The Republican push for Sharia Law continues...

The State of Tennessee is home to the latest group of Republicans seeking to impose their particular brand of Sharia law in the United States of America and the members of the right-wing pundit-ocracy remain vigilant in the silence.

According to media reports, Republicans are proposing legislation that would prohibit Tennessee school teachers from mentioning or discussion homosexuality in classrooms across the state.

In what appears to be a wild turn from the preventing the teaching of human sexuality in classrooms, the Republicans in the state are now in favor of having teachers and educators from Kindergarden to middle school preach the gospel of heterosexual sexual relationships while refraining from mentioning the existence of homosexual sexual relationships.

This is another example of how the Republicans are interested in oppressing gay/homosexuals with the same zeal and vigor to bring the Republican party's idea of Sharia law to the United States.


The Republican Party supports Sharia Law

During the last election it wasn't odd to hear the worrisome cries of Tea Party Republicans about the pending threat of Sharia Law being forced upon Americans. In fact, in a couple states, the Republican legislative bodies in Oklahoma, Georgia, Nebraska and Wyoming (to name a few) passed anti-Sharia law statues. Arizona went as far as to outlaw Karma.

Well, it turns out that people like Frank Gaffney and Sarah Palin were right about Sharia Law coming to the US. Unfortunately the real impact of Sharia Law is being seen in the United States, and it isn't through the actions of Muslim extremists or liberals. Nope, Sharia Law is a live and well thanks to the actions of the Republican party. And I don't hear a word of fear or criticism coming from conservatives.

Since the beginning of the new year Republican in South Dakota have proposed legislation that would justify honor killings and sanction the killing of abortion providers.

In the US House of Representatives, Republicans seek to oppress women by eliminating tax deductions for private insurance plans that cover abortions.

Then the Republicans decided that it was in their best interest to alter the legal definition of rape in an effort to prevent women from obtaining an abortion.

And most recently the Republicans voted on legislation designed to prevent women from receiving medical assistance from birth control to pap smears by prohibiting the federal funding of Planned Parenthood.

Sharia Law is all about controlling the lives of women and making them second class citizens. And through these legislative actions, the Republicans are seeking to control women and subjugate them as second class citizens by denying them their legal rights.

It never ceases to amaze me how Republicans are against big government and it's reach into our everyday lives. Except when it comes to a woman's reproductive rights and a woman's right to chose. When it comes to women, Republicans support big government reaching into a woman's private life to grab hold of her uterus in ways they would never allow when it comes to the government grabbing 30 round magazines from guns like that used by Jarrod Laughtner.

And Republicans hold homosexuals in the same regard as Sharia law and point to their bible as evidence and justification for their oppression of gay people and by denying them the right to marry.

Yes, Sharia Law has come to the United States. And it is being introduced by the very people who warned us that it was coming to our nation. Looks like the Republican party wasn't warning us about outside influences, they were warning us about the enemy from within.


The Aftermath.

The extreme political rhetoric of the last 2 years comes in large part from the "right" side of the political spectrum. There is serious consequences to be had when it comes to political discourse in this country following the shooting in Arizona.

I see why conservatives are in large part pushing the "he is crazy/insane" defense. As I see their argument, if the shooter is crazy/insane, no one is responsible for his actions. Except the shooter. Well if the shooter is crazy/insane, then by the very definition of the word means that the shooter is not responsible for his actions and was influenced to act by an outside force.

If I were a conservative, I would hope like hell that this kid is sane, because with a sane individual it is easier to ascribe personal responsibility too their motives and actions. If he is insane, it looks like this shooter's motivations can be attributed to whomever he listened to, or followed.

It is being reported that the shooter has an affiliation to a group known as the American Renaissance.

As it pertains to Palin, and the other merchants of right wing misinformation and extreme political vitriol, I can only hope that this is a moment of reflection and a chance to change the tone and tenor of politics. But I fear that this just a chance for them to "reload" and take aim at the "bulls-eye" on their political enemies.


Propaganda at it's finest.

I have been getting SPAM email from two websites that are fronts for getting out the propaganda of World Net Daily. One of them is Vision to America. It is birther central there. It is all birther, all the time! The second is The Patriot Update. It is another birthers unite site!

Since I started posting to these sites I have learned:

Conservatives/Republicans are by in large John Kerry flip floppers. They are fond of posting that Obama should adhere to poll results. Of course, back in 2006 and 2008 when the electorate gave majorities to the Democratic Party in the house and senate, these folks weren't crying that Bush should adhere to the will of the electorate. Quite the opposite in fact. That makes them flip flopper. Whether they realize it or not.

These same folks would brag about how Bush is a real leader, who doesn't lead according to poll results. Of course to validate their point they would follow it up with a reference to Clinton leading according to poll results. And now, these same individuals are demanding that Obama do what they never asked of Bush, and what they criticized Clinton for doing. Clearly there is a whole lot of flip flopping going on.

Now, regarding the birthers and their beliefs; if they are going to call for the impeachment of a sitting president, they should understand how the process works. If they want Obama to be tried for treason, they really can't believe that he is Kenyan born. Of course, it is most likely that they are oblivious as to who can and cannot be tried for treason. They are also under the delusion that just because you impeach a president, or find one guilty of treason, it magically undoes the actions taken by the congress and the president.

One other thing I have learned from the posters in these forums is that many(most) of them are completely unaware of the legislative process involved in repealing health insurance reform. They seem to believe that if the House of Representatives repeals Obama's health insurance reform, it's repealed. No other actions are required.

It is sad that these people who like to think of themselves as strict constructionists are so uninformed when it comes to the US Constitution, and the legislative process.

Oh the irony of it all.


I watched this...

and responded HERE with THIS

Can you explain what exactly the Republicans settled for as a part of this "bipartisan agreement?" You actually believe that they would not vote to extend unemployment benefits? (They realized that you and the Democratic Party's fear of tax increases exceeded their fear of not extending unemployment benefits.)

Sorry, but this is yet another example of you caving to the Republicans rather than fighting for what you believe in. Why didn't you demand that the members of your party take a vote on extending tax cuts for those making $250,000.00 or less before the November election? It is rather strange that you put more time and energy motivating the Republicans to not vote than you do the members of the party that you lead.

And quite frankly I have to wonder just how much damage would be done to the economy by allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire. Everyone keeps talking about how tax cuts are the only way to create jobs. Really? If tax cuts were the end all be all that you and the Republicans keep saying, why then did the Bush tax cuts fail to create jobs? And why aren't those very tax cuts creating jobs in this economy?

Yeah, I notice that you don't want to respond to what I consider the weakness of the tax cuts create jobs canard. Of course, the tax increases that took place under Clinton's tenure seems to indicate that in an economic downturn raising taxes creates jobs and wealth. Oh wait this is the worst recession since the depression, how could I forget.

According to Bernanke, even with tax cuts the unemployment rate won't decrease, and it won't create jobs for 4 or 5 years. So explain how the alternative of letting the tax cuts expire will slow down any recovery that will take another 5 years?

You bailed out the banks, promising that this would turn around the economy. You promised that the Recovery Act would create jobs, and it didn't. Now you say that this deal with Republicans will create jobs. Really? Or is it more of the same. Every legislative action taken to create jobs has failed to create jobs, and has only empowered the banks and the financial industry. Just like when Bush was president, and just like when you are the president, the divide between the rich and the middle class has grown ever wider. (And they call you a liberal, a socialist!

Sorry President Obama, you made promises that you have repeatedly caved on, from the public option, to DADT, to not extending the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000.00. If you gave up fighting this year, why should anyone believe that you will fight any harder for repeal in 2012?

Well I guess this "bipartisan agreement" is your last best chance at winning re-election.

My first presidential election was back in 1984. This will be the first presidential election where I will not be voting for a president in 2012 if my options are between you and any Republican.

Change, you President Barack Obama, can believe in.


Look what the SPAM Filter dragged in

Let Your Voice Be Heard!

We want to get a sense of your thoughts on the results of the Mid-term election. Please fill out the survey below. By providing us your email, we will be able to send you the results once they are tallied. In 6 months, we will ask for your input again to see how you think the new Congress is doing.

Now, with a Republican majority in the house:

Do you believe the newly elected members will try to repeal the Obamacare bill?

Don't Care

What's your most important item you want Congress to address?

Cut Taxes
Cut Spending
Get the Economy Going

Do you think the Republicans will pay attention to the legislative processes and procedures of the House of Representatives (Read the Bill, 72-hour rule):


Do you foresee the Republicans compromising with the Democrats?


Do you think the newly elected members will keep their campaign promises?

Very Likely
Somewhat Likely
Very Unlikely

Do you believe President Obama will shift to the center?

Very Likely
Somewhat Likely
Very Unlikely

In regard to the Stimulus Law, do you want the Republicans to:

Work to Repeal the Law
Cooperate with Democrats on Revising the Law
Leave the Law as it is

In regard to the bailouts, do you want the Republicans to:

Defund the Bailouts
Repeal the Bailouts
Leave the Bailouts as they are

Should the Tea Party work to become a viable 3rd party if the Republicans fail to push for the things the Tea Party patriots want?

I hope not

Who would you like to see run on the 2012 Presidential ballot?

Newt Gingrich
Sarah Palin
Rand Paul
Marco Rubio

If you answered "other", please provide their name below:

This unscientific poll was brought to you by: The Patriot Update.

I hope they send me the results so I can post those as well.


Campaign 2010

I was really not surprised that the Democratic Party lost the majority in the house and saw their majority shrink in the senate. It was inevitable when you consider that the very people that elected Obama to office and provided him with majorities to enact the change that they could believe in found themselves on the receiving end of political hyperbole, with little change, and less to believe in.

Of course, the president didn't do himself any favors when he blamed liberals for holding him to his "hope and change" promises which included a public option as a part of health care reform. To use a baseball metaphor, Obama swings, and that is strike one!
Under my plan, Americans will be able to choose to maintain their current coverage if they choose to. For those without health insurance I will establish a new public insurance program, and provide subsides to afford care for those who need them.

If they wonder about the voter turnout among the Obama coalition of 2008, they should start here. Of course, the White House decided that the best way to ensure that they would get out the vote was to chastise liberals for daring to hold Obama to his campaign promises, like the aforementioned health care.
When I hear Democrats griping and groaning and saying ... 'the health care plan didn't have a public option', and ... 'the financial reform -- there was a provision here that I think we should have gotten better', or, 'you know what, yes, you ended the war in Iraq, the combat mission there, but you haven't completely finished the Afghan war yet', this or that or the other, I say 'folks, wake up'.

Yeah, nothing fires up the base like blaming them for your political cowardice. And nothing fires up the base more than having the VP repeat the same attack against the very people whose support you will need in the fall election cycle.

Obama and his administration revealed that they were more worried about the concerns of the Tea Party Republicans, than they were of their own supporters. In the national media Tea Party Republicans where being hailed for their anger against the establishment, while the liberals are pushed to the back of the bus because for being angry with the president and his unfulfilled campaign promises. And this is another swing and a miss by Obama, strike two.

The last point I would like to make is about getting out the message. Obama was said to have used the internets to his advantage in his run for the White House. And yet in the subsequent election cycle he appears to have forgotten all that they knew, or whomever was working for them joined the Republicans in 2010.

Allow me to explain. I like to think of myself as an average voter, I actually read ballot propositions before I vote on them as opposed to relying upon commercial propaganda to secure my vote. I like to know something about candidates before I vote for them. When I created my Google email account I found myself the recipient of what I can only describe as political SPAM. In my estimation, (based upon my email SPAM filter) the Republicans and their surrogates completely overwhelmed President Obama and his Democratic party allies.

The two attached screen captures are of just the first 50 of 116 emails I received going back to October 4th, 2010. You can do the math if you like, but at a quick glance it is easy to see that for every one email notice I received from the Democratic Party and their surrogates, I received 4 emails from the Republicans and their surrogates promoting fear.

And with that pitch, we catch Obama looking at strike three. The election is over and from the looks of things, we might not have to wait for his presidency to come to an end in 2012.

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Juan Williams and NPR

There is something missing in the recent furor of the firing of Juan Williams comments that he made to Bill O'Reilly. People are quick to condemn NPR for their actions. Williams of course doesn't see anything wrong with his comments. I see something very wrong with what Williams said as he echoed the spin of Bill O'Reilly.

Let's look at what Williams said.
"I mean, look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they're identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

Excuse me Juan Williams, but you are in fact a bigot. What makes Williams comments the bigoted speech I have come to expect from hosts and guest of Fox News programs is the fact that the Muslim extremists who attacked the US on 9/11 didn't wear traditional Muslim attire, or Muslim garb.

Funny, you'd think that a credible newsman like Williams would be aware of the facts about terrorist attacks in this country. I would love for him to cite when an extremist Muslim terrorist was wearing Muslim garb? According to every act of terrorism that I have heard about in the past 10 years, the perpetrators were dressed in traditional western style clothes and not what the bigoted Juan Williams refers to as Muslim garb.

Juan Williams is a "liberal" apologist on Fox News. His appearance on O'Reilly's show only cements his role as Fox commentator. And now he is being rewarded for his loyalty to News Corp. and his own bigotry.

From my perspective Williams should be thanking NPR for firing him. Had they not fired him he would not have signed his contract for $2 Million dollars.

Labels: , , , ,


What I have learned from O'Donnell and Angle

Debates can be amazing for what they reveal about the cognitive machinations of political candidates.

I first watched the debate between Delaware senate candidates Chris Coons and Christine O'Donnell. I learned that when Coon's is offered the chance to take a swipe at his opponent he opted against it. Of course, O'Donnell was swinging for the fences as she took ill formed thoughts and tried to turn them into the "gotcha" moments her mentor Sarah Palin warned her about.

And Wolf Bliter hit her with that "gotcha" moment when she was asked whether she believed evolution is a myth.
"What I believe is irrelevant, because what I will support in Washington, D.C. is the ability for the local school system to decide what is taught in their classrooms."

Her beliefs are irrelevant? If her beliefs are irrelevant, why is she running for office?

But for me the quote that deserves a jaundice eye came as she tried to avoid being accountable for her beliefs about evolution.
"So when you look at his position on things like raising taxes, which is one of the tenets of Marxism, not supporting eliminating the death tax, which is a tenet of Marxism -- I would argue that there are more people who support my Catholic faith than his Marxist beliefs."

When she spoke about taxes being a tenet of Marxism, I had to laugh. Clearly O'Donnell isn't as familiar with Marx. If we follow O'Donnell's point to it's logical conclusion that raising taxes "is one of the tenets of Marxism" the United States of America was a "marxist" nation long before Marx was ever born, or had written the Communist Manifesto.

But perhaps the disturbing response of the night came when O'Donnell responded to a question about foreign policy and the war in Afghanistan.
When we were fighting the Soviets over there in Afghanistan in the 80s and 90s, we did not finish the job, so now we have a responsibility to finish the job and if you are gonna make these politically correct statements that it's costing us too much money, you are threatening the security of our homeland.

Oh no she didn't? The US was not fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan "in the 80's and 90's." The Soviet's left Afghanistan in 1989. And what job was she referring to that wasn't finished? It appears that O'Donnell doesn't know her Afghanistan from her Iraq.

Now there is Sharron Angle. Boy talk about a boring debate between her and Reid. After watching the debate it was clear that I am glad that I don't live in Nevada. As I watched the debate I kept wondering how in the hell did Reid become the Senate Majority Leader? His lack of preparedness was both alarming and disconcerting to watch.

But alas, what I learned from Angle supersedes that of the unprepared of Harry Reid. When asked about whether a senator creates jobs, the loss of jobs.
Once again, Harry Reid, it’s not your job to create jobs, it’s your job to create policies that create the confidence for the private sector to create those jobs. And they have lost confidence because of things like Obamacare. There’s a, a business in Reno, where he wanted to hire twenty-four – five – more employees but instead laid of five, just because of the provisions in Obamacare.

We’re seeing those kinds of policies actually crush our economy over the last 20 months.

Is Angle at all aware that what she is calling Obamacare was signed into law in March of this year, and that various provisions have only been in effect since September of this year. How is it that policies of Obamacare have been crushing our economy for 20 months?

Of course, her repeated denials of verbatim quotes by the moderator were expected. Angle refused to acknowledge her prior previous statements about phasing out Social Security, eliminating the Dept of Education, and her motivation for telling Tea Party candidate Scott Ashjian she "got juice" in Washington DC. (Geeze, I thought that Harry Reid was the only career politician in the race.)

The most telling moment of the evening came when Angle tried to attack Reid on immigration. Angle's false allegation about Reid voting for Social Security benefits for "illegal immigrants" was the opportune moment to point out the absurdity of Angle's point, such that it was. She said;
Harry Reid has voted to give Social Security to illegal aliens, not only before they were citizens but after they were citizens.

So, Reid voted to give Social Security benefits to "illegal aliens," not only "before they were citizens but after they were citizens" too? Reid missed a golden opportunity to ask Angle why is she be opposed to giving Social Security benefits to immigrants who became citizens.

Ah, the joy of debates. If Reid loses to Angle it will be of his own doing. Should he retain his seat, I hope to hell that the Senate Democrats are smart enough to remove Reid from any majority or minority leadership roles.


Killing in the name of Glenn Beck.

By Byron Williams own words, he credits Glenn Beck for providing him with his motivation to kill. Williams completely undermines the claim of Glenn Beck that "you have to get them young" in order to believe propaganda. Williams clearly believes the propaganda espoused by Beck. To the point of explaining away Beck's role in his own conspiracy to kill innocent civilians for his terrorist ideology.

Glenn Beck is promoting or inciting terrorism and hiding behind the First Amendment. Byron Williams makes it clear who he gets his marching orders from.

More Byron Williams in his own WORDS.(.pdf)