Online Left

Church: It's Were the Laws Aren't Followed

WASHINGTON — In what may be its most significant religious liberty decision in two decades, the Supreme Court on Wednesday for the first time recognized a “ministerial exception” to employment discrimination laws, saying that churches and other religious groups must be free to choose and dismiss their leaders without government interference.

Makes sense to me. The one place in the country not required to follow the laws are in church. Maybe that's why so many right-wing avengers now attempt murders of doctors and petition to have guys permitted in the congregation.

Fat Man Threatens to Eat Protesters

This is another story that reminds me that for Republican politicians, truth is not a necessary commodity. It is frustrating, depressing, and maddening at the same time.

Seems Gov. Fat Boy of New Jersey was appearing at a rally in support of Mitt Romney's campaign, and was interrupted by protests throughout the event. Without campaign signs, buttons or slogans, Gov. Fat Boy blames it all on President Obama and strongly suggests the protesters are somehow connected to the Obama campaign.

Christie blamed President Barack Obama for encouraging the actions of such protesters, who continued to chant sporadically throughout the rally.

"You're disoriented by the ways of hope and change," the first-term New Jersey governor said, referencing the president's famous 2008 campaign mantra.

Christie has frequented the campaign trial in support of Romney, the former Massachusetts governor and GOP presidential frontrunner. On Sunday, he accused the president of running a re-election campaign based on cynicism and anger.

"It is the most cynical re-election strategy you could ever think of," Christie said. "The president is encouraging people to be angry at me, angry at Mitt, because we stand up for what America believes in."

Apparently it's not cynical to lie on other politicians, but it is cynical to protest. Once again, the Constitutional rights of Americans and the Bill of Rights present obstacles to fat Republicans.

(Via CNN Political Ticker)

For GOP, Creating Jobs is Priority #122

While legislators profess to be concerned with creating jobs, they actually spend their time playing to their base, the right-wing conservatives in charge of the Tea Party. As proof, 64 members of the House of Representatives have signed on to H. Con Res 13, a resolution by Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) to affirm "In God We Trust" as the official motto of the United States and supporting and encouraging the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions."

House Report 112-47 includes:

A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84–851) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States. IN GOD WE TRUST was first used on paper money in 1957, when it appeared on the one-dollar silver certificate. The first paper currency bearing the motto entered circulation on October 1, 1957. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing was converting to the dry intaglio printing process. During this conversion, it gradually included IN GOD WE TRUST in the back design of all classes and denominations of currency.

So, what has happened since 1956 that requires congressional action to reaffirm the need for the motto? Nothing, except the need to convince right-wingers of their devotion to their religious beliefs. Is the House of Representatives completely ignorant of the needs of the American people in the midst of the most serious economic downturn since the Great Depression? Thank goodness, they aren't.

The dissenting views mirror those who understand our nation's priorities.

Today we face the highest budget deficit in our Nation’s history, a national unemployment rate of nearly 9%, and an ongoing mortgage foreclosure crisis. American forces are deployed in combat on several fronts, while our children who—by the very circumstances of their birth—are placed into a cradle-to-prison pipeline. We are also in the midst of reacting to a natural disaster of unimaginable proportions that recently occurred in Japan and the resulting nuclear disaster, which may have worldwide import. Yet, instead of addressing any of these critical issues, and instead of working to help American families keep a roof over their heads and food on their tables, we are debating whether or not to affirm and proliferate a motto that was adopted in 1956 and that is not imperiled in any respect.

So, if you're worried that the House of Representatives have completely lost their mind, rest assured that not all of them have -- but at least 64 of them are too busy pandering to their base to notice.

Updated: The House adopted, 396-9, a resolution (H Con Res 13) that would reaffirm the phrase "In God We Trust" as the official motto of the United States and encourage the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools and other government institutions.

Honor. Duty. Country.

While watching a documentary on Confederate General, Robert E. Lee, mention was made of the oath he took as a student soldier at West Point, which includes the words, Honor, Duty, and Country. I was again reminded when perusing the website, Veterans Today, that these words continue to be cherished and promised today, over one-hundred and fifty years later.

These three words may be only words to you and to me, ordinary citizens of the United States of America. To our Servicemen and women, however, they are a code to live by as they serve our country. They live with honor. They do their duty and they serve their country.

And then it crosses my mind. To some, Robert E. Lee was one of the greatest soldiers in the history of the United States, and I'm sure there are others who would expand that to include the entire world.

Did he abide by the oath taken?

He was a top cadet at West Point, paid for entirely by the United States Government. Did he owe the government of his country anything in return, or is it perfectly acceptable that if given an option of supporting your government, or the enemy of your government, the soldier has a right to choose?

Ed Fights Attacks on Postal Service

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Instructions for managers - 1878 [MACKEY VS. O'CONNOR]

In reading recently several depositions of a contested election in 1878, I stumbled across the "Instructions for Managers", included in the file.  I found it interesting.  I hope you will, too. The contest was in the Second Congressional District of South Carolina, U.S. House of Representatives. The contestants were Michael Patrick O'Connor and Edward William McGregor Mackey.

Each manager of election must take and subscribe, before any officer authorized to administer an oath, the oath of office provided by the constitution, and send the same to the commissioners of election, to be filed in the office of the clerk of the court.

1. At their first meeting, the managers should organize themselves into a board by appointing one of their number chairman. The chairman should administer the necessary oaths in the course of the election.

2. The managers must then appoint a clerk, who must take the oath provided by the constitution before the chairman of the board.

3. The polls must be opened at 6 o'clock a.m., and closed at 6 p.m.; and must be kept open, without intermission or adjournment, during these hours.

4. At the opening of the poll the box must be publicly opened and inspected, to see that it is empty and secure, then locked, the key returned to the managers, and not again opened during the election.

5. The managers must administer to each person offering to vote an oath that he is qualified to vote a this election according to the constitution of this State, and that he has not voted during this election.

6. The voting must be by ballot, which must contain written or printed, or partly written and partly printed, the names of the persons voted for, and the offices to which such persons are intended to be chosen, and must be so folded as to conceal the contents.

7. The clerk of the poll must keep a poll-list, upon which must be entered the name of every elector voting at the election.

Now for me, this is when it gets really interesting!

8. At the close of the election the managers and clerk must immediately proceed, publicly, to open the ballot-box and count the ballots therein; and continue such count, without adjournment or interruption, until the same is completed.  If, in counting, two or more lke ballots should be found folded together compactly, only one shall by counted, and the others destroyed; but if they bear different names, the same must be destroyed and not counted. If more ballots are found, on opening the box, than there are names on the poll-list, all the ballots must be returned to the box and thoroughly mixed together, and one of the managers, or the clerk, must without seeing the ballots, draw therefrom and immediately destroy as many ballots as there are in excess of the number of names on the poll-list.

9. After counting the votes, the managers and clerk must make and sign a statement of the result of the election.  Within three days after the election, the chairman of the board, or one of the managers designated in writing by the board, must deliver to the commissioners of election their written statement of the result of the election, the poll-lists, and the boxes containing the ballots, properly sealed and secured. The managers must, in addition to the statement of the result of the election, make and sign separate returns of the number of votes cast for governor and lieutenant-governor, in duplicate, and seal up the same, and deliver them to the commissioners of election, to be transmitted to teh secretary of state, and filed with the clerk of the court.

This is an interesting case that tells a lot about our country, campaigns, elections and politicians. Rather than ending it here, I'll periodically post more from MACKEY VS. CONNOR, as my schedule permits.

Thanks for reading.

If Only The Right Would Leave The Constitution Alone, Cont'd

We talked a few weeks ago about the right's approach to the U.S. Constitution, specifically, its desire to fiddle with it, adding more amendments while scrapping some old ones. As the GOP's interest in giving the 14th amendment a touch-up intensifies, let's take stock of where we are.

By my count, Republican leaders, including George W. Bush, endorsed six different new amendments to the Constitution over the last decade: (1) prohibiting flag burning; (2) victims' rights; (3) banning abortion; (4) requiring a balanced budget; (5) prohibiting same-sex marriage; and (6) allowing state-endorsed prayer in public schools. Jon Chait runs a similar list today, and notes a few I missed, including amendments to require legislative supermajorities to raise taxes, a 'parental rights' amendment, a term-limits amendment, and in one instance, an amendment to give Washington, D.C., a single voting representative.

Taken together, that's 10 constitutional amendments proposed, endorsed, and/or introduced by leading Republicans over the last decade.

I'd call this many things, but 'constitutional conservatism' -- a phrase repeated ad nauseum by Bachmann and the Tea Party crowd -- it isn't.

On top of the new amendments the right has requested, there's also the existing amendments the right wants to 'fix.' That means scrapping the 17th Amendment, repealing the 16th Amendment, getting rid of at least one part of the 14th Amendment, and 'restoring' the 'original' 13th Amendment.

It's as if the right has begun to look at the entire Constitution as little more than a rough draft, in desperate need of deft conservative editing. (What could possibly go wrong?)

The Constitutional Accountability Center's Elizabeth Wydra recently noted:

It is encouraging that so many Americans are now discussing and debating the Constitution. It is, after all, the People's document. But before Tea Party repeal efforts gather steam, 'We the People' should take a sober look at the text, history, and principles behind the amendments the Tea Party would like to do away with. Amending the Constitution is not an easy task, and generations of Americans poured blood, sweat, and treasure into adopting the amendments that Tea Party activists would now like to repeal.

Of course, if this were limited to right-wing activists, it'd be easier to dismiss. Alas, Republican officeholders and several statewide candidates are echoing the same ridiculous demands. In recent weeks, both Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called for the partial repeal of the 14th Amendment, for crying out loud.

Given the alleged reverence for the Constitution in far-right circles, the irony is rich.

"

(Via Political Animal.)

Tea Party Nuts for Terrorists

Earlier today, the Tea Party Nation circulated the following message:

An action alert from Tea Party Nation -

A few days ago, Geek.com and others reported that the Federal Government had shut down blog hosting site, Blogetery. The site that hosted Blogetery stated they were contacted by the Federal Law Enforcement and had little choice but to shut the site down immediately.

This action silenced 73,000 blogs.

Until this action occurred, none of us at Tea Party Nation had even heard of this site. We do not know what kind of blogs were hosted on this site, but we suspect they cover the range from personal to political.

This is why the Tea Party Movement needs to be involved immediately.

The Obama regime has taken a very hostile attitude towards our First Amendment rights. Is this a dry run the government is taking to shut down sites that are critical of the regime?

We need to act.

Call your Senators and Congressmen today and demand that the Senate and the House investigate which agency shut this site down and why. Email your friends and ask them to call as well. We need an explanation and we cannot let the regime off on this issue.

Along this line, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan has said she sees nothing wrong with the government suppressing speech the government finds offensive. Given the regime’s attitude to the First Amendment, we must be vigilant.

Remember to keep calling the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee and reminding them to vote "NO!" on the Kagan nomination.

Here are the direct numbers to the Republicans on the committee.

Ominous enough, but is there any truth to it? It took me all of 15 seconds to find the answer posted to PC World. I guess, of course, the Tea Party leaders would argue that PC World is part of the conspiracy, secretly owned and operated by members of the Obama administration, but you and I -- otherwise known as normal people -- know the truth. The Tea Party is a bunch of lying, scum-sucking, knuckle dragging idiots, who bring nothing to the political arena but hate and lies.

Here for anyone who actually sought the truth is a response to the lies circulated by the tin-foil hat crowd.

The blogosphere and online message boards have been buzzing with speculation as to why blogging website Blogetery.com, which claims to have hosted more than 70,000 bloggers, was suddenly shut down last week.

Was the site a haven for terrorists? Packed with how-to advice for bomb builders? Rife with child porn? And did the FBI really order the blogging site's host BurstNET to pull the plug?

BurstNET officials on Monday attempted to set the record straight by issuing the following statement:

"On the evening of July 9, 2010, BurstNET received a notice of a critical nature from law enforcement officials, and was asked to provide information regarding ownership of the server hosting Blogetery.com. It was revealed that a link to terrorist material, including bomb-making instructions and an al-Qaeda 'hit list', had been posted to the site. Upon review, BurstNET determined that the posted material, in addition to potentially inciting dangerous activities, specifically violated the BurstNET Acceptable Use Policy. This policy strictly prohibits the posting of 'terrorist propaganda, racist material, or bomb/weapon instructions'. Due to this violation and the fact that the site had a history of previous abuse, BurstNET elected to immediately disable the system."

So it appears that terrorist activity, including a "hit list," were key factors that led to Blogetry.com's shutdown, as well as the fact that the service had previously violated BurstNET's usage policy.

That explanation probably won't wash with numerous online commentators who've speculated that the Blogetery.com shutdown was part of a government plot to stifle free speech and control the Internet.

Apparently the use of the website for terrorists and racists didn't deter the crazies from coming to their rescue.

Oh, and another thing. The spokesperson doesn't identify the "law enforcement officials" who contacted them. It could have been the FBI, it could have been the state police, or just as likely a member of the local police force, but don't let the truth which you could have discovered in 15 seconds deter you from a good scare tactic.

Assholes!

Supreme Court Justice Stevens, writing in opposition to the majority opinion in a case that gives wider latitude to gun nuts (McDonald vs. Chicago, Number 08-1521), wrote:

Although the court's decision in this case might be seen as a mere adjunct to Heller, the consequences could prove far more destructive -- quite literally -- to our nation's communities and to our constitution.

I hope he's wrong. I fear he's right.

To The Victor...

Carol D. Leonnig's article on the Washington Post website, "Obama's Team Rankles the Right", is one of those stories that makes me want to blow chunks.

To some staunch conservatives watching President Bush relinquish the reins of power to President-elect Barack Obama, a few too many ardent liberals are now crashing the gates.

I'm paraphrasing no one in particular, when I ask, "Who Gives A Shit?"

I'd like President-elect Obama to reach across the aisle as much as possible to try and devise a bipartisan government that works for the American people. My only demand would be that the other side genuinely be interested in developing solutions, rather than finding just another wedge issue with which they can beat Democrats about the head.

At the same time, Obama and the Democrats won the 2008 elections decisively. I don't want to hear any more about America being a center-right country. The right didn't win squat -- in fact, they got the [electoral] asses handed to them.

My advice to Republicans is to reach out to Obama and find if there's any interest in working together. If that's not possible, I think you just need to shut up and sit down for a few months while the Obama-Biden team install their Administration.

They won, and you lost.

No one cares whether you're happy with their choices. If McCain had won, he'd be doing the same thing -- picking people who share his world vision.

Elections are contests, and in all contests, there are winners and losers.

Quoting New York Senator William Learned Marcy in 1831, "to the victor, go the spoils."