by Charles Blow:
The system failed him when Florida’s self-defense laws were written, allowing an aggressor to claim self-defense in the middle of an altercation — and to use deadly force in that defense — with no culpability for his role in the events that led to that point.
The system failed him because of the disproportionate force that he and the neighborhood watchman could legally bring to the altercation — Zimmerman could legally carry a concealed firearm, while Martin, who was only 17, could not.
The system failed him when the neighborhood watchman grafted on stereotypes the moment he saw him, ascribing motive and behavior and intent and criminal history to a boy who was just walking home.
The system failed him when the bullet ripped though his chest, and the man who shot him said he mounted him and stretched his arms out wide, preventing him from even clutching the spot that hurt.
The system failed him in those moments just after he was shot when he was surely aware that he was about to die, but before life’s light fully passed from his body — and no one came to comfort him or try to save him.
The system failed him when the slapdash Sanford police did a horrible job of collecting and preserving evidence.
The system failed him when those officers apparently didn’t even value his dead body enough to adequately canvass the complex to make sure that no one was missing a teen.
The system failed him when he was labeled a John Doe and his lifeless body spent the night alone and unclaimed.
The system failed him when the man who the police found standing over the body of a dead teenager, a man who admitted to shooting him and still had the weapon, was taken in for questioning and then allowed to walk out of the precinct without an arrest or even a charge, to go home after taking a life and take to his bed.
The system failed him when it took more than 40 days and an outpouring of national outrage to get an arrest.
The system failed him when a strangely homogenous jury — who may well have been Zimmerman’s peers but were certainly not the peers of the teenager, who was in effect being tried in absentia — was seated.
The system failed him when the prosecution put on a case for the Martin family that many court-watchers found wanting.
The system failed him when the discussion about bias became so reductive as to be either-or rather than about situational fluidity and the possibility of varying responses to varying levels of perceived threat.
The system failed him when everyone in the courtroom raised racial bias in roundabout ways, but almost never directly — for example, when the defense held up a picture of a shirtless Martin and told the jurors that this was the person Zimmerman encountered the night he shot him. But in fact it was not the way Zimmerman had seen Martin. Consciously or subconsciously, the defense played on an old racial trope: asking the all-female jury — mostly white — to fear the image of the glistening black buck, as Zimmerman had.
This case is not about an extraordinary death of an extraordinary person. Unfortunately, in America, people are lost to gun violence every day. Many of them look like Martin and have parents who presumably grieve for them.
This case is about extraordinary inequality in the presumption of innocence and the application of justice: why was Martin deemed suspicious and why was his killer allowed to go home?
[skip]
The idea of universal suspicion without individual evidence is what Americans find abhorrent and what black men in America must constantly fight.
It is pervasive in policing policies — like stop-and-frisk, and in this case neighborhood watch — regardless of the collateral damage done to the majority of innocents.
It’s like burning down a house to rid it of mice.
As a parent, particularly a parent of black teenage boys, I am left with the question, “Now, what do I tell my boys?”
We used to say not to run in public because that might be seen as suspicious, like they’d stolen something. But according to Zimmerman, Martin drew his suspicion at least in part because he was walking too slowly.
So what do I tell my boys now? At what precise pace should a black man walk to avoid suspicion?
And can they ever stop walking away, or running away, and simply stand their ground?
Can they become righteously indignant without being fatally wounded?
Is there anyplace safe enough, or any cargo innocent enough, for a black man in this country?
Martin was where he was supposed to be — in a gated community — carrying candy and a canned drink.
The whole system failed Martin.
What prevents it from failing my children, or yours?
I feel that I must tell my boys that, but I can’t. It’s stuck in my throat.
It’s an impossibly heartbreaking conversation to have. So, I sit and watch in silence, and occasionally mouth the word, “breathe,” because I keep forgetting to.
George Zimmerman, killer of unarmed teen, Trayvon Martin, was allowed to take his gun home.
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
Monday, July 15, 2013
"A Violent Social Order"
Continuing on with commentary on the Trayvon Martin case, this comes from The Guardian:
Who screamed. Who was stronger. Who called whom what and when and why are all details to warm the heart of a cable news producer with 24 hours to fill. Strip them all away and the truth remains that Martin's heart would still be beating if Zimmerman had not chased him down and shot him.
There is no doubt about who the aggressor was here. It appears that the only reason the two interacted at all, physically or otherwise, is that Zimmerman believed it was his civic duty to apprehend an innocent teenager who caused suspicion by his existence alone.
Appeals for calm in the wake of such a verdict raise the question of what calm there can possibly be in a place where such a verdict is possible. Parents of black boys are not likely to feel calm. Partners of black men are not likely to feel calm. Children with black fathers are not likely to feel calm.
Those who now fear violent social disorder must ask themselves whose interests are served by a violent social order in which young black men can be thus slain and discarded.
But while the acquittal was shameful it was not a shock.
[skip]
[T]he first black president of the United States ventured an early comment, saying that if he had had a son “he would look like Trayvon”. In so saying, Barack Obama pinpointed the truth that a great many white Americans will see a young man up to no good before they see a president’s son.
For all the civil rights advances over half a century, personified by the black family now residing in the White House, racism remains pernicious and entrenched. [...]
[T]he verdict leaves the impression not just that it is acceptable for an individual in large parts of the US to take the law into his own hands, but that the life of a young black man is cheap.
This incendiary case from central Florida – electorally, a swing district of a swing state – shows how far, despite Mr Obama’s election, the US still fails to practise racial equality.
Capt. Fogg over at The Swash Zone has an excellect article on this tragic case. HERE.
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Sunday Night Poetry
Unjust
"I think one of the things
that most upsets me here
is the “well that's just the way
the law works” argument
or hearing that the verdict
was in line with the law.
It’s sort of a “that’s the way
the cookie crumbles” response;
it entirely ignores the policy
and justice problems
and implications at play here.
To be clear, like everyone else,
I’m not angry because I think
it’s going to bring Trayvon Martin
back to life. I’m angry because
there’s a justice system that somehow
says that the killing of an unarmed boy
by an armed civilian who defied
police orders and pursued him, got
in a fight, and then killed him when
he was probably losing that fight is ok.
Simply saying that the verdict was appropriate,
given the system, doesn’t make it
any less a travesty of justice. It’s like
saying that the selling of slaves
wasn’t unjust until it was illegal.
A Justice System that allows
this type of verdict is broken,
that’s why people are so angry
because that doesn’t seem to be changing.
Fine, for argument sake, I’ll concede
that this verdict was entirely in line
with the law. It doesn’t make it less wrong.
It was still wrong to sell slaves
before the Justice System decided
to make it illegal. It was still unjust
to deny women equal rights
before the Justice System decided
it wasn’t just anymore. It is still unjust
that this kid was killed, and saying
that the verdict was in line with the law
either ignores that purposefully, or
is only recognizing 1/10th of the problem."
—Brian Sims, State Representative, Pennsylvania House of Representatives
George Zimmerman, the killer of Treyvon Martin, found not guilty of killing Treyvon Martin
Andrew Cohen of The Atlantic:
"Of course the deadly meeting last year between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman had at its core a racial element. Of course its tragic result reminds us that the nation, in ways too many of our leaders refuse to acknowledge, is still riven by race. The story of Martin and Zimmerman is the story of crime and punishment in America, and of racial disparities in capital sentencing, and in marijuana prosecutions, and in countless other things. But it wasn't Judge Debra Nelson's job to conduct a seminar on race relations in 2013. It wasn't her job to help America bridge its racial divide. It was her job to give Zimmerman a fair trial. And she did. So the murder trial of George Zimmerman did not allow jurors to deliberate over the fairness of Florida's outlandishly broad self-defense laws. It did not allow them debate the virtues of the state's liberal gun laws or its evident tolerance for vigilantes (which we now politely call "neighborhood watch"). It did not permit them to delve into the racial profiling that Zimmerman may have engaged in or into the misconduct and mischief that Martin may have engaged in long before he took that fatal trip to the store for candy. These factors, these elements, part of the more complete picture of this tragedy, were off-limits to the ultimate decision-makers.
[snip]
What the verdict says, to the astonishment of tens of millions of us, is that you can go looking for trouble in Florida, with a gun and a great deal of racial bias, and you can find that trouble, and you can act upon that trouble in a way that leaves a young man dead, and none of it guarantees that you will be convicted of a crime. But this curious result says as much about Florida's judicial and legislative sensibilities as it does about Zimmerman's conduct that night. This verdict would not have occurred in every state. It might not even have occurred in any other state. But it occurred here, a tragic confluence that leaves a young man's untimely death unrequited under state law. Don't like it? Lobby to change Florida's laws."
[snip]
That's the story of this trial. That explains this result. That's why some will believe to their own dying day that George Zimmerman has just gotten away with murder. Maybe yes and maybe no. Technically speaking, the fact that Zimmerman now has been found not guilty under Florida law of the crimes of second-degree murder and manslaughter does not necessarily exonerate him in the world beyond the court. It does not mean that he is not culpable. This is and can never be a case where the defendant can proudly proclaim his innocence at some later date.
But today's verdict, the unanimous result of six women who worked through their longest day to deliver the word, does mean that after 18 tortuous months, this tragic story now can move on to whatever comes next. And what comes next, surely, is a wrongful death civil action for money damages brought against Zimmerman by the Martin family.
That means another case, and perhaps another trial, with evidentiary rules that are more relaxed than the ones we've just seen. And that means that a few years from now, after Martin v. Zimmerman is concluded, we'll likely know more about what happened that night than we do today. That's the good news. The bad news is that no matter how many times Zimmerman is hauled into court, we will never know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about what happened that terrible night."
Saturday, July 13, 2013
George Zimmerman, Killer of Treyvon Martin, found "not guilty"
The man who shot and killed an unarmed teenager was found NOT GUILTY by a jury of Sanford, Florida, citizens.
The man who shot an unarmed teen walks.
Sanford, Florida, justice?
What could we have expected from a city that has a long, long history of racial injustice?
"...some night very soon, if he so chooses, George Zimmerman can load his piece, tuck it into the back of his pants, climb into his SUV, and drive around Sanford, Florida looking for assholes and fucking punks who are walking through neighborhoods where he, George Zimmerman, defender of law and order, doesn't think they belong.
He can drive around Sanford, Florida and check out anyone who is dressed in such a manner as might frighten the average citizen who has been fed a daily diet of "Scary Black Kids" by their local news and by their favorite radio personalities, and who is dressed in such a manner as might seem inappropriate to their surroundings as determined by George Zimmerman, crimebuster.
He can drive around Sanford, Florida until he spots an asshole or a fucking punk and then he can get out of his SUV, his piece tucked into the back of his pants, and he can stalk the asshole or the fucking punk, the one who is in the wrong neighborhood, or who is dressed inappropriately, at least according to George Zimmerman, protector of peace.
If the asshole, or the fucking punk, turns around and objects to being stalked -- or, worse, if the asshole, or the fucking punk, decides physically to confront the person stalking him -- then George Zimmerman can whip out the piece from the back of his pants and shoot the asshole, or the fucking punk, dead right there on the spot.
This can happen tonight.
That is now possible.
Hunting licenses are now available and it's open season on assholes, fucking punks, and kids who wear hoodies at night in neighborhoods where they do not belong, at least according to George Zimmerman, defender of law and order, crimebuster, and protector of the peace, because that is what American society has told George Zimmerman, and all the rest of us, is the just outcome of what happened on one dark and rainy night in February of 2012..."
To paraphrase George Zimmerman, these thugs always get off.
Gullibility, Biases, and Hatreds. Oh My!
A few days ago the rightwing blogs were ablaze with allegations about the Department of Justice that they found at Judicial Watch.
The sheeple read these posts, filled their comment sections with knee-jerk blather about President Kenyan Commie Satan, nodded their heads and then went back to chewing their cud, compliments of FAUX NOOZ and World Nut Daily.
But it turns out they were wrong and were only too willing to believe the worst--and any lie that confirms their gullibility, biases, and hatreds:
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton defended his organization’s claim that the Department of Justice “actively worked to foment unrest” during the fiery pro-Trayvon Martin protests of 2012, speaking both with Fox News and TheBlaze on Thursday. In the interviews, he adamantly disagreed that the proof put forward is not conclusive.
Speaking on Fox, he said: “By their own admission, [the Department of Justice] went down to organize the protests…They would show up at these meetings with DOJ jackets and hats on looking more like stormtroopers than facilitators and peacekeepers.”
“The idea that the Department of Justice was a mediating force here is false,” he continued. “They were promoting the protests against Zimmerman.”
Using documents obtained by a number of Freedom of Information Act requests, Judicial Watch has claimed a little-known division of the Department of Justice called the Community Relations Service facilitated the explosive pro-Trayvon Martin protests, spending thousands “to train protestors throughout Florida.”
But as TheBlaze has pointed out, the new information that Judicial Watch presented (part of the story is from April 2012) doesn’t seem to explicitly support those allegations. For example, when the CRS says it spent $1,142.84 to “work” the protests, it could mean that the CRS was supporting the protesters, but could also mean they were there to keep the peace, as defined in their stated mission, and as the DOJ told TheBlaze.
Additionally, the charge that the DOJ has admitted to “organizing” the protests appears to be a stretch. They admit to attending the rallies in an effort to keep the peace, in addition to “providing technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies.”
At one point, TheBlaze asked Fitton over the phone about a complaint by the DOJ that the organization is inaccurately quoting the documents it received.
The widely-read Judicial Watch press release says the CRS provided “support for protest deployment,” but the CRS says the documents it provided say “interregional support.” The distinction appears to indicate support for fellow CRS members, instead of support for the protesters.
Fitton told TheBlaze “We didn’t change anything.” But comparing the press release with the raw documents on his website, there does appear to be a discrepancy.
SOURCE
Thursday, July 11, 2013
The Dystopian GOP-run State of North Carolina
North Carolina is a perfect example of what the TeaPublicans would do to this country should they grab all the levers of power through any of the means they can contrive.
Here is what has happened to a state that was once a beacon of far sightedness after those who value poor education, intolerance, and tightfistedness took control:
From the lead editorial in yesterday's NYTimes:
After the election of Republican Governor Pat McCrory in January, the GOP took control of both the executive and legislative branches of North Carolina's government and began their tyranny of the majority:
* North Carolina Republicans ended unemployment benefits for 70,000 residents, and another 100,000 will lose their checks in a few months;
* Those who are still receiving benefits will see them cut by a third;
* The length of time for those who need benefits will be slashed from 26 weeks to 12, and NC politicians are doing this at a time when their unemployment rate is the FIFTH HIGHEST in the country.
* NC has severely cut back on spending for public schools; NC spends less now on public schools than it did in 2007, and it ranks 46 in per-capita education dollars. In math and science scores, North Carolina ranked 36 out of the 50 states.
* 10,000 pre-kindergarten slots will be eliminated;
* Services to disabled children are being cut;
* North Carolina repealed the Racial Justice Act, a law that gave death-row inmates a chance to prove their innocence.
* North Carolina Republican controlled government refused to expand Medicaid;
* North Carolina Republican controlled government wants to give billionaires and millionaires tax cuts;
* North Carolina Republican controlled government wants to increase the regressive sales tax;
* To make up for any revenues lost by eliminating the state income tax, North Carolina Republicans propose taxing groceries; [h/t Ducky's Here, see comment section.]
* North Carolina Republican controlled government passed a bill that would close most of the state's abortion clinics;
* North Carolina is rushing to pass voted ID laws that would cut back on early voting and Sunday voting, something that would help working class citizens;
* North Carolina proposes a move to eliminate tax deductions for dependents if students vote at colleges instead of their hometowns--a blatant, stomach-turning effort to reduce Democratic voting strength in college towns in NC.
h/t New York Times editorial
That's just one GOP-run state determined to do its best to make people whose lives are difficult at this time, more miserable. It's a good bet that a majority of the pols in this state, who claim they're on the side of protecting "innocent life," cynically ignore the fact that eliminating and/or cutting back benefits to those who are jobless will impact the most vulnerable citizens: the poor, the elderly, the sick, the disabled, and children.
IMO, those who seek to afflict the afflicted and comfort the comfortable are monsters. The people who claim they are for protecting "innocent life" are the same who voted to cut back on education, health care, a safety net for the unemployed, and programs for disabled children. Monstrous.
This uniquely Republican vision is one of dystopia for the entire country.
Just look at what they're doing to the states where they are in charge of government.
This is how the GOP looks at people who need food stamps:
Extremely well-fed Rush Limbaugh says taking babies and children off food stamps would be a great way of solving America's child obesity problem! And hey! Dumpster diving is good exercise as well! Har. Har. Har. Extremely well-fed Rush! Making fun of people who are hungry is great sport, innit? Bet your millions of listeners think you are a very large riot!
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
They're Not the Solution; They're The Problem
When the IRS shytenews hit the fan, hundreds of rabid rightwing bloggers and idiot pundits tripped and fell over themselves trying to outdo each other's hysteria by calling President Obama "Nixonian," "corrupt," and then, at the top of their squealing, puny little lungs, called for President Obama to be IMPEACHED!
Where did that IRS scandal end up?
On the ever-growing trash heap of rightwing fanatical nincompoopery.
I can't count how many wingers promised that the truth would come out and that, like Watergate, the evidence would point right up to the executive branch and to President Obama himself as the Nixonian culprit who orchestrated and commanded the IRS to illegally harass the poor put-upon Tea Baggers and their god-given right to organize fake non-profit entities.
Turns out their partisan frenzy over the IRS non-scandal was a big, fat failure. Turns out that President Obama had NOTHING to do with the machinations of the local IRS bumblers, and that Darryl Issa is a liar, who was exposed as nothing more than a damnable partisan hack.
Do you remember the rightwing blogs that screamed bloody TREASON! over this bloated story coming forward and admitting that they were duped and too stupid to wait and see what the, y'know, EVIDENCE would reveal?
No. Neither do I.
But that is the political world we live in today. A George Zimmerman world where you make assumptions about people you don't understand and people you hate because of your bloated bigotry and then destroy the object of your hatred.
This is why I say these crazies are a problem. They think with their hatreds, not their reason. And we can't solve our problems with their hatreds.
****************************
From the Huffington Post:
Remember the IRS scandal? How the tax agency improperly singled out Tea Party groups for extra scrutiny in a nefarious political vendetta against conservatives because the agency is either inherently liberal or was acting on orders from the Democratic President?
Well, as it turns out, that whole scandal is entirely bogus. False. A fiction. The entire notion that the agency singled out groups with “Tea Party” in their name in simply wrong, we learn today, thanks to new documents revealed by the Associated Press.
The documents, and confirmation from officials, show the IRS targeted groups with other keywords in their names, including “Progressive” and “Occupy.” “There was a wide-ranging set of categories and cases that spanned a broad spectrum” on the lists, newly appointed IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel said on a conference call with reporters.
Darrell Issa Furious After Democrat Releases IRS Transcript That Blows Up His Investigation
Darrell Issa's McCarthyist Tactics Might Just Save Obama From the IRS ScandalBy cherry-picking evidence, overstating his case, and violating the principle of presumed innocence, the GOP rep only weakens himself.
THE VANISHING I.R.S. SCANDAL
Darrell Issa backtracks on IRS scandal
"The news that progressive groups were also targeted by the IRS should, in theory at least, prompt reporters to press leading Republicans on a simple question: Do you still stand by your insinuations that the White House or Obama campaign were somehow behind the politically motivated targeting of conservatives?
In a key moment, Rep. Darrell Issa — the chair of the Oversight Committee and a lead investigator into the IRS scandal — is now claiming he never, ever said the White House or the Obama campaign was behind the targeting. In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash, he said this: “I’ve never said it came out of the office of the President or his campaign. What I’ve said is, it comes out of Washington.”
And yet, later in the very same interview, Issa said this: “For years, the president bashed the Tea Party groups. He was very public against these groups. And on his behalf — perhaps not on his request — on his behalf, the IRS executed a delaying tactic against the very groups that he talked about.”
This is utter gibberish, and reporters (kudos to Bash for doing a great job here) need to hold Issa accountable for it.
Indeed, the juxtaposition of the two statements neatly captures the increasingly untenable nature of Issa’s stance. He claims the IRS targeting was done “perhaps” not on the president’s request — seemingly dangling that out there as a possibility – right after flatly stating he has never said the targeting was directed by the White House or the president’s campaign."
Monday, July 8, 2013
All In The Family
Governor Rick "Ooops" Perry of Texas is working diligently these days to make sure girls and women will find it more and more difficult, if not almost impossible, to obtain an abortion, a legal medical procedure:
"Texas lawmakers will soon weigh in on one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, and at the heart of the proposal is banning abortions after 20 weeks.
But the other aspects of the bill — from requiring operating rooms and hallways at clinics to be larger to making sure an abortion facility is within 30 miles of a hospital — could have the most dramatic impact, potentially forcing most abortion clinics in the state to shut their doors.
“Since it’s not possible to eliminate Roe v. Wade right now, the goal is to limit the number of abortions in Texas,” said Mark P. Jones, a political science professor at Rice University in Houston. “They are focusing on fetal pain, but the much more consequential part of the legislation is that abortion clinics” will close.
This week, lawmakers will continue work on the measure during the second special session called by Gov. Rick Perry. The first special session ended shortly after a more than 11-hour filibuster by Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth.
Hanging in the balance are three dozen licensed health centers in Texas where women may get abortions, as well as other medical services such as family planning and screenings for cancer and sexually transmitted diseases."
All those anti-abortion folks out there can be proud of the "Ooops" Governor's brave and holy campaign to make girls and women conform to his and other people's ideas of what they should do when they become pregnant by allowing big government into the most private and personal part of their lives. Afterall he's only trying to protect innocent human life.
(Question: Does anyone wonder how many of the 500 people put to death in Texas were innocent? I'm guessing more than a few. But that's another issue that Governor Protector of Innocent Human Life will ignore.)
It's curious, though, to learn that should most of the clinics close down where girls and women can obtain a safe and legal abortion, girls and women will still be able to be treated at only five clinics that conform to SB/5 and SB/1:
"While it is truly hard to keep up with the sheer amount of graft, giveaways, turning of blind eyes, and special favors that has emanated from Rick Perry’s 13 years in the Governor’s mansion, when following the tale of SB5/SB1 it is hard to miss the crucial results of one of the provisions:
#SB5 requires every abortion provider to be licensed as an ambulatory surgery center. This requirement will costs providers about $1 million and will have to comply with 117 pages of regulation. It is expected that all but five clinics would not be able to afford to stay open because they simply cannot afford to comply with these regulations.
Wait, anambulatory surgery center, that’s just the religious right chipping away at abortion around the edges, right? No one could possibly stand to gain from this provision, could they?
Thank youHouston Chronicle for following the money:
If the bill passes, only five Texas abortion clinics would remain open—those that are already equipped as ambulatory surgical centers, advocates say. But a question remains: would the 420 other ambulatory surgical centers that exist in Texas begin performing the operation?
Abortion rights advocates predict that the demand for the procedure won’t disappear with passage of the law. One company that will be faced with that decision is United Surgical Partners International, based in Addison, TX. Their vice-president of government affairs is Milla Perry Jones, Gov. Rick Perry’s sister. She is also on the board of the Texas Ambulatory Surgical Center Society.
So if this bill passes, it provides Rick Perry’s sister’s company an opportunity to move into a new field, one where poor girls and women can be charged an exorbitant rate for a desperate procedure.
Expect abortions in Texas to continue, just at 2-3 times the previous going rates." --h/t dailykos
Keeping the business side of abortion and the $$$ to be gained from it all in the family while making people's lives more difficult than ever: a conservative value.
"Texas lawmakers will soon weigh in on one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, and at the heart of the proposal is banning abortions after 20 weeks.
But the other aspects of the bill — from requiring operating rooms and hallways at clinics to be larger to making sure an abortion facility is within 30 miles of a hospital — could have the most dramatic impact, potentially forcing most abortion clinics in the state to shut their doors.
“Since it’s not possible to eliminate Roe v. Wade right now, the goal is to limit the number of abortions in Texas,” said Mark P. Jones, a political science professor at Rice University in Houston. “They are focusing on fetal pain, but the much more consequential part of the legislation is that abortion clinics” will close.
This week, lawmakers will continue work on the measure during the second special session called by Gov. Rick Perry. The first special session ended shortly after a more than 11-hour filibuster by Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth.
Hanging in the balance are three dozen licensed health centers in Texas where women may get abortions, as well as other medical services such as family planning and screenings for cancer and sexually transmitted diseases."
All those anti-abortion folks out there can be proud of the "Ooops" Governor's brave and holy campaign to make girls and women conform to his and other people's ideas of what they should do when they become pregnant by allowing big government into the most private and personal part of their lives. Afterall he's only trying to protect innocent human life.
(Question: Does anyone wonder how many of the 500 people put to death in Texas were innocent? I'm guessing more than a few. But that's another issue that Governor Protector of Innocent Human Life will ignore.)
It's curious, though, to learn that should most of the clinics close down where girls and women can obtain a safe and legal abortion, girls and women will still be able to be treated at only five clinics that conform to SB/5 and SB/1:
"While it is truly hard to keep up with the sheer amount of graft, giveaways, turning of blind eyes, and special favors that has emanated from Rick Perry’s 13 years in the Governor’s mansion, when following the tale of SB5/SB1 it is hard to miss the crucial results of one of the provisions:
#SB5 requires every abortion provider to be licensed as an ambulatory surgery center. This requirement will costs providers about $1 million and will have to comply with 117 pages of regulation. It is expected that all but five clinics would not be able to afford to stay open because they simply cannot afford to comply with these regulations.
Wait, anambulatory surgery center, that’s just the religious right chipping away at abortion around the edges, right? No one could possibly stand to gain from this provision, could they?
Thank youHouston Chronicle for following the money:
If the bill passes, only five Texas abortion clinics would remain open—those that are already equipped as ambulatory surgical centers, advocates say. But a question remains: would the 420 other ambulatory surgical centers that exist in Texas begin performing the operation?
Abortion rights advocates predict that the demand for the procedure won’t disappear with passage of the law. One company that will be faced with that decision is United Surgical Partners International, based in Addison, TX. Their vice-president of government affairs is Milla Perry Jones, Gov. Rick Perry’s sister. She is also on the board of the Texas Ambulatory Surgical Center Society.
So if this bill passes, it provides Rick Perry’s sister’s company an opportunity to move into a new field, one where poor girls and women can be charged an exorbitant rate for a desperate procedure.
Expect abortions in Texas to continue, just at 2-3 times the previous going rates." --h/t dailykos
Keeping the business side of abortion and the $$$ to be gained from it all in the family while making people's lives more difficult than ever: a conservative value.
Sunday, July 7, 2013
Sunday Poetry: Cosmic Comics
Cosmic Comics
The moon said dream
The stars spun themselves sick
The planets refused to be named
The comets grew some ice balls
The muon micro-secondly lapped his milk
The asteroid played a rock guitar
The red giant noshed on a white dwarf
The exoplanet was, like, far out
The quark could not be pinned down
The globular star clusters got fat
The anti-matter cried Uncle!
The sun spotted his dashiki
The nebula rode a horse like crazy
The cosmic ray stuck his nose in everything
The meteor ironed her blouse
The white noise considered dark matter
The Aurora bored Alice
The nutrinos passed through the toll gate
The Magellanic Cloud went south
The super nova blew his nose
The neutron star careened out of control
The black hole ate my homework
The singularity bragged she was edgy
The Andromeda strained the jelly
The Milky Way left the lights on
And Orion belted out his songs.
--S.K.
Saturday, July 6, 2013
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
The Fourth of July
AMERICAN TUNE
(words by Paul Simon music by JS Bach)
Many's the time I've been mistaken,
And many times confused
And I've often felt forsaken,
And certainly misused.
But it's all right, it's all right,
I'm just weary to my bones
Still, you don't expect to be
Bright and Bon Vivant
So far away from home,
So far away from home.
I don't know a soul who's not been battered
Don't have a friend who feels at ease
Don't know a dream that's not been shattered
Or driven to its knees.
But it's all right, all right,
We've lived so well so long
Still, when I think of the road we're traveling on,
I wonder what went wrong,
I can't help it I wonder what went wrong.
And I dreamed I was flying.
I dreamed my soul rose unexpectedly,
And looking back down on me,
Smiled reassuringly,
And I dreamed I was dying.
And far above, my eyes could clearly see
The Statue of Liberty,
Drifting away to sea
And I dreamed I was flying.
We come on a ship we call the Mayflower,
We come on a ship that sailed the moon
We come at the age's most uncertain hour
And sing the American tune
But it's all right, it's all right
You can't be forever blessed
Still, tomorrow's gonna be another working day
And I'm trying to get some rest,
That's all, I'm trying to get some rest.
Monday, July 1, 2013
Deen and Baldwin
Sounds like a legal team for apples, doesn't it?
Both of these people are in the news for racial and homophobic slurs. One of the slurs coming from a history of oppression and murder of minorities; the other from a history of oppression and murder of minorities.
Both are reprehensible; both are a reminder of what I called, in another post, the bloated corpse of bigotry that lurks in the murky depths of the American soul.
I have no sympathy for either of these people. Not for Deen and her excuses and apologies, and not for Baldwin and his excuses and apologies.
But I'm glad people are having a discussion over why this country can't let go of its miserable attitudes toward minorities. Yes, I understand other countries do it too.
But, wait.
How many times have I heard people tell me that America is EXCEPTIONAL! Wouldn't an exceptional country have learned by now that demeaning minorities and treating them as second-class citizens is not acceptable, and that we shouldn't have to always fight discrimination at the highest courts in the land?
It's all very discouraging, because I lived through the Civil Rights Era and I've lived through the Marriage Equality Era, and that gave me so much to hope for.
With the gutting of the Voting Rights Act and the backlash from certain political and religious sectors in this country on giving minorities, gay and lesbians, the right to marry whom they choose, I'm not so sure that hope was well placed.
What will happen going forward? I don't know.
Read these two opinions on these controversies:
THE BANALITY OF BUTTER
MORE ON THE PAULA DEEN SCANDAL
PRESS CHARGES AGAINST ALEC BALDWIN
Both of these people are in the news for racial and homophobic slurs. One of the slurs coming from a history of oppression and murder of minorities; the other from a history of oppression and murder of minorities.
Both are reprehensible; both are a reminder of what I called, in another post, the bloated corpse of bigotry that lurks in the murky depths of the American soul.
I have no sympathy for either of these people. Not for Deen and her excuses and apologies, and not for Baldwin and his excuses and apologies.
But I'm glad people are having a discussion over why this country can't let go of its miserable attitudes toward minorities. Yes, I understand other countries do it too.
But, wait.
How many times have I heard people tell me that America is EXCEPTIONAL! Wouldn't an exceptional country have learned by now that demeaning minorities and treating them as second-class citizens is not acceptable, and that we shouldn't have to always fight discrimination at the highest courts in the land?
It's all very discouraging, because I lived through the Civil Rights Era and I've lived through the Marriage Equality Era, and that gave me so much to hope for.
With the gutting of the Voting Rights Act and the backlash from certain political and religious sectors in this country on giving minorities, gay and lesbians, the right to marry whom they choose, I'm not so sure that hope was well placed.
What will happen going forward? I don't know.
Read these two opinions on these controversies:
THE BANALITY OF BUTTER
MORE ON THE PAULA DEEN SCANDAL
PRESS CHARGES AGAINST ALEC BALDWIN
Sunday, June 30, 2013
The Stupidest Man on the Internet, Jim Hoft...
...gets it WRONG AGAIN! And his thousands of little conservabots continue to pass along his bullpuckey.
From Jim Hoft, the GatewayIdiot Pundit
"Just in case you want more Obama in your life… AT&T is loading iPhones with emergency alerts from Barack Obama… That you can’t switch off.
Engadget reported: AT&T has begun rolling out Wireless Emergency Alerts updates for iPhone 4S and 5, so you won’t be the last folks to know if the entire northern hemisphere is about to be covered in ice à la Day After Tomorrow. You’ll receive a notification from the carrier when your update is ready, but only if you’re using iOS 6.1 or higher.
Once installed, AMBER and Emergency alerts are automatically sent to your phone unless you switch them off via Settings. However, should you be tired of Obama, just know that there’s no way to switch off Presidential alerts. So now Barack can track your calls and send you messages, too."
"Seems old Dim Jim forgets that the WARN Act (passed in 2006) is what allows AT&T and the other wireless providers to send region-specific notifications for AMBER alerts, Sever Weather alerts, and other alerts that maybe you might want to know about to protect yourself.
Dim Jim also fails to realize that all recent weather radios also support SAME notifications."
It's not for nothing that Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit is known as the Stupidest Man on the Internet!
h/t LGF
From Jim Hoft, the Gateway
"Just in case you want more Obama in your life… AT&T is loading iPhones with emergency alerts from Barack Obama… That you can’t switch off.
Engadget reported: AT&T has begun rolling out Wireless Emergency Alerts updates for iPhone 4S and 5, so you won’t be the last folks to know if the entire northern hemisphere is about to be covered in ice à la Day After Tomorrow. You’ll receive a notification from the carrier when your update is ready, but only if you’re using iOS 6.1 or higher.
Once installed, AMBER and Emergency alerts are automatically sent to your phone unless you switch them off via Settings. However, should you be tired of Obama, just know that there’s no way to switch off Presidential alerts. So now Barack can track your calls and send you messages, too."
"Seems old Dim Jim forgets that the WARN Act (passed in 2006) is what allows AT&T and the other wireless providers to send region-specific notifications for AMBER alerts, Sever Weather alerts, and other alerts that maybe you might want to know about to protect yourself.
Dim Jim also fails to realize that all recent weather radios also support SAME notifications."
It's not for nothing that Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit is known as the Stupidest Man on the Internet!
h/t LGF
Saturday, June 29, 2013
I Salute Texas State Senator, Wendy Davis
"Give a girl the right shoes, and she can conquer the world." --Marilyn Monroe
Friday, June 28, 2013
The Stupids of the Republican Party
There is so much awful in the report below on GOP state representative Daryl Metcalfe, that it is difficult to decide which part of it is the most shocking. How do idiots like Pennsylvania Republican State Representative Daryl Metcalfe get elected? Apparently the folks in his district are so ignorant of the US Constitution that they elected a representative who reflects their stupidity on our First Amendment rights.
This story will just add to the volume of evidence that is piling up and demonstrating how irrelevant the GOP has become on both the state and federal level.
GOP Rep. Metcalfe is under the impression that this country has become a theocracy and that people like him will prevail. He needs a good strong cup of reality, and so do the people who voted for this anti-American religious zealot.
"As is the case in many states, many in Pennsylvania are considering how to proceed in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling striking down the Defense of Marriage Act, and on Wednesday, state Rep. Brian Sims (D) of Philadelphia rose to address the issue with his legislative colleagues. But Sims, the first openly gay member elected to the state House, was not allowed to deliver his remarks -- one of his colleagues raised a procedural objection to block him from speaking.
And why is that?
Republican State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, who prevented Sims from addressing the chamber on DOMA, explained himself this way: "I did not believe that as a member of that body that I should allow someone to make comments such as he was preparing to make that ultimately were just open rebellion against what the word of God has said, what God has said, and just open rebellion against God's law,"
Metcalfe had told WHYY of Philadelphia.
Maybe now would be a good time to note that the separation of church and state still exists; American policymakers' ability to discuss Supreme Court rulings should not be based on one person's interpretation of "God's law"; and theocracies, as a rule, are not a good idea.
Pressed for further explanation by the Associated Press, Metcalfe didn't back down, adding, "For me to allow him to say things that I believe are open rebellion against God are for me to participate in his open rebellion. There's no free speech on the floor."
Do you ever get the feeling some folks just aren't cut out for public service?
Let's also note that two of Sims' Democratic colleagues rose to defend him, and they were blocked from speaking, too.
Update: Metcalfe is the same state lawmaker who argued in 2009 that any U.S. military veteran who supports combating climate change "is a traitor."
In an email Metcalfe wrote at the time, he added, 'Remember Benedict Arnold before giving credibility to a veteran who uses their service as a means to promote a leftist agenda. Drill Baby Drill!!!' " h/t The Maddow Blog
And then we have this nut who wants to reinstate criminal penalties for what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedrooms:
From The Inquisitor:
"Virginia AG, Ken Cuccinelli’s ideas on sex itself are outdated and patronizing. This becomes even more apparent when we see what he has asked of the Supreme Court:
Cuccinelli wants the court to reconsider a March 2013 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit striking down the state’s “crimes against nature” statute. The 4th Circuit ruled that the law did not pass muster in light of the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision, which struck down the latter state’s anti-sodomy law as an unconstitutional criminalization of Americans’ sexual conduct. The Virginia law, however, remained on the books. Cuccinelli wants that law reinstated because he thinks that it is “an important tool that prosecutors use to put child molesters in jail.” Pardon me but isn’t there already a Virginia law against child molestation? It shouldn’t matter what a pedophile does: the fact that s/he is molesting a child in the first place is surely enough to prosecute. Why ask for an additional law that will impact those who aren’t pedophiles when the law already deals with the issue? "
Darwin save us from such knuckleheads!
This story will just add to the volume of evidence that is piling up and demonstrating how irrelevant the GOP has become on both the state and federal level.
GOP Rep. Metcalfe is under the impression that this country has become a theocracy and that people like him will prevail. He needs a good strong cup of reality, and so do the people who voted for this anti-American religious zealot.
"As is the case in many states, many in Pennsylvania are considering how to proceed in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling striking down the Defense of Marriage Act, and on Wednesday, state Rep. Brian Sims (D) of Philadelphia rose to address the issue with his legislative colleagues. But Sims, the first openly gay member elected to the state House, was not allowed to deliver his remarks -- one of his colleagues raised a procedural objection to block him from speaking.
And why is that?
Republican State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, who prevented Sims from addressing the chamber on DOMA, explained himself this way: "I did not believe that as a member of that body that I should allow someone to make comments such as he was preparing to make that ultimately were just open rebellion against what the word of God has said, what God has said, and just open rebellion against God's law,"
Metcalfe had told WHYY of Philadelphia.
Maybe now would be a good time to note that the separation of church and state still exists; American policymakers' ability to discuss Supreme Court rulings should not be based on one person's interpretation of "God's law"; and theocracies, as a rule, are not a good idea.
Pressed for further explanation by the Associated Press, Metcalfe didn't back down, adding, "For me to allow him to say things that I believe are open rebellion against God are for me to participate in his open rebellion. There's no free speech on the floor."
Do you ever get the feeling some folks just aren't cut out for public service?
Let's also note that two of Sims' Democratic colleagues rose to defend him, and they were blocked from speaking, too.
Update: Metcalfe is the same state lawmaker who argued in 2009 that any U.S. military veteran who supports combating climate change "is a traitor."
In an email Metcalfe wrote at the time, he added, 'Remember Benedict Arnold before giving credibility to a veteran who uses their service as a means to promote a leftist agenda. Drill Baby Drill!!!' " h/t The Maddow Blog
And then we have this nut who wants to reinstate criminal penalties for what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedrooms:
From The Inquisitor:
"Virginia AG, Ken Cuccinelli’s ideas on sex itself are outdated and patronizing. This becomes even more apparent when we see what he has asked of the Supreme Court:
Cuccinelli wants the court to reconsider a March 2013 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit striking down the state’s “crimes against nature” statute. The 4th Circuit ruled that the law did not pass muster in light of the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision, which struck down the latter state’s anti-sodomy law as an unconstitutional criminalization of Americans’ sexual conduct. The Virginia law, however, remained on the books. Cuccinelli wants that law reinstated because he thinks that it is “an important tool that prosecutors use to put child molesters in jail.” Pardon me but isn’t there already a Virginia law against child molestation? It shouldn’t matter what a pedophile does: the fact that s/he is molesting a child in the first place is surely enough to prosecute. Why ask for an additional law that will impact those who aren’t pedophiles when the law already deals with the issue? "
Darwin save us from such knuckleheads!
Thursday, June 27, 2013
THAT DIDN'T TAKE LONG!
Six states, all of them southern and all with a past history of institutional racism against African-Americans, among others, are moving forward with plans to restrict and make difficult the ability of minorities and the poor to vote. Among those states are Mississippi and Alabama, two southern states with the worst historical records on racial issues. The federal government had a vested interest to stay involved with how these traditionally racist states treated their minorities. With the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, these states can do whatever they wish to make voting more difficult for whomever they please.
"...six states have already started moving on restrictions, many of which have adverse effects on the abilities of minorities, young people, and the poor to exercise their right to vote:
Texas: The Lone Star State saw its strict voter ID law and redistricting plan blocked by the DOJ and federal courts last year. Just two hours after Tuesday’s decision came down, the state’s attorney general issued a statement suggesting both laws may go into effect immediately. On Wednesday, Gov. Rick Perry (R) signed slightly modified congressional maps into law, apparently deciding not to veto them and reinstate the more blatantly discriminatory maps blocked by the court. These new maps will not be screened by the DOJ. And Thursday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated two federal court decisions that had relied upon the VRA in blocking the voter ID law and redistricting plan.
Mississippi: The state legislature approved a voter ID scheme in 2012, but it has not received DOJ clearance. Despite the restrictions, Mississippi’s secretary of state said Tuesday they would proceed with implementing the voter ID law and that “We’re not the same old Mississippi that our fathers’ fathers were.“
Alabama: In 2011, the state passed a law requiring photo ID to vote, but never cleared it with the DOJ. Both the attorney general and the secretary of state said Tuesday they believed their plans could now be implemented in time for the 2014 elections.
Arkansas: In April, the Arkansas legislature overrode Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe’s veto to pass their voter ID legislation. With preclearance out of the way, the state law can now be implemented without DOJ review.
South Carolina: The Palmetto State passed a similar voter ID law in 2012, but DOJ at least succeeded in delaying its implementation. South Carolina’s attorney general issued a statement following the decision, lauding the Court for allowing the preclearance states to “to implement reasonable election reforms, such as voter ID laws similar to South Carolina’s.”
Virginia: Unlike several of the other states, Virginia’s voter ID plan was not scheduled to be implemented until July 2014 anyway. But unless Congress replaces the preclearance formula before then, Virginia will also likely be able to move forward with its plan.
From the Miami Herald on the gutting of the VRA:
"Of this there should be no doubt: The impact of the ruling will be to weaken the rights of voters at a time when politically driven efforts to suppress voter registration and turnout have increased in GOP-leaning states all across the country.
Voter ID laws, restrictions on early voting (which led to embarrassingly long lines in Florida last year), extreme gerrymandering of congressional districts — all these tactics and more have become more evident in recent elections. The court’s ruling means there’s no cop on the beat to prevent these malicious actions, encouraging those intent on curtailing voting rights to do as they please."
"...six states have already started moving on restrictions, many of which have adverse effects on the abilities of minorities, young people, and the poor to exercise their right to vote:
Texas: The Lone Star State saw its strict voter ID law and redistricting plan blocked by the DOJ and federal courts last year. Just two hours after Tuesday’s decision came down, the state’s attorney general issued a statement suggesting both laws may go into effect immediately. On Wednesday, Gov. Rick Perry (R) signed slightly modified congressional maps into law, apparently deciding not to veto them and reinstate the more blatantly discriminatory maps blocked by the court. These new maps will not be screened by the DOJ. And Thursday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated two federal court decisions that had relied upon the VRA in blocking the voter ID law and redistricting plan.
Mississippi: The state legislature approved a voter ID scheme in 2012, but it has not received DOJ clearance. Despite the restrictions, Mississippi’s secretary of state said Tuesday they would proceed with implementing the voter ID law and that “We’re not the same old Mississippi that our fathers’ fathers were.“
Alabama: In 2011, the state passed a law requiring photo ID to vote, but never cleared it with the DOJ. Both the attorney general and the secretary of state said Tuesday they believed their plans could now be implemented in time for the 2014 elections.
Arkansas: In April, the Arkansas legislature overrode Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe’s veto to pass their voter ID legislation. With preclearance out of the way, the state law can now be implemented without DOJ review.
South Carolina: The Palmetto State passed a similar voter ID law in 2012, but DOJ at least succeeded in delaying its implementation. South Carolina’s attorney general issued a statement following the decision, lauding the Court for allowing the preclearance states to “to implement reasonable election reforms, such as voter ID laws similar to South Carolina’s.”
Virginia: Unlike several of the other states, Virginia’s voter ID plan was not scheduled to be implemented until July 2014 anyway. But unless Congress replaces the preclearance formula before then, Virginia will also likely be able to move forward with its plan.
From the Miami Herald on the gutting of the VRA:
"Of this there should be no doubt: The impact of the ruling will be to weaken the rights of voters at a time when politically driven efforts to suppress voter registration and turnout have increased in GOP-leaning states all across the country.
Voter ID laws, restrictions on early voting (which led to embarrassingly long lines in Florida last year), extreme gerrymandering of congressional districts — all these tactics and more have become more evident in recent elections. The court’s ruling means there’s no cop on the beat to prevent these malicious actions, encouraging those intent on curtailing voting rights to do as they please."
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
A Minestra of News
UPDATE BELOW
After several days in the great state of Vermont visiting with wonderful friends and enjoying a Joan Baez concert in Rutland, I've come home to a minestra of news. Some good, very good, and the one on voting rights, very awful.
First, the awful, the gutting of the Voting Rights Act:
The SCOTUS majority must actually believe that the worst of the southern states would have brought about the changes in voting rights for minorities without the federal government stepping in. And they must also believe that those reddest of red states won't set in place impediments to voting for minorities who traditionally vote for the Democratic Party in those states.
Why would minorities feel confident about their ability to vote, when it took federal intervention to right those awful wrongs that were endemic in those reddest of red states?
People aren't racist anymore, you say? Really. Where did all those racist jokes and cartoons and jibes at the first bi-racial president about his being "lazy" or not a real American come from? HINT: Not from local Democratic Party politicians in liberal states. Those ideas and suspicions about Mr. Obama and his "angry" and "uppity" wife [often depicted as a primate] came from pols associated with traditionally conservative states and the Republican Party.
And to my conservative friends who believe there is no need to oversee how individual states develop their voting requirements, please read THIS. It is NOT a matter of a simple ID, which can be easily procured. Texas is going to make it more difficult for minorities to vote. And now they can do so without any oversight by the feds.
I believe there is still a strong undercurrent of racism in this country, and the election of Mr. Obama has caused it, like a bloated corpse, to rise from the murky depths of this nation's soul to remind us all of what we had hoped was gone forever.
The Return of Jim Crow
The Good and the Very Good:
5-4 Vote Extends Federal Benefits to Same-Sex Spouses
The Supreme Court issued a pair of opinions expanding gay rights, ruling unconstitutional a law denying federal benefits to married same-sex couples and effectively permitting gay marriage in California.
The opinion, delivered by Justice Anthony Kennedy:
"The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity...By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment."
UPDATE:
"GOP demanding Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage
(Yahoo News) Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kansas, and other conservative members of Congress say they will attempt to introduce in the coming days a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. Following the Supreme Court's ruling deeming the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional, several Republicans expressed their disappointment with the decision and vowed to take action. Apparently, this means an amendment to the Constitution."
Senator Rand Paul (Crackpot, KY) tried to backpedal on his idiotic statement on same-sex marriage. What he and other loonies on this subject apparently haven't the brains to understand is that CONSENTING ADULTS marrying each other will not automatically confer legality to adults marrying non-consenting children and animals. A German Shepherd dog or a box turtle cannot say "yes" to having sex with a human being, neither can a child give his or her "consent" to an adult who wants to have sex with an underage human being.
Conservatives and Libertarians apparently have a difficult time in understanding this simple fact, therefore, they make jackasses of themselves when they state that allowing consenting adults to marry each other will lead to beastiality and pederasty.
After several days in the great state of Vermont visiting with wonderful friends and enjoying a Joan Baez concert in Rutland, I've come home to a minestra of news. Some good, very good, and the one on voting rights, very awful.
First, the awful, the gutting of the Voting Rights Act:
The SCOTUS majority must actually believe that the worst of the southern states would have brought about the changes in voting rights for minorities without the federal government stepping in. And they must also believe that those reddest of red states won't set in place impediments to voting for minorities who traditionally vote for the Democratic Party in those states.
Why would minorities feel confident about their ability to vote, when it took federal intervention to right those awful wrongs that were endemic in those reddest of red states?
People aren't racist anymore, you say? Really. Where did all those racist jokes and cartoons and jibes at the first bi-racial president about his being "lazy" or not a real American come from? HINT: Not from local Democratic Party politicians in liberal states. Those ideas and suspicions about Mr. Obama and his "angry" and "uppity" wife [often depicted as a primate] came from pols associated with traditionally conservative states and the Republican Party.
And to my conservative friends who believe there is no need to oversee how individual states develop their voting requirements, please read THIS. It is NOT a matter of a simple ID, which can be easily procured. Texas is going to make it more difficult for minorities to vote. And now they can do so without any oversight by the feds.
I believe there is still a strong undercurrent of racism in this country, and the election of Mr. Obama has caused it, like a bloated corpse, to rise from the murky depths of this nation's soul to remind us all of what we had hoped was gone forever.
The Return of Jim Crow
The Good and the Very Good:
5-4 Vote Extends Federal Benefits to Same-Sex Spouses
The Supreme Court issued a pair of opinions expanding gay rights, ruling unconstitutional a law denying federal benefits to married same-sex couples and effectively permitting gay marriage in California.
The opinion, delivered by Justice Anthony Kennedy:
"The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity...By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment."
UPDATE:
"GOP demanding Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage
(Yahoo News) Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kansas, and other conservative members of Congress say they will attempt to introduce in the coming days a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. Following the Supreme Court's ruling deeming the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional, several Republicans expressed their disappointment with the decision and vowed to take action. Apparently, this means an amendment to the Constitution."
Senator Rand Paul (Crackpot, KY) tried to backpedal on his idiotic statement on same-sex marriage. What he and other loonies on this subject apparently haven't the brains to understand is that CONSENTING ADULTS marrying each other will not automatically confer legality to adults marrying non-consenting children and animals. A German Shepherd dog or a box turtle cannot say "yes" to having sex with a human being, neither can a child give his or her "consent" to an adult who wants to have sex with an underage human being.
Conservatives and Libertarians apparently have a difficult time in understanding this simple fact, therefore, they make jackasses of themselves when they state that allowing consenting adults to marry each other will lead to beastiality and pederasty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)