Republicans in Congress

Watch before you read.

I’m sure all politicians careen between saying what they believe and spouting whatever crap will get them elected. But it seems like* Republicans have adopted a universal strategy of popular deceit, and if they speak truth it’s only by coincidence. Here’s the pattern I’ve seen:

  • Toss out a slew of outrageous lies.
  • Watch for one to capture the public’s imagination.
  • Turn it into jargon (“death panel”) that sticks in voters’ heads.
  • Step back from the lie when it’s debunked, and craft a milder (still dishonest) version. But keep the original jargon.
  • Repeat as necessary. Debunkers eventually move on to tackle some new lie, leaving the last version in place and the jargon established.

Republicans sound like they’re conducting a giant experiment in saying whatever they can get away with, and I suspect they’re surprised as any of us by some of the results. That’s probably too harsh, though. What’s worse is that a good chunk of them might believe the stuff they say. That’s the difference between, for instance, Glenn Beck and Michele Bachmann. Either way, the country loses.

Take a closer look at the comments described in the video.

* It’s been pointed out that people might interpret this bit of hyperbole literally. To be clear, I do not believe that all Republicans are liars, or that the average Republican citizen lies more frequently than the average Democrat — merely that the abundance of deception from many leading Republican politicians made it seem so (you know, as when people say something along the lines of “It seems like no one says ‘thank you’ anymore,” without meaning it absolutely literally). I’m a bit surprised I need to clarify my use of this common expression, but I’ll admit it was needlessly inflammatory, and I do apologize to those Republicans who have not uttered lie after lie after lie in an attempt to bring down Obama by any means necessary, including the deliberate deception of their constituency.

If you want to heckle the president during his address to the nation

I’m referring to Addison Graves Wilson — or Joe Wilson, as he prefers to be called. At Obama’s September 9 address to a joint session of Congress, Joe yelled, “You lie!”

Joe later explained, “Illegal aliens could get the benefits, they could get the subsidies.” Politifact has shown this itself to be a lie.

If you want to suggest smacking around your wife doesn’t truly count as assault, and neither does killing homosexuals

Watch this clip of Louie Gohmert. At the 1:00 mark he starts in with outright lies:

I’ve dealt with this sort of analysis in a prior post. Check it out for a complete debunking. For now just note what Louie said about LGBT hate crime victims in 2007, “There were only 242 crimes where there was actually some — truly an assault.”

He’s referring to these figures. Here’s how you get his number:

  • Ignore anti-gay murders. These are listed in his source, just two columns over from the 242 number, but he doesn’t mention them. So killing gays doesn’t count.
  • Ignore anything the FBI calls simple assault. Simple assault simply doesn’t count as assault to him. The FBI give an example of simple assault:

A married couple was arguing about financial problems. The husband slapped his wife and left the house. The wife followed him, and they continued their argument. The police responded to a call by a neighbor. The wife told them that her husband slapped her. The police arrested the husband for domestic violence.

So, to Louie Gohmert, smacking around your wife doesn’t truly count as assault.

Does he believe what he’s suggesting? I hope he’s just an incompetent legislator making a special effort to air false statements that he hasn’t confirmed but believes because they suit his bias and agenda. Yes, that would be giving him the benefit of the doubt.

If you want to warn foreign governments not to trust the United States

In 2009, on a trip to China (which owns $700 billion in US Treasury bonds), Mark Kirk told Chinese officials not to believe budget numbers released by the US government. Why? In order to build their trust in us.

Black is white. War is peace. Disbelief is…trust.

If you want to refute scientific research by quoting Biblical prophecy

John Shimkus quotes Genesis and Matthew to prove we don’t have worry about humankind destroying the earth. I guess all the fuss about nuclear war was no big deal, either.

If you think wives should be submissive to their husbands

Michele Bachmann is low-hanging fruit on the crazy tree, and this is one of her milder statements. Apparently she’s let her husband dictate her career, even entered fields she hated, because “the Lord says, Be submissive — wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.” (1:37 into the clip).

Michele’s statements are so consistently jaw-dropping that she’s had to make them part of her electoral appeal. For a long time, my favorite was her belief that swine flu only rages during Democratic administrations (not that there’s a link, mind you, she’s just sayin’…) — even though the other outbreak she mentions was under Ford, not Carter.

But she’s topped that with her plan for bringing down Obama’s health care plan:

What we have to do today is make a covenant, to slit our wrists, be blood brothers on this thing. This will not pass. We will do whatever it takes to make sure this doesn’t pass.

First, though, make sure your health insurance covers slit wrists (and can you add your blood brother as a family member?).

If you want to pass laws to establish the Bible as the Word of God for all Americans

Randy Forbes wants to place the Lincoln-Obama Bible on permanent display upon the Lincoln table at the Capitol Visitor Center. He introduced a resolution with a long list of WHEREASs, one of which was:

Whereas the Holy Bible is God’s Word

Randy must not know the First Amendment prohibits Congress from establishing a state religion. Randy’s shown his incompetence in other ways, too. He once opposed expanding hate crime protections to gays and lesbians by saying this of the Perez Hilton/Carrie Prejean Miss USA ruckus:

Had [Hilton] done what he said he would do and stormed that stage and pulled that tiara off [Prejean’s] head and [inflicted] bodily harm when he did it, there would not have been one ounce of protection under this piece of legislation for that young girl.

As Right Wing Watch points out, the opposite is true:

Under the current hates crimes law, violent crimes targeting someone because of their real or perceived religion are already covered and carry enhanced penalties, whereas violent crimes targeting real or perceived “sexual orientation” are not…

Still, you can’t expect a Congressman to be an expert on everything. It’s not like Randy is a is a former ranking member of the Judiciary Crime Subcommittee. Except, you know, he is.

If you want to scare women with a false link between abortion and breast cancer

Retired Congressman Bill Sali repeatedly asserted that women who have abortions are more likely to get breast cancer. There’s no evidence to support this. Here’s someone impervious to scientific evidence that runs counter to his political beliefs. Or is he an ambitious politician willing to say anything his voting bloc wants to hear? I wish I could see into the heads of these people. Either way, they turn truth and fact into roadkill on the political highway.

One more thing — while in office, Bill fretted mightily over a Muslim elected to Congress and a Hindu chaplain chosen to offer the opening prayer one day in the Senate. “You know, the Lord can cause the rain to fall on the just and the unjust alike,” Bill said. He’s afraid the Hindu prayer “creates problems for the longevity of this country.”

If you think stiffer penalties for violent attacks on gays are a threat to your freedom

Yep, Louie Gohmert again. He does have a thing about the gays.

Even though the bill ends with this clause:

Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by, the Constitution.

Religious expression is protected. Actually, any sort of speech previously protected by the First Amendment will remain protected. Did you know Gohmert used to be an appeals court judge?

By the way, what he says around 0:45 in the video? About the legislation duplicating laws that exist in every one of the 45 states in the union? He’s wrong. And not just about how many states there are.

If you think same-sex marriage is a purely socialist concept

Steve King said this on a WorldNetDaily radio show.

If there’s a push for a socialist society, a society where the foundations of individual rights and liberties are undermined and everybody is thrown together, living collectively off of one pot of resources earned by everyone. That is, this is one of the goals they have to go to is same-sex marriage because it has to plow through marriage in order to get to their goal. They want public affirmation. They want access to public funds and resources. Eventually all those resources will be pooled because that’s the direction we’re going. And not only is it a radical social idea, it is a purely socialist concept in the final analysis. [emphasis added]

Steve King also was the only vote in all of Congress to oppose a plaque commemorating the role of slaves in the construction of the Capitol Building. He did it to protect our Judeo-Christian heritage. But don’t let your head explode yet. Wait for this quote from his press release:

Last night I opposed yet another bill to erect another monument to slavery…

Yet ANOTHER bill? For ANOTHER monument? My God, Marilyn, what do these people WANT?

If you need someone to call Michelle Obama uppity

In 2008, Georgia representative Lynn Westmoreland was commenting on…oh, just listen to the audio.

And then watch this.

If Obama’s election sends you looking for a great white hope to save the GOP

Lynn Jenkins, from Kansas.

If you want to push your political agenda by exploiting the fears of senior citizens

You know where this is headed.

I love her directness. No meek statement from Ginnie. She’s not worried about seniors dying from neglect or waiting in long lines. No, she’s all about them being put to death. By the government! It takes a special kind of courage to come out against that sort of thing.


I can’t say it any better than this:

Representative Stephen Buyer(R-ID) knows that by the middle of next week, the skeptical seniors will realize that they are on a single payer government run Medicare and the “kill granny” scare tactic was a hoax, so he is prepared to use the third bullet in this debacle by going after the veterans. Representative Buyer sent out a letter stating that “Major veterans’ organizations are speaking out against several provisions within the proposed House version of the national health care reform plan that could adversely affect veterans and their families.” Congressman Joe Sestak (D-PA), retired United States navy rear admiral and the highest former ranking military officer serving in Congress said “Section 202 prohibits the Health Care reform bill to affect VA benefits and their dependents.” Congressman Sestak went onto say that 265,000 veterans and their dependents that were above the $34,000 threshold limit ,were removed from the rolls of the VA in 2003 , without much fanfare from the republicans but Obama’s new budget will restore many of those same veterans and their dependents back into the system. As of today, 500,000 veterans and their dependents have been removed.

Seriously, pushing your agenda by trying deceive senior citizens — and now veterans? Can Republicans go any lower?

…and parents of disabled children

In September, Trent Franks offered this warning about the Democrats’ healthcare reform bill to parents of disabled kids:

We run into one reality: the rationing of care because you have to decrease the costs. There is always, always rationing and restrictions, which fall on the most weak.

Trent is right about the problem but wrong about the bill. There’s rationing already, done by health insurance companies that deny claims, terminate coverage, and refuse to insure those with pre-existing conditions. The reform bill tries to address those issues. “I’ll never vote for government-run healthcare,” Franks has said elsewhere. But “government-run healthcare” is one of those scary, dishonest bits of Republican jargon. The bill doesn’t put the healthcare system under government control, or put treatment decisions in the hands of government bureaucrats.

It’s hard to cast Trent as a bad guy in this debate. He was born with a cleft palate, and his late brother had Down Syndrome. He has every reason to take a deep and sincere interest in how disabled kids will fare under reform. But that makes him all the more dangerous when he distorts the truth.

Trent portrays himself as a defender of moral values, but that doesn’t prevent him from entering half-truths into the public record. In his opposition to extending hate crime protections to gays and lesbians, he spoke of the “Philadelphia 11″:

Eleven individuals were jailed and faced $90,000 in fines and 47 years in prison for simply speaking the Gospel openly and publicly.

Well, no. Trent doesn’t mention that police intervened when the eleven individuals tried to disrupt a publicly-permitted event and were charged with disorderly conduct after they ignored police orders to disperse for the sake of public safety. And ultimately none of them were tried under Pennsylvania’s hate crime statute, because these laws simply do not criminalize speech. Trent says none of that.

And by the way, existing hate crime legislation protects Christians (and other religious believers). Does his principled opposition include this protection, or was he moved to speak only when the gays got involved?

In this post I’ve only listed comments by US representatives. If you want to include state officials, the world gets even crazier.

You almost expect this sort of lunacy at the lower levels of government. But everything else in the post came from our representatives in Congress. The Republican party today has little interest in developing constructive policy. Its reps would rather spend their energy offering up ridiculous claims to see if they can ride a wave of deceit back into power. Hopefully, they’ll just catch a riptide and get pulled further out to sea.

  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • email
  • Reddit

150 comments to Republicans in Congress

  • 51
    Alexander Hamilton says:

    Just because you take someones words and twist them to the extreme doesn’t equal a fair argument. Ad Hominem fallacies run amuck throughout this post. How much of this did you actually discover yourself and not just hear on some left wing extremist news show?

  • 52
    Coutney says:

    Awesome! Now we just need to do one for Democrats. Both sides are the same side – they are all there to f*ck us! Vote independent…or don’t vote at all. Be part of the solution, not the psuedo two party system. If you honestly believe there are two parties then you’ve really got a lot of waking up to do.

  • 53
    Jane says:

    The whole “science is a religion” thing is shit. Science isn’t a set of beliefs, it is the practice of acquiring answers, and no answers are concrete or written in stone. Science is what you turn to when you want to know why the earth is round, not if killing someone is good or bad. That’s what religion is there for, to create a moral compass to follow. One that best suits a society and its needs. Obviously, Christianity has grown a little archaic, and maybe needs a good updating.

  • 54
    Marvin says:

    Great “ad” – It’s amazing to me just how flat out nuts so many Republicans are. These people aren’t just wrong. They’re living in a whole other reality and time period. They are truly pathetic.

  • 55

    […] I Phone App….. Great Christmas present for many…… Republicans in Congress __________________ 2001 QC, 4×4, 435HP, 878 Ft Lbs, tons of crap and two yellow labs-315,000 19 […]

  • 56

    […] A cute take on the iPhone Apps commercial, and a who’s-who of Republican douchebaggery. […]

  • 57
    Ryan says:

    Um… you must have gotten the state wrong for Rep. Stephen Buyer in the Exploiting fears of Veterans section. Idaho doesn’t have a representative named Stephen Buyer. You can see for yourself here:

  • 58
    Talmage says:

    Nice work. There are much better examples than some of the ones which you have cited, but still really funny. I am a shameless liberal but am not surprised at the calls for a democratic equivalent video. Particularly this shameful process of catering to a single republican to try to garner some semblance of bi-partisanship. There is a theme in the Obama WH and in congress in general which I find very disconcerting. Every time there is a major piece of legislation that is being negotiated. the democratic party never starts from the liberal position and then works their way to the middle ground to find a compromise solution. They started the stimulus with 18 percent tax cuts which was more than any reasonable person in the Republican party should have expected, at the end of the day it went to thirty percent. They started from the position of no single payer health care system so now the compromise position of a public option won’t pass and we will end up with a watered down version of the co-op system which will be an abject failure. When Republicans are in charge man do they get stuff done. Wars are a waging. Taxes for rich people are a dropping. Regulations are rolling back like mad. Democrats can’t even bargain from the power position without giving up the prize before the fight has even started. The democratic party seems ineffective inefficient and are definitely complicit in this economic debacle. I am surprised that anyone posting on this cite can muster up enough enthusiasm to support either of the major parties in their entirety. Both parties are so intellectually dishonest and fundamentally unprincipled I can’t fathom people have any passion for either one. Especially the Republicans though. I can understand overlooking the perceived inability (though I believe it is purposeful undermining) of the democratic party, but good lord the Republicans are out of their minds. This is the states rights party (whose president was appointed by the U.S. Supreme Court) of fiscal conservatism (Who took a budget surplus and turned it into the largest deficit man has ever known) that is strong on national defense (who got us mired down in no less than two unnecessary and illegal wars.) How do you reconcile that blatant hypocrisy in your party? Either you think that is what conservatism is and your wrong, or you are blindly following a party because you always have and you don’t know what you believe politically. It is really funny to watch people get so fired up over a web posting (that is really funny and generally very well done). Do these guys just eat piss and vinegar for breakfast? WTF!

  • 59
  • 60

    […] (Thanks for the laugh, Waking Up Now.) […]

  • 61

    […] Detailed explanations and support for the claims are available at the creator's website, Waking Up Now. […]

  • 62
    Beau says:

    on Science vs. Christianity

    I personally look to Science to answer the “How” and my religion to answer the “Why”. For example, science is really good at looking at evidence and making determinations based on analysis, like how all of the elements were created in stars, supernovas, and other stellar events, but when science looks to the reasons behind their determinations, they can’t give you the reason why. The may be able to give you the odds of it happening, but to give meaning to their findings is out of their reach.

    I find the universe and life so elegant and amazing that I cannot believe that God doesn’t exist. For me to believe that God created the universe and set the creation of life as we know it in motion by using stars to create increasingly more complex building blocks such as oxygen and carbon, then to put the spark in said life, eventually leading us to humans and sentiency makes perfect sense to me. After all most Christians are taught that God works in mysterious ways and the book of Genesis is more like the clif notes to the creation of the universe and the comprehensive log of God’s love.

  • 63
    Brad says:

    Don’t know who this guy is, but is he ever screwed up in the head!! Or maybe just brain washed by Oreobama and his Muslim, anti-american cohorts!!

  • 64

    […] “We’ve got a Rep for that.” (Click for specific references and videos.) […]

  • 65

    […] of Apple’s iPhone App Store meme. The rest, especially the bitter, canard laced garbage from Waking Up Now shown above, just detracts from the whole body of work, which is quite ironic given how liberal […]

  • 66
    Jenny says:

    Thank you! Well done, funny, catchy, and sounds and looks just like an Apple commercial. I appreciate the work it took.

  • 67
  • 68
    Jeanette McKenzie says:

    A bright beacon showing the stupidity that is prevalent in society today. Facts are no longer important, it’s all spin. Thinking Christians are now over-run by emotional wowsers that don’t even know their own religion well enough to remain consistent throughout an argument. More than anything else, this points out to me that the current school curriculum, the great minds in delivering education are WRONG about what works. Let’s stop coddling Dick and Jane telling them that it’s okay, they did their best and come right out and say, Dick & Jane, you didn’t study and you FAIL. You are not fit to hold public office. Dear Dick, you don’t know what you’re talking about, maybe you should give up politics and take up plumbing (although I’m guessing that would be unfair to plumbers and might lower the working groups IQ too drastically). Dear Jane, it’s NOT politically or socially correct to let your husband tell you what to do and when, maybe you should give up politics and take up work in a call-centre. It’s considered a GOOD trait there if you listen to bullshit all day and can still smile serenely.

    For gods sake – stop electing Moron’s even if they do spout a line you like. Insist on better!

  • 69

    […] Check out the great video (playing off the iPhone campaign). Share and Enjoy: […]

  • 70
    Crystal Stephens says:

    Love it…posted on my Facebook page…people need to know about the people who are representing them. Thanks for putting this together!

  • 71
    Kim T says:

    As much bull as each party gives out (both repubican and democrat) I think it’s well overdue to form a new major party. The two we have now are becoming quite indistinct of each other and each is just as willing to go to the new all-time low in order to gain a few inches of political ground. It seems that no matter which party you turn to on any level of government, you will find selfish and incapable fools. We need a new political party. One that can remember why they get their positions in the first place-to serve our nation and the voting public. To SERVE us to the best of their abilities and to be as transparent in doing that as possible. We don’t serve them, they serve us!

  • 72

    […] Whatever Bad Deed You Need, There’s a Rep for That – “If you want to heckle the president during his address to the nation, there’s a Rep. for that.” […]

  • 73

    […] (Thanks for the laugh, Waking Up Now.) […]

  • 74
    Stephen Jaye says:

    If you want someone with a heightened sense of self-importance, and a distorted view of the proper relationship between government and its people to destroy our economy, devastatingly devalue our currency, and trample on our freedom, there are 256 reps, 59 senators, and an administration for that – go Democrats!

    Seriously, can you please talk about the issues rather than resorting to character assassination. Nothing in your video makes the $1.48 Trillion deficit any lower, nothing in your video makes cap-and-trade less of a threat to more than double people’s heating bills, and nothing in your video changes the situation in Afghanistan.

  • 75

    […] Congress, republicans spreading lies After you watch this video you might want to mosey on over to Republicans in Congress where you can read about and watch multiple videos of some of the most outrageous lies coming out of […]

  • 76

    […] quoting Biblical prophecy…There’s a rep for that,” it says. In the accompanying blog post the video’s auteur explains his claims and sums it up by saying, “The Republican party […]

  • 77
    Kristina says:

    I for one am shocked and horrified at what I’m seeing here. Especially the parts about protecting people from hate crimes.

  • 78
    C. Bryan King says:

    I love this “ad” and will be sending it to everyone I know!

    Thanks Maslab for the link to Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli. Best argument against the theocrats I’ve seen; I’m going to try to memorize it!

    I find it interesting that those who are attacking this blog almost unanimously give no examples or citations to back their claims, while the blog itself and many of those who have replied positively give numerous examples, citations, and/or links. Typical when fear mongering and/or when you have your head up your ass.

    I also find it interesting that people can accuse anyone who agrees with this site of being “brainwashed” or getting their info from “left-wing extremist news” when they believe GOP BS such as: “Democrats want to murder old people by rationing health care…and put capitalists in death camps.” Talk about brainwashed.

    A recent study by Harvard Medical School researchers found that nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care; that’s 3750 deaths a month, more than died on 9/11. A recent study by the California Nurses Association titled, “California’s Real Death Panels: Insurers Deny 21% of Claims”, found that during the first six months of 2009, PacifiCare denied 39.6 percent of claims; Cigna denied 32.7 percent; HealthNet denied 30 percent; Kaiser Permanente denied 28.3 percent; Blue Cross denied 27.9 percent and Aetna denied 6.4 percent.

    Don’t misunderstand me, I am not a Democrat and do not agree with many of their actions either, but at least I can see that they usually have clear and rational reasons for their beliefs and actions. I am a proud left-wing liberal progressive, but as Bill Maher so eloquently put it: “We don’t have a left and a right party in this country anymore. We have a center-right party and a crazy party.”×327906

    Finally, on the topic of science as a religion, I have thought that for quite sometime now, and I was a Zoology major. Granted, science isn’t quite as dogmatic as religion but it is a belief system. It is predicated on the belief that everything can be reductively and quantitatively explained and that the only valid way to the Truth is via the scientific method. It’s hypothoses and theories must be believed by the majority of the scientific community before they are accepted; factual data is not always universally accepted and even after it is it can be overturned. There are few “laws” in science and even those laws are subject to change when new data leads to new beliefs. By its very nature science is atheistic, not to say that scientists themselves are universally atheists, but atheists are almost universally scientific in that they only believe that which can be empirically proven. So, science is an atheistic belief system that attempts to discover the Truth. Religion is also a belief system that attempts to discover the Truth and can be either theistic OR atheistic (i.e. Buddhism). Simple logic, so revered by science, leads to the conclusion that science is therefore a religion.

  • 79
    Jeff Redman says:

    These “now do it to the Democrats because they’re just the same” comments are absurd.

    Pretending that Democrats’ political tactics and misbehavior are the same as Republicans’ is like saying:
    Picnic trash is the same as radioactive waste;
    A pimple is the same as cancer;
    That criticizing U.S. policy is the same as suspending Habeas Corpus AND torturing people AND throwing folks in prison because
    you believe they committed a crime.

    The offenses are not comparable. They’re not even in the same category.

    D__n people use the brain that God gave you.

  • 80
    Rob says:

    I just laughed at how incredibly twisted all your information is young sir. You probably wasted a lot of time making all this. Sorry to inform you, but your a) a fool and b) entirely wrong. Don’t get hit by a bus, or do and live… If health care reform passed, you’d be dead.

  • 81
    C. Bryan King says:

    I feel I need to clarify my position on the science = religion issue. I only feel that science crosses the line into religion when it stands in opposition to religion, when it refuses to accept that there is any other valid way to arrive at the Truth. So that it really comes down to the attitude of the individual regarding science. If someone believes it is the ONLY valid source of information, then for that person it has become a religion, otherwise it is simply a tool, methodology, practice, or philosophy.

  • 82
    dean says:

    I agree with every point. I have only one comment. didn’t you mean Republicrat? That is the same species as Demublican. They’re all the same! Government under Obama looks staretlingly similar to Bush. Tax and spend, spend and tax. Lie, cheat, steal, ignore the oath of office, rob the people and hand it all over to the banksters. What has changed? If you don’t agree, stop drinking the cool-aid. If you do, widen your guns to include the Dmocrats. They’re all liars and thieves.

  • 83
    Jenn Riedy says:

    I’d encourage you to do a search on Pub Med using the search term “abortion breast cancer.” You might be surprised by what you find. Here is just one example:

    Spec Law Dig Health Care Law. 2009 Jan;(340):9-35.

    The abortion-breast cancer connection.
    Brind J.

    Baruch College–City University of New York, NY 10010, USA.

    This article examines the abortion breast cancer link in some historical scientific detail, offering a perspective on an issue that is at the center of a long-running public policy debate that plays out in legislatures, courtrooms, and newspaper editorials, as well as in scientific and medical journals. Even as politically correct studies have been promulgated to neutralize the data proving the abortion breast cancer link, even stronger data have emerged in recent years that firmly link abortion to premature births in subsequent pregnancies, which in turn raise the risk of breast cancer in mothers and cerebral palsy in prematurely born children.

    (emphasis mine)

  • 84
    deadshot says:

    Great video. I also like the fact you let people post comments without making them register/use a password/identify characters. as some web boards make you do.

    I also respect you for letting opponents of the web site and/or comments made post their comments.

    Personally, I think the GOP is moving to a far right rump that disagrees with everything the duly elected government of this country is doing purely because they can. The GOP offer no alternatives.

  • 85
    Miriam says:

    Well put! Thank you!!!

  • 86
    CLAllen says:

    I am in total agreement with your reporting but sadly as a gay man I feel betrayed by the Democrats. I voted for Obama who promised change so far he is continuing business as usual. I would like to see an in depth analysis of the Democratic Party. Unfortunately I feel that both parties of our two party system are out of touch with the will of the people — they seem to be representing the “Wall Street Wizards”. I doubt that there will ever be a viable third party with a serious chance to govern this country. This is the same reason the Original American Revolution was fought God save us all.

  • 87

    […] I come back to this theme over and over, but it seems like the Right is offering up another thought experiment to see if it takes hold.  An experiment in the politics of sound bites.  And do you know how we can be sure that Nick Rizzuto isn’t making a serious argument?  Because he never answers a basic question:  If we take science out of policy-making, then on what basis do we make policy? […]

  • 88
    Lesley Morn says:

    Thanks for putting up this article. I’m unquestionably frustrated with struggling to search out relevant and rational commentary on this matter. Everybody now goes to the very far extremes to either drive home their viewpoint that either: everyone else in the planet is wrong, or two that everyone but them does not really understand the situation. Many thanks for your concise, pertinent insight.

  • 89
    Meat eating, pussy fucking, gun-toting conservative says:

    Pff, give me a break. If you rob/assault/murder a normal person OR a fudgepacker, they are already both equally protected under the law. Take your request for “special rights” and shove that up your ass, if you can do without your boyfriends penis for more than a minute.

  • 90

    Republicans are social retards and are at least honest about it. Democrats are bald faced liars and shills for corporate power and money. There are differences, real differences, but they exist at the public level more so than Congressional.

  • 91
    software says:

    Hi.. I for one am shocked and horrified at what I’m seeing here. Especially the parts about protecting people from hate crimes.

  • 92
    Don Calhoon says:

    The point that Judge Gohmert was trying to make was that the crimes such as flashing, voyeurism, etc.. are only treated as misdemeanors but if one is offended and reacts or retaliates against the person who commits the misdemeanor then their actions are considered a federal hate crime by the definition in the bill. It is obvious to me that there is no reasoning with a person who believes that the judge was saying it is ok to slap around one’s wife. There is only one hope and that is in Jesus Christ the living Son of GOD who died for our sins and rose again that we might live.

  • 93
    robtish says:

    But I did not say “the judge was saying it is ok to slap around one’s wife.” I said he suggested that it doesn’t count as violence. According to his definition of violent crime, slapping your wife so that it doesn’t leave mark does not count as violence. It’s an inescapable conclusion based on what he said. Now, did he intend to suggest this? I certainly hope not. But he did it, whether intentional or not.

  • 94
    Don Calhoon says:

    I listened to the Gohmert clip 5 times and never heard him say anything about slapping a wife nor did I hear him say anything indicating that he had anything against gays. I heard him say that everyone regardless of who they are, what they believe or who they want to go to bed with has a right to be treated fairly and equally. Also, why the “low-hanging fruit on the crazy tree” comment about Michelle Bachmann? Is it because she is a Christian and practices what she believes and what the Bible teaches? Submission does not mean slavery! In this case it means honor and honor goes both ways. The same passage says for husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the Church (those who believe in Him)and gave himself for it (that is on the cross for our salvation). Submission is also a way of showing love but it doesn’t mean you have to accept the dictates of your husband. It is more like honoring him by considering the way he is leading the family and in return because he loves you he wants what is best for you and the family. I’m sure she and her husband discussed her going to law school and they both agreed. You see, when we love Christ and He lives in us then His will is what we want to do. Here is a secular example: I love my country and I am free to do whatever I want within the parameters of the law. I don’t feel restricted by those laws because I know they are for the good of everyone and I don’t want to break them. So, because I love Christ I am truly free.

  • 95
    robtish says:

    Don, did you read post you’re commenting on? Let me summarize

    1. Louie said about LGBT hate crime victims in 2007, “There were only 242 crimes where there was actually some — truly an assault.” He’s suggesting, then, that simple assault doesn’t truly count as assault. That’s the only way his number works, as you can see here.
    2. The FBI gives us a man slapping his wife as an example of simple assault, the sort of assault Gohmert is suggesting isn’t truly assault.

    There you go. It’s an inescapable conclusion of his testimony

    Does he believe what he’s suggesting? I hope he’s just an incompetent legislator making a special effort to air false statements that he hasn’t confirmed but believes because they suit his bias and agenda. Yes, that would be giving him the benefit of the doubt.

  • 96
    Don Calhoon says:

    Yes I did read it. Listen more carefully to what the Judge says. Be fair.

  • 97
    robtish says:

    This is the problem I have with conservatives these days. I have very explicitly explained the foundation for my comment. Rather than refuting it, you keep offering posts that offer little more than “Nuh uh!” In your initial post, you say there is no reasoning with me. I suppose that explains why you have not even attempted to reason with me; you just keep restating your disagreement. I’ll repeat the logic one more time, and then you’re on your own.

    1. Louie said about LGBT hate crime victims in 2007, “There were only 242 crimes where there was actually some — truly an assault.” He’s suggesting, then, that simple assault doesn’t truly count as assault. That’s the only way his number works, as you can see here.
    2. The FBI gives us a man slapping his wife as an example of simple assault, the sort of assault Gohmert is suggesting isn’t truly assault.

    There you go. It’s an inescapable conclusion of his testimony.

    By the way, I’m being quite fair to Gohmert. He did in fact say that ““There were only 242 crimes where there was actually some — truly an assault.” This is an untruth, an untruth that he made a special effort to get into the Congressional Record. He’s either dishonest or incompetent.

  • 98
    Richard Enderle says:

    I see a lot of ad hominem attacks in the comments. They are quick to accuse you if “listening to some leftist organization’, but they have no evidence, or proof. Just bitching.

  • 99
    Crew 16 says:

    The parsing of words by the conservative commentators posted previously is exactly the same game they accuse the originator of this post of playing. On the one hand, by not saying something, it can be inferred that you are saying something. On the other, it is the same thing as a legislator who is allegedly prepared (with significant staff assistance) for making a statement for the Congressional record that sounds like he wouldn’t agree that a husband striking his spouse unprovoked or otherwise would be construed under the law as “domestic violence/assault.”

    The cases noted require special attention because it could be that in some parts of these United States, a jury of the accused peers just might find the lynching of a black American and the torture and murder of a gay college student acceptable behavior in their neck of the woods–so to speak. There are parts of this nation that have required Federal intervention to make sure that the law is applied equally to all Americans. And so it is today.

    When people do the right thing and play fair, the government is invisible. When people of great power and wealth refuse to acknowledge that they stand on the shoulders of the farmers and shop keeper minutemen who fought for and founded this nation it is the role of the government: local, state and federal to make sure the law is applied equally to all.

    It comes down to this: When American individuals decide once and for all that they will abide by the notions of common decency in a civilized society, the government will have no role to play but maintain the parks and keep the peace. However, Americans have proven time and again from generation to generation that individual accountability is for somebody else, not for them. And so we have to legislate to the lowest common denominator, not to the better angels of our nature.

  • 100

    […] name may be familiar:  he made into my Republicans in Congress video.  He’s certain global warming is nothing to worry about.  We can ignore all those […]

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>