Here’s Eric Holder’s announcement that the justice department will launch a civil rights investigation into the chokehold death of Eric Garner.
The gays are going to force us all into tolerating them, Or kill us. Or tolerance-camp us.
Something that requires a pre-emptive strike by the forces of decency…which will coincidentally take the form of policing the population for gayness, criminalizing gayness, and maybe forced reparitive therapy…in camps. And the occasional stoning to keep morale high.
Following the resignation of Mozilla president Brendan Eich, the wingnut talking heads have increased their outpouring of claims that public protest against discrimination is a sign that gays are the real persecutors.
Gays stifle dissent by protests and boycotts, therefore they’re fascists. Wingnuts don’t boycott anything, because freedom…unless it’s pertinent to gay people.
Gays are intolerant of intolerant Christians…and btw, you can’t be truly Christian and tolerant of gay marriage. So a sizable chunk of Christendom just vanishes.
Gay organizations are terrorists, because they make people afraid…not, you know, actual terrorists who issue violent threats, blow up stuff, and kill and beat people. But they’re going to, we are continuously assured, as soon as they have power. They’ll murder Christians and conservatives They’ll corrupt the youth and make them believe wrong things.
So let’s take this at face value, that this is a criticism of activists and extremists. But gay organizations aren’t all representative of all gay people, right? It’s not like they’d say the same thing of any homosexual person, regardless of whether or not they express themselves on the political stage? It’s not like the bundle of assertions made following the Mozilla dust-up are simply replays of an opt-repeated script? Surely, these critics would accept that premise, and a modicum of research won’t turn up an ongoing agenda of denying any legitimacy to the concept of homosexuality?
This article provides a brief but fascinating history of the corporate quest for civil (personhood) rights and how dangerous it is to our democracy. (I had no idea it goes all the way back to the end of the Civil War/beginning of the Gilded Age!)
Last week, The Wire creator David Simon told Bill Moyers that the legal doctrine that spending money on political campaigns is an act of political speech protected by the First Amendment poses the greatest threat to American democracy. “That to me was the nail in the coffin,” he said. “If the combination of the monetization of our elections and gerrymandering create a bicameral legislature that doesn’t in any way reflect the will of the American people, you’ve reached the end game for democracy.”
He’s right. Not only does money as speech allow those with the fattest wallets to drown out the voices of average citizens, as John Light points out, it also gives wealthy donors an effective veto over policies that enjoy majority support. But it’s important to understand the other ways that the expansion of civil rights for corporations can conflict with the public interest.
As Simon observed, the notion of corporate personhood isn’t inherently problematic. The concept that companies are “artificial persons” is necessary because you can’t enter into a contract with an inanimate object, and you can’t take an inanimate object to court if that contract is breached.
Problems arise when these soulless artificial persons demand constitutional rights that were designed to protect real, flesh-and-blood people. […]
By the way, if you enjoy looking at scanned historical documents, you can find a ton of them at the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) website. Here’s a link to four high resolution pages of the U.S. Constitution, which is where Wikipedia got their copies. If you prefer to have all four pages as a PDF, you can download it here (7MB).
Most of what you find at NARA should be in the public domain:
May I reproduce images from your web site?
The vast majority of the digital images in the Online Catalog are in the public domain. Therefore, no written permission is required to use them. We would appreciate your crediting the National Archives and Records Administration as the original source. For the few images that remain copyrighted, please read the instructions noted in the “Access Restrictions” field of each catalog record.
Please note that a few images on other areas of our web site have been obtained from other organizations and that these are always credited. Permission to use these photographs should be obtained directly from those organizations.
May I reproduce other NARA records?
In general, all government records are in the public domain and may be freely used. We do have some donated or other materials that might be copyrighted. If you have questions about the records you are interested in, speak to the archivist or reference staff that handles those records.
Can I get a signed permission form from NARA to use materials?
NARA as a policy does not sign documents stating that particular records are not copyrighted because government records are in the public domain. For other materials, it is the user’s responsibility to determine copyright.
The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, legalizing it throughout the state.
The ruling was handed down Thursday, capping off a whirlwhind few months that catapulted New Mexico into the national discussion on same-sex marriage. This makes New Mexico the 17th state in the country to legalize same-sex marriage.
The ruling denied an argument that same-sex marriage would be detrimental to children and said that saying they could not procreate is not a valid argument.
Read the rest of the article here: State Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Marriage Legal in New Mexico
Here’s the full decision:
While China cracks down on Internet dissent, America’s pit bulls of air travel, the TSA, have expanded their use of information about passengers even before the shoes and belts come off at the security check points
Tax records, property ownership, drivers licenses, credit ratings, travel itineraries, frequent flier club memberships, and previous run ins with law enforcement are among the databases the TSA is using to judge which fliers may be security risks.
Data in the Automated Targeting System is used to decide who is placed on the no-fly list — thousands of people the United States government has banned from flying — and the selectee list, an unknown number of travelers who are required to undergo more in-depth screening, like Mr. Darrat. The T.S.A. also maintains a PreCheck disqualification list, tracking people accused of violating security regulations, including disputes with checkpoint or airline staff members.
Much of this personal data is widely shared within the Department of Homeland Security and with other government agencies. Privacy notices for these databases note that the information may be shared with federal, state and local authorities; foreign governments; law enforcement and intelligence agencies — and in some cases, private companies for purposes unrelated to security or travel.
For instance, an update about the T.S.A.’s Transportation Security Enforcement Record System, which contains information about travelers accused of “violations or potential violations” of security regulations, warns that the records may be shared with “a debt collection agency for the purpose of debt collection.”
A recent privacy notice about PreCheck notes that fingerprints submitted by people who apply for the program will be used by the F.B.I. to check its unsolved crimes database.
Four precious young lives cut short by hate.
Denise. Addie Mae. Carole. Cynthia. #Birmingham
Three of the girls were 14 years old, the other was 11. Had they not been brutally murdered they’d all be in their 60s today. They most likely would’ve had children and grandchildren by now, maybe even great grandchildren. Who knows what any one of them or their descendants might have gone on to accomplish?
Twenty-two other people were also injured that day. The case remained unsolved until 1971, when Bill Baxley was elected Attorney General of Alabama. He reopened it after requesting the original FBI files on the case and discovering that evidence had been withheld from prosecutors by order of J. Edgar Hoover. The case wasn’t brought to court until November 1977.
In honor of the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, a moment when America took decisive action to reverse the legacy of slavery. And a warning that the American right wing is working hard to roll back that progress. We must remain vigilant.
On @msnbc, Julian Bond says several Republican leaders were invited to speak at the march today but declined.
Inexplicably, or perhaps very explicably, right wing blogs have united to defend and lionize Trayvon Martin’s killer George Zimmerman, and today they’re all (and I do mean “all”) freaking out like chihuahuas on crack about a report that the Department of Justice is opening an email tip line: George Zimmerman: DOJ Solicits Help From Civil Rights Leaders in Zimmerman Investigation.
The U.S. Department of Justice on Monday afternoon appealed to civil rights groups and community leaders, nationally and in Sanford, for help investigating whether a federal criminal case might be brought against George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, one advocate said.
The DOJ has also set up a public email address to take in tips on its civil rights investigation.
That’s all the wingnuts need to set them off into a frenzy of hatred for President Obama and Eric Holder. Actually, to be precise, they’re always in a constant state of low-level frenzy; this just turns up the heat a little more.
At PJ Media, Bryan Preston says the DOJ is going to manufacture evidence so they can destroy the entire concept of self defense, and give Obama “two years of unchecked power.”
The Dumbest Man on the Internet, Dim Jim Hoft, calls it a “Zimmerman snitch line,” and is careful to note that George Zimmerman is a Democrat and voted for Obama. This is always a very important point for Hoft. Nobody knows why.
At Michelle Malkin’s troll agitation site Twitchy.com, they’re inciting the wingnut audience to flood the DOJ’s tip lines with stupid comments, as usual. Winning!
These people won’t be satisfied until there is blood in the streets.
The Jews believed the same thing about Hitler little Johnny. Then he turned them into Jewish Crackers and roasted them to death in ovens.
Obama and Holder would do the same to us if they could get away with it.
Crazy Pamela Geller turns in one of her typical bizarre hateful rants:
Obama and his SS are on the war path. It. is. unbelievable. I am sure they are looking to enact legislation that mirrors the German Weapons Act (gun control, Third Reich) in concert with the lynching of George Zimmerman.
And who is Obama and Eric’s patsy on this? Thomas Perez (Obama’s pick for Labor Secretary). Stunning subversion. As Assistant Attorney General at the Justice Department, Tom Perez has a shameful record of pro-sharia initiatives and craven accommodation to Islamic supremacists at the DoJ.
There’s a lot more, but I can only stand to read so much of this deranged wharrgarbl.
(Note: Obama’s speech begins at about 40 minutes in, but there are some good moments before that.)
Tennessee legislators are back at it. They’re looking to enact legislation that would ban the word “gay” from school classrooms. They’ve tried for the last few years, but have fallen short each time. It hasn’t stopped them from trying again though.
This time, they’re not only looking to ban the word, but they’re going to require teachers to out their gay students to their parents.
At grade levels pre-K through eight (pre-K-8), any such classroom instruction, course materials or other informational resources that are inconsistent with natural human reproduction shall be classified as inappropriate for the intended student audience and, therefore, shall be prohibited.
The preceding passage would also seem to indicate that talk of contraceptives is inappropriate, since it’s inconsistent with natural human reproduction. Moreover, it would seem to prohibit discussion of in vitro fertilization (IVF).
The provision that requires counseling seems innocuous on its face, until you realize that if a school counselor or other administrator learns a student is gay during counseling, that person must inform the parents:
(2) A school counselor, nurse, principal or assistant principal from counseling a student who is engaging in, or who may be at risk of engaging in, behavior injurious to the physical or mental health and wellbeing of the student or another person; provided, that wherever possible such counseling shall be done in consultation with the student’s parents or legal guardians. Parents or legal guardians of students who receive such counseling shall be notified as soon as practicable that such counseling has occurred;
Parents wouldn’t need to be informed if the school official believes that the parent or guardian is in any way responsible for the sexual abuse of the student.
Campfield has tried this act before, and was even featured in 2008 in a fauxtography scandal when locals altered a photo to show him holding a bumper sticker saying confederate values.
Campfield’s positions have been highlighted here in the past as well. He’s previously been noted as being a birther.
It shouldn’t be surprising that Campfield’s focus on gayness is in part due to misguided notions about AIDS as well.
That Campfield construes gayness to be a dangerous act may be rooted in his faulty understanding of HIV and AIDS. ‘My understanding is that it is virtually—not completely, but virtually—impossible to contract AIDS through heterosexual sex,’ he said during a radio interview last year. ‘Most people realize that AIDS came from the homosexual community—it was one guy screwing a monkey, if I recall correctly, and then having sex with men. It was an airline pilot, I believe.’
(Renowned scientist Jacques Pepin’s book The Origin of AIDS differs greatly from Campfield’s account.)
True to the wording of his bills, Campfield does find homosexuality unnatural. Homosexuals ‘do not naturally reproduce,’ he says. ‘It has not been proven that it is nature. It happens in nature, but so does bestiality. That does not make it right or something we should teach in schools.’ And he does find homosexuality dangerous: ‘What’s the average lifespan of a homosexual? It’s very short. Google it.’