Dems giving in on Social Security

Why do we even bother when we have jokers like this representing us.

Dems. Adjust on Social Security Stance

House Democrats have decided to quit emphasizing that they will not negotiate changes to Social Security until President Bush drops his idea for private accounts. The switch in strategy comes after Democrats learned from focus groups that people frown on the lawmakers for being obstinate.

"People feel like it doesn't show a good-faith effort," said a top House aide, who like several others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the internal data. "It makes us seem like we're `typical politicians.'"

The shift in tactics comes with Democrats and Republicans unsure what will happen after the end next month of a campaign-style, 60-day travel blitz by the president and administration officials who are promoting his plan.

If they were not so pathetic this would be funny. This is the jist of the entire problem with the Democratic leadership... the entire base is behind them and unified ... but these asshole rather listen to a fucking focus group...(ie Al From, LIEberman, Clinton and Kerry) and throw in the towel when were were fucking winning... unfucking believable.

Only White Evangelist Burn Crosses and Bomb Churches

I think this point needs to be made very clear. This is not about religion it is about race. There was a poll done amongst these so-called Evangelical Christians and most of them did not even know basic stories of the bible.

Why is this important:

We need to separate the wheat from the shaft and real Christians from the wingnuts.

I was thinking of some re-framing on being a Christian.

When asked by a wingnut if you believe in the lord... howyabout replying:

- "Yes, I believe in the true Lord, not the false one who supposedly hates Spongebob Squarepants"


- "Yes, I believe in the true Lord, not the false one made up by the Republicans"


- "Yes, I believe in the true Lord, not the false one who advocate burning crosses and bombing Black churches"

Any more suggestions...??

I don't think we should try to get holier than thou but just smack them in the face with their hypocracy

krempasky = gannon???

Well not the hooker part...I don't think?

just watched his interview with C-Span... found out that just like Gannon, Krempasky has no credentials what so ever... not even an undergraduate degree.

Compared that to Kos's interview where we find out that he has several undergraduate degrees and a law degree.

This should not make a difference but... it does. Kos answered his questions with humility and even humor whereas the insecurities of Krempasky oozed out of every condescending smirking pore (notice that Bush also smirks to when he feels insecure) and the rude comebacks... class ... I guess that is my elitists sushi eating latte drinking side coming out.

When I see wingnuts like Krempasky and Terry Randall, Guckert/Gannon one thing that is striking is that they are all white male losers desperate to find a niche in this world. A read an article about Randall where his aunts who are staunch feminist say that he is just lost (he even was in a rock band at one point) .... he  wandered around until he grabbed onto the anti-choice issue that made a man out of him.

They remind me of Milan Kundera's Life is Elsewhere. These poor saps are Jaromil and the lies his mother tells him are the same lies that this country has told white males for centuries ie that they are superior. The rug has been pulled out from underneath them of their absolute superiority and now they are lost... wandering around looking for a reason to justify themselves.

The anger of the Limabughs and the O'Riellys is real and they are really in a battle for their lives. The MARJORITY of white males have succeeded in this transition and are open to the new competition from women and other races, it is the throwbacks (the losers) that are taking this country down.

Randi Rhodes says it constantly that these men need phychological counseling they are traumatised by modernity.... that includes DEMOCRACY.

The real revolution is that the revolution succeeded now there is a desperate attempt to turn back the clock to pre-revolution times. They want us to  relive the dawn of 1929...

Look at them all... Krempasky, Gannon, Limmbaugh, O'Rielly, Hannity ... LOSERS all of them. If it weren't for their little contra-revolution going on now they'd be whoring themselves or collecting unemployment benefits.

Kos is right, the wingnut blog are pretty lame... might as well watch the real thing on Fox news at least you get the talking points from the horses mouth.

Chris's frontpager is very good... but I still believe it has nothing at all to do with religion ...yes they are using religion as a salvation... a salvation from becoming obsolete.


On April 13, the FCC announced a new ruling requiring broadcasters to disclose the source video news releases (VNRs). Read about it from the Washington Postor read the full ruling. The FCC, along with separate statements by Commissioners Adelstein and Copps, noted "receiv[ing] thousands of emails about this practice" of airing VNRs. Your 26,900 emails made a huge difference.

A better solution than the Kerry/Santorum Discrimination Act

Seems as though many people didn't read the solution that the ACLU came up with

A Narrowly Drafted Bill Is a Better Response to the Problem

Congress should replace WRFA with more narrowly drafted legislation that bolsters only the requirements imposed on employers to accommodate the scheduling of leave time for the observation of religious holidays or for the wearing of religious apparel or a beard or hairstyle. Not only would a narrowly drafted bill address most of the problems actually experienced by employees denied religious accommodations, but it also would be a constitutionally sound approach to legislation.

Based on our review of 25 years of Title VII religious accommodation federal decisions, we conclude that the vast majority of the religious accommodation claims that are denied by employers fall into three categories:

  • scheduling of religious holidays,

  • the wearing of religious clothing or a beard or hairstyle, or

  • claims that would result in harm to critical personal or civil rights.  

Congress does not have to guess at what types of religious practices it is accommodating or refusing to accommodate when considering WRFA or any amendments to it.  The ACLU found that claims for the scheduling of time off for religious holidays or the wearing of religious clothing or a beard together made up 83 of the 113 reported federal decisions since 1977 through the end of last year in which the employee lost his or her claim to a reasonable accommodation.
Changing the approach from WRFA to a bill specifically focused on the problems that real people actually face in the workplace would be consistent with the approach that Congress took a few years ago when it replaced the Religious Liberty Protection Act with the more sharply focused Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000.  Not only did Congress create a powerful new tool for protecting religious exercise without harming any other rights, but it also created a vehicle that was so popular that it passed both houses by unanimous consent on the same afternoon.

Further, a more narrowly drafted bill is more likely to survive an Eleventh Amendment challenge by a state claiming that the statute violates the state's sovereign immunity.  The existing religious accommodation standard in Title VII is the only provision in Title VII to have been found unconstitutional by a federal court of appeals deciding an Eleventh Amendment challenge.  See Endres v. Indiana State Police, 334 F.3d 618, 627-30 (7th Cir. 2003).  As it considers strengthening the religious accommodation standard in Title VII, Congress must be careful to meet the federalism standards set by the Supreme Court in several recent decisions.  Close tailoring of the legislative solution to the constitutional harm being prevented increases the likelihood that a statute will be upheld against an Eleventh Amendment challenge, and decreases the possibility of establishing additional case law further limiting the power of Congress to provide federal remedies for discrimination.

This solution would address everyone's concerns yet not allow free for all discrimination.

  • This would take care of the two old ladies that Kerry says were fired because as Catholics they did not want to work on Christmas.

  • It would also allow Jews and Muslims to wear religous clothing to their hearts content...even Rasatfarians to wear dreadlocks.


Think about it people... had Kerry's bill been ratified the workers and police officers serving and protecting Terry Schaivo would be legally allowed not to carry out their duties in accordance to the law.

Harmful Effects of the Workplace Religious Freedom Act

ACLU Letter on the Harmful Effect of S. 893, the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, on Critical Personal and Civil Rights

June 2, 2004

Dear Senator: [So Kerry and Hilliary got this letter and have chosen to remain ignorant]

The American Civil Liberties Union strongly urges you to oppose S. 893, the Workplace Religious Freedom Act ("WRFA")--unless it is amended to ensure that the legislation will not have the presumably unintended consequence of harming critical personal and civil rights of coworkers, customers, or patients.  Unless amended, the bill would threaten important rights of religious minorities, racial minorities, women, gay men and lesbians, and persons seeking reproductive health care and mental health services.

WRFA would revise and strengthen the existing requirements imposed on employers to accommodate the religious practices of their employees.  This letter explains:  the current religious accommodation requirements under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the changes made to Title VII by the legislation, WRFA's potential harm to important personal and civil rights, and the availability of a more targeted alternative to WRFA.

In preparing this letter, the ACLU reviewed every Title VII religious accommodation federal decision reported either in an official reporter or on Westlaw--since the Hardison decision in 1977 through December 31, 2002--in which a court reached the question of reasonable accommodation or undue hardship.  A quarter-century of reported litigation gives a fairly accurate picture of the full range of cases that employees already win under the current religious accommodation standard, and the cases that employees typically lose under the current standard.(1) Based on that review, the ACLU (2)
has serious concerns about the potential harmful effect of WRFA, but we also see an opportunity for alternative legislation that would have addressed nearly all of the religious accommodation claims that did not involve harm to critical personal and civil rights.

Over the past 25 years, employees have brought an array of claims for employers to accommodate religious practices that would have resulted in harm to critical personal or civil rights.  If WRFA had been law, the following rejected religious accommodation claims could have been decided differently: 

  • police officer's request to refuse to protect an abortion clinic,
  • another police officer's request to abstain from arresting protestors blocking a clinic entrance,
  • social worker's decision to use Bible readings, prayer, and the "casting out of demons" with inmates in a county prison, instead of providing the county's required secular mental health counseling,
  • state-employed visiting nurse's decision to tell an AIDS patient and his partner that God "doesn't like the homosexual lifestyle" and that they needed to pray for salvation,
  • delivery room nurse's refusal to scrub for an emergency inducement of labor and an emergency caesarian section delivery on women who were in danger of bleeding to death,
  • two different male truck drivers and a male emergency medical technician request to avoid overnight work shifts with women because they could not sleep in the same quarters with women,  
  • employee assistance counselor's request to refuse to counsel unmarried or gay or lesbian employees on relationship issues,
  • hotel worker's decision to spray a swastika on a mirror as a religious "good luck" symbol,  
  • private sector employee's request to uncover and display a KKK tattoo of a hooded figure standing in front of a burning cross,  
  • state-employed sign language interpreter's request to proselytize and pray aloud for her assigned deaf mental health patients, and
  • retail employee's request to begin most statements on the job with "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth."

These examples were all actual cases brought into federal court by employees claiming that their employers refused to provide a reasonable accommodation of their religious beliefs.  Applying the existing Title VII reasonable accommodation standard, the courts rejected all of these claims.  But Congress has no assurance that courts would continue to reject all of these types of claims if WRFA becomes law.

The harm that WRFA could cause is completely avoidable.  Congress can--and should--pass legislation tightly focused on strengthening the federal requirements imposed on employers to accommodate workplace scheduling changes for the observation of religious holidays and the wearing of religious clothing or a beard or hairstyle.  These two areas of religious accommodation account for nearly three-fourths of all of the religious accommodation claims rejected by federal courts in published opinions during the past quarter-century.  A narrowly tailored bill could address these problems for religious minorities without any of the harms that WRFA could cause.

There's more...

Kerry aligns with Santorum AGAINST women

Sorry for posting so much today... but this goes along with the Panty Politics theme and Chris's frontpager

Religion in the Pharmacy

Published: April 12, 2005

To the Editor:

"Moralists at the Pharmacy" (editorial, April 3) addressed "scattered reports" of pharmacists refusing to dispense certain medications that conflict with their personal moral or religious beliefs and women seeking to have these prescriptions filled. We believe that there is a solution that accommodates the needs of both parties.

Recently, we introduced the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, which clarifies current law to say a person's religious beliefs should be recognized and accommodated in the workplace as long as this does not adversely affect the employer's business or customers.

The bill is supported by a diverse coalition of more than 45 religious and civil rights groups as well as a bipartisan group of senators and representatives.

If the bill becomes law, a pharmacist who does not wish to dispense certain medications would not have to do so long as another pharmacist is on duty and would dispense the medications.

The Workplace Religious Freedom Act provides a sensible solution to the potential conflict between an employee's religious conviction and the needs of pharmacy customers. [WHAT SICK ASSED CRAP IS THIS  What the fuck is next? What about Muslim wait-persons who wants to refuse to serve pork.]

(Senator) Rick Santorum
(Senator) John Kerry Washington, April 7, 2005
The writers are, respectively, Republican of Pennsylvania and Democrat of Massachusetts.

Kerry is the biggest ASS-WIPE I have ever seen in politics... he is up there with LIEberman.

This is just pathetic and sickening... I NEVER liked Kerry and to say that he would have been better than Bush is a slight understatement... Kerry is an opportunist piece of shit. Isn't he signing this with the man who just made a mockery out of a personal family crises.

NEVER TRUST A SKULL AND CROSSBONES MAN Kerry just fucking tanked and he can go to hell in 2008... before even better.

Faith based Genocide

Uganda has performed well in bringing down the HIV prevalence to around 6%. In many parts of the country, it was at least three times as high during the early 1990s. [Prior to the US getting into it's panties]

The New York-based group Human Rights Watch (HRW) has strongly criticized the Ugandan government, accusing it of pushing the abstinence line while downplaying the safe sex message.


A "life-threatening" shift which HRW says is orchestrated and funded by the US.

It says the funding for abstinence is due to President George W Bush's conservative Christian views, which are similar to those of Uganda's first lady.

The US says it plans to spend more than $100m combating HIV/Aids in Uganda this year - of which more than $8m will be on the abstinence and faithfulness programme. Some of that money will be focused on the young.

There's more...

Clinton smacks down the Gay GOP sociopathic freak ...

The other day I posted a diary about Another Gay GOP sociopath... what's new and yesterday Bill Clinton smacked down the sociopathic freak.

The former president noted that an earlier article over the weekend reported that Mr. Finkelstein had married his male partner in a civil ceremony at his home in Massachusetts, then he alluded to the Republican Party's use of the same-sex marriage issue to mobilize conservative voters.


"Either this guy believes his party is not serious and he's totally Machiavellian," Mr. Clinton said, or "he may be blinded by self-loathing." Mr. Finkelstein, a reclusive former adviser to Gov. George E. Pataki, did not respond to a message left at his office seeking a comment on Mr. Clinton's remarks.

There's more...

Another Gay GOP Sociopath ... what's new...

Repeat after me there is no such fucking thing as a "values voter". They live in the non existent district as the "swing voter". This a just another invention of GOP Consultants like the one hypcritical bastard below.

Here is another typical example of the GOP digging in our panties to play politics.

Arthur J. Finkelstein, a prominent Republican consultant who has directed a series of hard-edged political campaigns to elect conservatives in the United States and Israel over the last 25 years, said Friday that he had married his male partner in a civil ceremony at his home in Massachusetts.

Mr. Finkelstein, 59, who has made a practice of defeating Democrats by trying to demonize them as liberal, said in a brief interview that he had married his partner of 40 years to ensure that the couple had the same benefits available to married heterosexual couples.

"I believe that visitation rights, health care benefits and other human relationship contracts that are taken for granted by all married people should be available to partners," he said.

The hypocrisy is stunning... it is the TOTAL LACK OF MORALITY that is the engine of the GOP.

Do what I say... not what I do...

In Israel, Mr. Finkelstein used similar attacks against the Labor Party as an adviser to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and as a consultant to the winning and losing campaigns of Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister.

"In recent years, Arthur hasn't pretended to be a social conservative," said one longtime conservative associate, who cited Mr. Finkelstein's aversion to publicity in declining to be identified. "But this is the same man who was the architect of Jesse Helms's political rise."

If there is a hell I hope that this man burns in it for all eternity along with his GOP bigoted buddies.

They dig around in our panties trying to find a campaign gimmick and we kept letting them.


Don't believe the hype

This is the face the GOP wants us to believe.... these are just more Boogie man stories...

Soon every time the left seems to be waking up from their GOP induced haze they will trot out more of bullshit stories of Evangelical Zombies who march in line and answer strictly to the GOP... yeah right

Kind of like the terror alerts syndrome.

... Even a MORAN can tell when they are no longer getting overtime does not have to be a rocket scientist to realize that they can no longer feed your children.



Advertise Blogads