited government" from the mouths of CPAC politicians over the next few days. If I had a nickel every time a conservative said "limited government" and didn't mean it, I'd be a very rich man.

Unlike libertarians, most conservatives simply don't want small government. They want their own version of big government. Of course, they have done a pretty good job of fooling American voters for decades by repeating the phrases "limited government" and "small government" like a hypnotic chant.

It's interesting that conservatives only notice "big government" when it's something their political enemies want. When conservatives want it, apparently it doesn't count.
• If a conservative wants a trillion-dollar foreign war, that doesn't count.
• If a conservative wants a 700-billion-dollar bank bailout, that doesn't count.
• If a conservative wants to spend billions fighting a needless and destructive War on Drugs, that doesn't count.
• If a conservative wants to spend billions building border fences, that doesn't count.
• If a conservative wants to "protect" the huge, unjust, and terribly inefficient Social Security and Medicare programs, that doesn't count.
• If a conservative wants billions in farm subsidies, that doesn't count.

It's truly amazing how many things "don't count."

Conservatives like Rush Limbaugh can't ever be satisfied with enough military spending and foreign wars.

Conservatives like Mitt Romney want to force everyone to buy health insurance.

Conservatives like George W. Bush -- well, his list of supporting big-government programs is almost endless.

Ronald Reagan, often praised as an icon of conservatism, signed massive spending bills that made his the biggest-spending administration (as a percentage of GDP) since World War II.

Some people claim that these big-government supporters aren't "true conservatives." Well, if a person opposes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, opposes the War on Drugs, opposes border fences, and opposes mandatory Social Security and Medicare, it's hard to believe that anyone would describe that person as a conservative at all. Most people would say that person is a libertarian (or maybe even a liberal).

Obviously, most liberals don't want limited government either. It's just that their support for big government leans toward massive handout and redistribution programs.

The fact is, liberals and conservatives both want gigantic government. Their visions sometimes look different from each other, but both are huge. The only Americans who truly want small government are libertarians.
An article posted at CNS News, linked prominently from the Drudge Report, noted that the Obama administration is on track to beat the Franklin Roosevelt administration in terms of average federal spending as a percentage of GDP. However, the article failed to note that the Reagan Administration already beat the Franklin Roosevelt administration easily. Roosevelt's average was 19.4 percent of GDP, while Reagan's average was 22.3 percent of GDP. (Source: White House OMB data)

Bush thought this guy should be in charge of protecting the Homeland

Bush’s Homeland Security Nominee gets 4 years: (I wonder if he looked into his soul like he did Putin’s)

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/18/kerik.sentence/index.html?hpt=T2

Oh yeah, he’s Rudi Giuliani’s BFF

Fox is really good at propoganda

Main Entry: pro·pa·gan·da
Pronunciation: \ˌprä-pə-ˈgan-də, ˌprō-\
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from Congregatio de propaganda fide Congregation for propagating the faith, organization established by Pope Gregory XV †1623
Date: 1718
1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause;"

I guess I always knew that Fox was very effective at getting out their message, but just recently it hit me when I heard the same exact talking points made by two ardent Bushies who've never met and live on other sides of the country and who use Fox as their only information source. The level of hypocrisy was astounding as they complained about Obama doing things that George W. Bush did 3x worse. Complained about "transparency" in the Obama administration...really they did. Yet, 2 years ago they defended Cheney's secrecy about everything AND the wiretapping of every Americans' phone. THEY DEFENDED THAT. They were complaining about Obama NOT undoing the very same things that Bush did that won their praise.

These people are educated, with advanced degrees in fact, but the amount of critical thinking they leave to Hannity and Beck to do for them is amazing. We often ask how could a populace follow lockstep with some of the great atrocities in human history perpetrated by dictators, but what Fox does is little different in terms of how they achieve this suspension of critical thinking. Only the scale is different, but I have no doubt with very little effort they could incite their minions to violence.

They will regurgitate items that Beck/Hannity have made up, that have no basis in fact and when presented with evidence and data it makes no difference...they've accepted the words of their leaders unconditionally. Truth and reality have no place in their minds. They can hold opposite opinions about the same exact behavior depending on who engaged in that behavior. The Fox news treatment of the Christmas underwear bomber was the perfect example...it was the same exact thing as the Shoe Bomber. Yet Fox uses that to prove that Obama is soft on Terror, but the Shoe Bomber was proof that Bush was awesome on terror AND NO ONE who prays at the Alter of Ailes bats an eye. AMAZING. How do you reason with someone like that?

Hero of the far right fringe turns out to be a terrorist

I know the Foxies are unaware of this story b/c Fox is ignoring it, but one of their heroes turns out to be a terrorist.

For years we've been hearing about how terrorists will work to destroy the communications infastructure in AMerica. I just didn't expect this attempt to interrupt the communications of American Government would be at the hands of one of the Right wings most beloved soldiers.

You can be damn sure that if Michael Moore was caught trying to mess around with the telecommunications equipment at the Capital the connection to terrorism and interrupting communication would have been thrown around freely.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35083861/ns/politics-more_politics/

Shameful...

So, much for that radical socialist agenda. His actions in this area seem to indicate he's more like BUSH III than some crazy liberal.

Shameful silence from the media...again

more proof that the media is not only NOT liberal but shameful in it acquiescence to the right wing in its ongoing turning a blind eye to the horrible things that happened under the Bush administration.

http://www.slate.com/id/2241948/

But hey, if 38 people show up at a Glenn Beck incited tea party, you can bet that every network will be there.