With his votes against veterans, children and their healthcare, Native Americans, unions, public education, voters’ rights, and lack of support from his own party the question remains, “Why do the Arizona and National Democratic Party organizations continue to support Republican fundamentalist, Trent Franks by refusing to fund viable candidates that oppose him?” This seems to make no sense. His ties to Tom Delay and Jack Abramof are well documented, his useless and ineffectual anti-abortion rhetoric has accomplished nothing, and his recent vote against ten vital water projects for Arizona is a matter of congressional record.
Thirty years ago in West Virginia, the Republican Party refused to put any candidate up against perennial Congressman Ken Heckler. Look at his record. As a political science teacher with no money he went door to door and got himself elected. He voted for every spending bill that came across his desk unless it involved the military. He championed every liberal cause regardless of cost or impact. Yet he never faced a challenge organized by the Republican Party. According to sources in West Virginia at the time, “Ken Heckler’s outspoken opposition to fiscal responsibility and extreme liberal views were the Republican Party’s best asset. Why would we want to remove someone from office who makes us look so good?”
Sound familiar?
The Democratic Party protects Trent Franks for the same reason; he’s an example of everything negative in the Republican Party. His opposition to minorities, obvious support of corporate interests at the expense of his constituents, and total inability to make any progress on his personal ideological agenda make other Democratic Party candidates look good. All Trent Franks needs to make his value to the Democratic Party more obvious is a pointy hat with bells and a clown suit.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Religious Bigotry
Defending the freedom of legal religious bigotry, Trent Franks, Arizona’s Grand Dragon, remained loyal to Bush and voted against allowing gay American citizens protection from discrimination. His “reasoning” is that religious groups should be allowed to treat any gay citizen of the United States as subhuman. In a statement issued by his office, Franks-in-stein stated that ENDA fails to protect the prejudicial hiring prerogatives of faith-based organizations including some religious schools. In other words, conservative religious organizations should be exempt from Civil Rights Laws. Religious bigotry has a long historical tradition; from the inquisition to the Holocaust to segregation.
Justifying segregation, Buckner H. Payne, a Nashville publisher and clergyman who wrote under the pseudonym Ariel, insisted in 1867 that the tempter in the garden was a black man whose interaction with Eve was the first cause of the Fall. Writing at the height of Radical Reconstruction, Ariel concluded his argument by reminding his readers that "a man can not commit so great an offense against his race, against his country, against his God, in any other way, as to give his daughter in marriage to a Negro or to take one of their females for his wife."
The liquidation of six million Jews and other “enemies of the state” was caused, D. B. Red explained in his pamphlet Race Mixing a Religious Fraud (c. 1959), by the sexual "mingling" of the Jews, who suffered what Red represents as God's final solution to the miscegenation problem: "Totally destroy the people involved." Here, surely, was proof that segregation was "divine law, enacted for the defense of society and civilization.”
Franks statements reflects these sentiments. “The provisions of ENDA would subtly erode the ability of states to protect the most fundamental building block of Western Civilization, the institution of marriage and family. It would serve as a building block for judges to argue that the government has no rational basis to continue discriminating in the area of marriage.” Gee, if ending legal discrimination of any class of citizens is such a threat, he should have trotted out his old picture of a fetus to scare people.
Franks summation of his position is, “Religious liberty is the cornerstone of human freedom, and the legislation put forth today would inevitably undermine that right;” which makes perfect sense as long as humans are defined as ‘straight, white heterosexual people’. If you are not part of that group, do not walk into Franks’ church; you are not human and have no rights as a citizen of the United States.
Justifying segregation, Buckner H. Payne, a Nashville publisher and clergyman who wrote under the pseudonym Ariel, insisted in 1867 that the tempter in the garden was a black man whose interaction with Eve was the first cause of the Fall. Writing at the height of Radical Reconstruction, Ariel concluded his argument by reminding his readers that "a man can not commit so great an offense against his race, against his country, against his God, in any other way, as to give his daughter in marriage to a Negro or to take one of their females for his wife."
The liquidation of six million Jews and other “enemies of the state” was caused, D. B. Red explained in his pamphlet Race Mixing a Religious Fraud (c. 1959), by the sexual "mingling" of the Jews, who suffered what Red represents as God's final solution to the miscegenation problem: "Totally destroy the people involved." Here, surely, was proof that segregation was "divine law, enacted for the defense of society and civilization.”
Franks statements reflects these sentiments. “The provisions of ENDA would subtly erode the ability of states to protect the most fundamental building block of Western Civilization, the institution of marriage and family. It would serve as a building block for judges to argue that the government has no rational basis to continue discriminating in the area of marriage.” Gee, if ending legal discrimination of any class of citizens is such a threat, he should have trotted out his old picture of a fetus to scare people.
Franks summation of his position is, “Religious liberty is the cornerstone of human freedom, and the legislation put forth today would inevitably undermine that right;” which makes perfect sense as long as humans are defined as ‘straight, white heterosexual people’. If you are not part of that group, do not walk into Franks’ church; you are not human and have no rights as a citizen of the United States.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Inmates in Charge
The Bush administration’s support of the economic rape of America by selfish business interests continues with no opposition by the officials we elected to look out for our interests. Good jobs are so hard to find that a woman recently took out an ad to sell her breast milk.
In a transparent attempt to divert attention from the country’s economic decline, increasing home foreclosures, and rising food and gasoline prices, the U.S. Department of Labor bowed down to the Bush propaganda machine and announced Friday that employers added 166,000 jobs to non-farm payrolls in October, the most since May. Meanwhile, the jobless rate held at 4.7%
If you are scratching your head wondering, “Huh?” you are not alone.
Here is what they do not tell us; Chrysler announced it plans to nearly double the 13,000 job cuts it announced in February, now targeting the elimination of more than 25,000 hourly and salaried workers, or nearly one-third of its workforce. Add the Chrysler cuts to the expected job cuts -- at least 137,400 of them -- already in the works at General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and its ACH unit, and Delphi Corp. and the total American job reductions just in the manufacturing sector rise to about 150,000.
Net gain zero? Not so much.
Let us look at what jobs the Labor Department is talking about. 99% are in what is euphemistically termed the “service sector.” That means janitors, bedpan orderlies, hotel maids and temporary employment workers making minimum wage. How many of those new jobs do you think went to American citizens laid off from $20 and hour jobs with benefits who are losing their homes? How many $5 an hour jobs with no benefits went to illegals?
Do the math; the net loss to the economy and the tax base by those who contribute nothing to America comes to billions of dollars. The inmates are running the asylum and you and I are screwed.
In a transparent attempt to divert attention from the country’s economic decline, increasing home foreclosures, and rising food and gasoline prices, the U.S. Department of Labor bowed down to the Bush propaganda machine and announced Friday that employers added 166,000 jobs to non-farm payrolls in October, the most since May. Meanwhile, the jobless rate held at 4.7%
If you are scratching your head wondering, “Huh?” you are not alone.
Here is what they do not tell us; Chrysler announced it plans to nearly double the 13,000 job cuts it announced in February, now targeting the elimination of more than 25,000 hourly and salaried workers, or nearly one-third of its workforce. Add the Chrysler cuts to the expected job cuts -- at least 137,400 of them -- already in the works at General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and its ACH unit, and Delphi Corp. and the total American job reductions just in the manufacturing sector rise to about 150,000.
Net gain zero? Not so much.
Let us look at what jobs the Labor Department is talking about. 99% are in what is euphemistically termed the “service sector.” That means janitors, bedpan orderlies, hotel maids and temporary employment workers making minimum wage. How many of those new jobs do you think went to American citizens laid off from $20 and hour jobs with benefits who are losing their homes? How many $5 an hour jobs with no benefits went to illegals?
Do the math; the net loss to the economy and the tax base by those who contribute nothing to America comes to billions of dollars. The inmates are running the asylum and you and I are screwed.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Church and State
Ever wonder why churches get away with paying no taxes? Well, there is an IRS rule (not law) that states: “Churches are granted a tax exemption because they serve the public and do not participate in or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office." How does that work in the real world? Great, if you are an evangelical corporate church that supports republicans.
In Ohio, the World Harvest Church and Fairfield Christian Church, huge corporate churches with thousands of members, held political rallies and were active in President Bush's narrow Ohio win in 2004. According to IRS complaints filed by other churches in the area, these churches violated their tax-exempt status by pushing the candidacy of J. Kenneth Blackwell, who is the favored candidate of Ohio's religious right. In addition, the pastors of these churches made political speeches from their pulpits and allowed the Republican Party to solicit signatures and funds from church members during services. So far, the IRS has ignored the complaints.
However, in Pasadena, Calif., the IRS is examining the tax-exempt status of All Saints Church because its former pastor delivered a sermon that criticized Bush on the Iraq war and Republican conservatives on social policy two days before the 2004 election and the NAACP is also under IRS investigation for political participation.
Ain’t selective enforcement grand? I guess it depends on how our Fearless Leader, Herr Bush, calls the shots.
This is not only happening in Ohio, friends, Arizona’s corporate churches have a long history of flaunting the rules with impunity. Our Fuhrer’s number one supporter, Franks-n-stein, regularly visits these churches to make political speeches and solicit donations. Every two years, these churchs circulate his election petitions gathering the signatures he needs to qualify for the ballot.
I guess going door to door like every other candidate is required to do is too much work. Besides, after lying to Sun City residents about opposing Medicare Part D, blocking federal highway funds needed to upgrade the valley’s crumbling transportation system, and endlessly shouting his useless anti-abortion rhetoric to hide his lack of awareness of the real concerns of his constituents and this country, people would slam their doors in his vacuous face anyway.
Why should he bother doing things the legal way when he does not have to?
In Ohio, the World Harvest Church and Fairfield Christian Church, huge corporate churches with thousands of members, held political rallies and were active in President Bush's narrow Ohio win in 2004. According to IRS complaints filed by other churches in the area, these churches violated their tax-exempt status by pushing the candidacy of J. Kenneth Blackwell, who is the favored candidate of Ohio's religious right. In addition, the pastors of these churches made political speeches from their pulpits and allowed the Republican Party to solicit signatures and funds from church members during services. So far, the IRS has ignored the complaints.
However, in Pasadena, Calif., the IRS is examining the tax-exempt status of All Saints Church because its former pastor delivered a sermon that criticized Bush on the Iraq war and Republican conservatives on social policy two days before the 2004 election and the NAACP is also under IRS investigation for political participation.
Ain’t selective enforcement grand? I guess it depends on how our Fearless Leader, Herr Bush, calls the shots.
This is not only happening in Ohio, friends, Arizona’s corporate churches have a long history of flaunting the rules with impunity. Our Fuhrer’s number one supporter, Franks-n-stein, regularly visits these churches to make political speeches and solicit donations. Every two years, these churchs circulate his election petitions gathering the signatures he needs to qualify for the ballot.
I guess going door to door like every other candidate is required to do is too much work. Besides, after lying to Sun City residents about opposing Medicare Part D, blocking federal highway funds needed to upgrade the valley’s crumbling transportation system, and endlessly shouting his useless anti-abortion rhetoric to hide his lack of awareness of the real concerns of his constituents and this country, people would slam their doors in his vacuous face anyway.
Why should he bother doing things the legal way when he does not have to?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
