Left Agenda

ACORN has been getting attacked by the conservative right since its conception.  Look, it helps the poor with legal advice, housing problems, tax forms, etc.  Conservatives seem to hate the idea of poor people, especially Black ones, getting any help from anybody.

Since O’Keefe’s false ‘journalistic’ videos were proven to be heavily edited and not worth shit in any type of conviction against ACORN, which the Right Wing media whom pushed the pimp and ho story is shockingly ignoring, the conservative right just can’t let it go.  Judicial Watch, a self-described “conservative, non-partisan educational foundation,’ seems particularly miffed about ACORN’s innocence.  Perhaps it’s their own blaring stupidity that is to blame; how else could you confidently claim that you were ‘conservative’ and ‘non-partisan’?  That’s like the Cato Institute claiming that they’re non-partisan.

Here’s some of those heavily edited O’Keefe pimp and ho vids:

Now, let’s get back to Judicial Watch.  This, snicker, snicker, LMFAO… “non-partisan” group thinks that the DOJ is ignoring evidence that ACORN is corrupt, corrupt they say!  And Obama, Obama’s the corrupt Muslim Kenya guy that has complete control over the DOJ, ya see?  And, now, Obama’s controlling the DOJ to ignore ACORN’s illegal activities and not investigate them.  Damn all the things the DOJ has the evidence to convict, like Dickhead Cheney illegally torturing people, nooooooes… go after ACORN;  you can hear Judicial Watch whispering, ‘We see poor people.”  It’s true that some employees of ACORN committed crimes and were convicted of those crimes, but how does that implement ACORN?  There are military personnel that commit crimes too, does that mean the military is a criminal organization?

It’s hideous, hideous that ACORN helps millions of Americans.  Don’t you see how America’s richest 5% are being victimized by all of those poor people.  And ACORN helps Black people; you know that rich White Americans are the minority!  Damn it, don’t you love America like Glenn Beck does?

And that’s sincere; those tears are real!

So, Judicial Watch wants to call out the DOJ and falsely claim that there’s some sort of bias involved in not investigating ACORN?  Or is it that Judicial Watch thinks that the DOJ is biased against rich people?  Maybe, they think Obama’s stacked the deck in the DOJ just like their hero, George Bush.  Whatever it is, hopefully the DOJ, the Congress, and the WH won’t be so quick to judge a non-profit organization that’s helped millions of poor and underprivileged people simply because a few conservatives cry foul.

Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is finally being discussed and the movement is growing stronger.  Passed during Clinton’s 1st term, in 1993, it was generally accepted as a compromise.  Prior to DADT, military personally were subject to general or undesirable discharges from the military simply for being gay, and a dishonorable discharge if they were caught having sexual or ‘indecent’ relations of a homosexual nature.

The world has changed.  What was once regarded as a compromise by the majority of Americans, and I’m guessing that doesn’t include homosexuals, has become a stain on civil liberties.  People with open minds and hearts vice dogmatic and homophobic RWW (Right Wing Wackos) have learned and acknowledged that continuing the policies in DADT constitutes an injustice.

Those policies clearly state the reasons for this perceived threat of openly gay military personnel:

“demonstrate(s) a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts” because ”it would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.”

So, gay people being themselves and having relationships and loving other people is a “risk to… morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion.”  This may have been true at some point in America’s history; I’m sure prejudice against homosexuals could have caused some upset among some of the people that were acceptably bigoted.  But what about now?

Public sentiment has completely changed:

The public supports it, and so do America’s serve members.

So, if public sentiment and armed forces’ sentiment has changed then there is no “risk to… morale.”  Great that’s one thing down!

Thankfully, along with the acceptance of the LGBT community also comes the wisdom that homosexuals aren’t some perverted group of people anymore than the rest of humanity.  I’m sure there are many heterosexual and homosexual predators, neither of which is a predator because of their sexual orientation.  That being said, then there’s no worry of “risk to…, good order and discipline,” because the service member being gay doesn’t have shit to do with either.  Fabulous, that’s two down!

The last one, “unit cohesion,” seems to be the one that homophobic, a.k.a. concerned citizens, are desperately grasping to in order to show that we can’t repeal DADT.  Merrill A. McPeak, former Chief of Staff for the United States Air Force, wrote an op-ed piece published in the NY Times yesterday titled, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Change”.  Let’s just consider it another case of futureshock; some elderly Americans are having a difficult time keeping up with changing sentiment and attitudes (Even lying to fight change).  McPeak seems to think it’s a terrible idea to allow gays to serve openly because:

Armies have to care about what succeeds in war. Sometimes they win or lose because of material factors, because one side has the greater numbers or better equipment. But armies are sure to lose if they pay no attention to the ideas that succeed in battle. Unit cohesion is one such idea. We know, or ought to, that warriors are inspired by male bonding, by comradeship, by the knowledge that they survive only through relying on each other. To undermine cohesion is to endanger everyone.

…

I do not see how permitting open homosexuality in these communities enhances their prospects of success in battle. Indeed, I believe repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” will weaken the warrior culture at a time when we have a fight on our hands.

Did you catch the switcheroo there?  The policy clearly states that openly gay people in the military are a “risk to…, unit cohesion,” and now McPeak is trying to argue that he doesn’t see how it will improve unit cohesion. The argument is no longer that homosexuals serving openly will be any such risk, but how does it make things better?  McPeak is being disingenuous at best and a fucking asshole homophobic lying bastard at worst.  Which one do you pick, cause neither make for a winning argument?

Someone sent me this link on FB and I’m grateful for it. Finally, we have an administration that takes into consideration the growing minority of non-theists in our great nation. There was a meeting on Friday, Jan. 26 that was meant to address some of the concerns that secularists had. President Obama didn’t attend, he’s mighty busy, but his staffers did and here’s what was presented to them for the President.

Presented to the Obama Administration

February 26, 2010

* * *

Surviving the Faith-based Medical Neglect of My Childhood: An Ex-Christian Scientist’s Story

By Liz Heywood (Presented by SCA Legislative Director Sasha Bartolf)

The last day of my childhood was Saturday, November 22, 1975. I was thirteen years old.

I galloped my horse through the woods, then I rode my bike to a friend’s house and we ran together all afternoon. I’d had no injury, but that night my left knee swelled like a melon; by bedtime I could barely walk. In a matter of weeks, so much pus was draining from my knee and running down my leg that my parents put a cookie sheet underneath to catch it. Within a month I was bedridden*and stayed that way for almost a year. Another six months in a wheelchair left me a teenager with a fused, hideously deformed leg and emotionally crippled by post-traumatic stress disorder.

Yet I never saw a doctor. I never received any medical treatment. I was a third-generation Christian Scientist living in Lexington, Massachusetts, within twenty miles of the Mother Church in Boston. My parents treated the sudden infection in my knee the same way they treated every illness: by having a Christian Science practitioner pray.  Christian Scientists believe that mortal life is unreal: they believe that understanding the spiritual universe created by God results in physical healing. All injuries and illnesses are treated this way*from paper cuts to cancer.

The year before, in 1974, a loophole in child abuse laws was initiated by the Nixon Administration that allowed parents to choose so-called religious treatment for their children even if it meant denying them urgently needed medical care. Federal law still contains a loophole that permits states to ignore the kind of torture I experienced, and 39 states have elected to have such loopholes.

Years later, my bone disease was identified as osteomyelitis, a strep infection that can settle in a joint. While serious complications can develop, immediate treatment with antibiotics often results in a good outcome. But my family saw my swollen, stiff knee as a mortal illusion to be corrected through prayer. About five weeks from the onset, my leg began to drain an alarming amount of pus. My mother called a Christian Science practical nurse to help care for me*a nurse trained by the church in strictly non-medical methods, forbidden to diagnose disease or dispense medicine.

And I believed only prayer could help me: I never expected or even wanted medical treatment. I was bedridden for ten months in 1976. I lost weight. I couldn’t bear to have my mother hug me*the slightest motion was agony. I sensed I might die. Some nights, I was afraid I wouldn’t die. I was fourteen years old.

My school, friends and neighbors were aware I was seriously ill and being treated with prayer. At times I screamed in pain, but none of the neighbors investigated. Only the mother of my best friend was concerned enough to call a lawyer but was told it was unlikely that I could legally be hospitalized. As a last-ditch effort, my friend’s mother sent an ambulance to our house, but my mother sent it away. She told me afterward the driver thought someone was having a baby.

This faith-based medical neglect hid me in plain sight behind the respectability of Christian Science, under the radar of politically correct religious tolerance. Even when they feared for my life, my parents seemed incapable of choosing medical help. By Christian Science policy, a practitioner must refuse to pray for clients who receive medical care, and my parents were terrified that hospitalizing me would lead to my death. Though I had a phone by my bed on those nights I cried, it never occurred to me to call anyone except the practitioner.

I outlasted the disease. My leg was scarred to the bone and my knee fused at an angle of about eighty degrees. But my school never asked for details when I finally lurched back to class on crutches after eighteen months, wrestling with depression, anxiety, eating disorders, claustrophobia, and panic attacks. Eventually I dropped out of high school.

Orthopedic specialists were unable to replace my fused knee. By the time I reached my forties, my foot and ankle had deteriorated until I could barely walk. Three years ago today, February 26, 2007, I had an elective above-knee amputation.

I remember clearly the agony and anguish I felt as a child. I remember that no adult stepped forward to end it. The law authorized my parents’ decision to leave me untreated, and the sanction of the law discouraged others from doing what is right. But refusing to act on the pain a child feels is criminal.

It is my sincere hope that my story will inspire the Obama Administration to realize that federal regulations must be amended. I hope you will encourage Congress to amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, (CAPTA) so that states protect all abused and neglected children equally instead of excluding religious-based medical neglect from their definition of child abuse. There is no right under the constitution to religiously based child abuse.

My case is not unique: children today are in danger. Despite the abuse inflicted upon these children, most states have exemptions from child abuse laws that permit children to be endangered as I was. The need to protect innocent children who are being hurt by these laws is urgent and immediate. When states aren’t unequivocally required to document or classify cases of religion-based neglect–and remove children from homes where this kind of abuse occurs–the consequences are completely unethical and morally unacceptable.

* * *

Military Association of Atheists & Freethinkers briefing to White House Officials

Presented by Jason Torpy, President of the Military Association of Atheists & Freethinkers

The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers (MAAF) is here today to request Executive mandated chain teaching sessions supporting nontheists in the military. A new MAAF study of Defense Manpower Data Agency religious preferences shows that Nontheists and other “Nones” represent nearly one-quarter of the military, or over 500,000 service members. Even self-identified Atheists outnumber Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, and Jews. Despite our significant numbers within the military, MAAF members continue to see a religious climate, created by commanders and chaplains, that shows little support and sometimes outright exclusion of nontheists.

As nontheists in the military seek morale and welfare support as well as a supportive community, they come to MAAF rather than to their unit chaplains. They come to MAAF with stories about discriminatory statements and exclusively religious or Christian focus within their units. MAAF operates a Chaplain Outreach program that has received few inquiries from chaplains over a period of years. Of those who have responded, we have had chaplains confide anonymously to us that they are afraid to be openly supportive of nontheists for fear of retribution from their commanders and/or Chaplains Corps leadership.

MAAF envisions a military where chaplains are focused on complex and challenging secular duties more than ministry to their own faith group. Joint Publication 1-05 on Religious Affairs lays out a complex array of religious affairs responsibilities a chaplain must attend to, including advisement of the command and support of service members. DoD Directive 1350-2 governs Equal Opportunity and defines religion as, “a personal set or institutionalized system of attitudes, moral or ethical beliefs, and practices that are held with the strength of traditional religious views, characterized by ardor and faith, and generally evidenced through specific religious observances.” While this is entirely compatible with nontheistic ideologies, it is often misinterpreted and explicit action is necessary to ensure no loophole for discrimination exists.

MAAF envisions a military that recognizes that nontheistic ideologies deserve and need the same protection and support as more traditional religions are already provided. MAAF has invited chaplains to publicly commit to the following Minimum Statement of Support:

“Nontheistic service members, including atheists, agnostics, humanists, freethinkers, and those holding other nontheistic designations, serve honorably within our nation’s military. I pledge to support nontheistic service members as strongly as I support theistic service members. I further pledge not to use my position to influence individuals or the chain of command to adopt the principles or practices of my own personal religion. I concur that these statements are minimum standards of conduct to which all service members, especially chaplains and commanders, should adhere.”

To ensure that all service members, especially commanders and chaplains, understand that nontheistic philosophies deserve the same respect as other traditional religious beliefs, chain-teaching sessions down to the Battalion, Group, or Navy Unit level should be given by chaplains with the explicit support of the unit commander to ensure that there is a consistent message from the chain of  command that nontheistic service members are part of the unit and welcome. These teaching sessions will highlight possible areas of conflict and stereotypes that need to be rejected to foster unit cohesion.

Your briefing packet includes information supporting the data we’ve provided, stories from members providing perspective on our issues, and sample instructional programs for the chain teaching sessions that we request. MAAF and other nontheists in our military community would appreciate any feedback you can give us on the chaplain outreach program and briefing plans.

* * *

Kathleen Johnson briefing to White House Officials on Nontheists in the Military

Kathleen Johnson is Vice President and Military Director of American Atheists

As a First Sergeant in the Army, I have witnessed firsthand how service members who are openly non-theist have been harassed by their commanders, leaders, and peers, and have been disrespected by their subordinates simply for failing to hold certain religious beliefs. Further, some of these service members have received threats to their life and welfare of such intensity that they have been forced to redeploy from the combat zones for their own safety.  These service members are identified when they try to opt out of pre-mission unit prayers, when they raise objections to being forced to eat, work, and sleep in overtly religious environments, or when they try to organize meetings for like-minded individuals.  These service members have few effective methods to address their issues internally, and a powerful tool, the Equal Opportunity system, is often closed to them because current regulations do not identify non-theism as a protected class, and each branch of the Armed Forces is free to interpret that lack to mean that non-theists do not merit protection from discrimination.

Now, as a civilian employee at Fort Hood, TX I am part of a large military population that is dealing with the aftermath of a tragic incident that occurred in part because no action was taken to intercept a dangerously self-radicalized religionist.  Our current command climate, while intended to promote inclusiveness, protects
religious expression to a point that leaders are afraid to take appropriate actions when the circumstances require.

Both the Bush Administration and your Administration have demonstrated a lack of commitment to ensure the non-theist military community is fully accepted and integrated into the military community and is protected from discrimination.  For example, the current Secretary of the Army, Secretary John McHugh, was appointed to his
position by President Obama despite how in 2005, in the wake of the exposure of egregious constitutional violations at the U.S. Air Force Academy, McHugh voted against an amendment to a bill that would have
required the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on progress made in addressing the proselytizing of cadets.  Further, the Department of Defense has a record of promoting officers to very senior positions despite clear evidence they are prone to using their positions to promote their religious beliefs.  For example, the DOD
Inspector General found seven senior officers guilty of misconduct for illegally promoting Christianity at the Pentagon during the Christian Embassy video scandal in 2007.  Two of the officers cited in the incident, Brigadier General Vince Brooks and Brigadier General Robert Caslen, were given senior commands and General Caslen was recently selected for promotion.  The former Secretary of the Army, Preston M. Geren, who was implicated in the scandal, was appointed as Secretary of the Army before the investigation was even completed.

I  wish to make it clear that the Secular Coalition for America is in no way stating that a religious person should be disqualified from senior positions for practicing their faith.  We are, however, stating that such persons must be thoroughly vetted to ensure they will protect the religious liberty of all under their command, including
extending that protection to the one quarter of the military population who identify themselves as non-theist.

Requested Actions:

1.  The Department of Defense standardizes the Equal Opportunity regulations throughout the Armed Services in a way that clearly defines non-theism as a protected class.  This policy adjustment would simply ensure that non-theists are afforded the same protection from discrimination as other minorities.

2.  The Administration demonstrates its commitment to improving the climate for non-theists by ensuring nominees to key senior leadership positions answer hard questions intended to indentify if they hold views detrimental to non-theists and if so, that such views be considered a disqualification from office.

* * *

Secular Coalition for America briefing to White House Officials on Faith-Based Initiatives

Presented by Sean Faircloth, Executive Director of the Secular Coalition for America

A group called Teen Challenge receives our tax money under faith based initiatives.  They use government funds while discriminating against non-Christians, and have referred to Jewish converts to Christianity under their proselytizing as completed Jews, implying others Jews are incomplete.

The Indiana Family Institute used its taxpayer-funded grant to hire a fundraiser and upgrade its website, which advocated amending Indiana’s constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.

Instances such as these raise serious constitutional questions. A well-known Constitutional Law professor from the University of Chicago said in Zanesville, Ohio, and I quote:

“First, if you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize … and you can’t discriminate…on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs.”

Despite these words, President Obama’s own admirable words, his administration still lets fester a Bush-era violation of the separation of church and state regarding discrimination and proselytizing.

This administration has said discrimination in so-called “faith-based” initiatives would be decided case by case.  Dr. King believed that justice, that civil rights, is decided by uniform law that applies to ALL Americans equally, not case by case.

We oppose any funding for religious organizations, a position espoused by the Father of the Constitution, James Madison. And we call on the administration to take heed of what was done in every administration until recent years and refrain from this unconstitutional practice altogether.  If the administration chooses the path of James Madison, then we have no further questions.

Failing that, with the stroke of a pen, President Obama can make his own noble words regarding discrimination and proselytizing a reality.  We have faith that President Obama will keep his word.  But the current lack of follow-through to date leads to five questions on five topics:

First: since no congressional vote is required to implement the President’s own pledge, why has the president not fulfilled his very commendable promise to prohibit proselytizing and discrimination?

Second: the faith advisory council recently called for a requirement that faith-based organizations form separate 501c3s.  We applaud that recommendation.  What would stop the Administration from adopting this requirement immediately?

Third: The council also recommended sunshine laws, so there is full transparency as to which faith organizations get our tax money and how much.  We know top notch secular groups like Carefirst had their funding decreased under faith-based initiatives.  It is unconscionable that citizens do not have easy access to exact faith-based funding numbers.  Why would the administration allow this information to be withheld from the public any longer?

Fourth: Every day federal funds are distributed to faith-based social service providers who are NOT required to give notice to consumers of secular alternatives. Why aren’t consumers guaranteed notice of and access to alternative secular providers?

Fifth: Georgetown Professor Jacques Berlinerblau has stated there is “some duplicity in the way the administration describes some members of the 25 person advisory board” — because the administration has referred to alleged secular members of the commission.  We will not use the term duplicity, but the complete lack of secular Americans on the board is a serious and glaring lack of diversity.  Will the administration name an avowed secular American to serve on the council?

We greatly appreciate this forum, and respectfully request an answer to each of these five questions.

Justice requires that we, who represent millions of secular Americans, be included – directly included — in ongoing policy debates throughout the course of this administration.

* * *

Closing Statement by Sean Faircloth

We are thankful to the administration for this opportunity.

The issues we raised here today demonstrate something very important.  Secular Americans believe in justice and compassion for all.

Most of the children who die, or are injured, by so-called faith-healing would self-identify as strongly religious.  Liz Heywood was very religious at the time she was abused.  For her, it was a lost leg, for others it is a lost life.

And regardless of the creed of the parent, Secular Americans believe there is no ancient document, no hallowed scripture, no dry parchment that justifies harming a child.  Our world view does not discriminate when it comes to compassion.

When we oppose discrimination in tax-payer funded faith based initiatives, yes, we oppose discrimination against nontheists, but our sense of justice calls on us to oppose discrimination against Muslims, Christians, or ANY other peaceful human being.

When our men and women in uniform speak out for justice and inclusion in our armed services, their bravery, by their own intention, benefits every American regardless of creed.

As we have demonstrated with facts, placing one class of citizens over another class of citizens on the basis of religion is simply unjust — and harms real people.

We ask that this administration take action to address these injustices now, not merely because it benefits our constituency, but because the ideas and ideals of our movement benefit all Americans — and all the world.

It is not our disbelief that brings us before you today. Rather it is our deep belief in the light of reason — and our confidence that the light of reason and justice will lead us all to a better and more compassionate world.

It’s shocking isn’t it?  Non-theists actually wanting equality and the Constitution being upheld, how dare they?!

Because religion is all about what you're rewarded.

Can you imagine the idea of a BLACK MAN actually trying to tell these WHITE Senators how to do their jobs?

OK, maybe it’s not so difficult for you, but it seems outrageous to Cons, Faux News, and the GOP.  While GOP appeals of “start from scratch,” and going, “step by step,” with the HCR bill were ignored, what really seems to inflame many of the RWL (Right Wing Lunatics) is the fact that Barack Hussein Obama thinks he has a right to speak as if he’s equal, or gosh-darnit, even superior to these white Republican Senators.

Of all the hats President Obama tried on at Thursday’s seven-and-a-half-hour health care summit, it appeared the one he was most comfortable wearing was that of the prickly professor.

How dare the President of the United States, commonly referred to as the Most Powerful Man in the World, talk to these people, correct their factual errors, or call for less campaigning and more substance.  How dare he!

The Party of No isn’t named so simply because of their obstructions in the House and in the Senate.  They’ve earned that title because if it were up to the GOP there would be NO social services of any kind, NO civil rights, NO labor laws, NO minimum wage, NO regulation of private enterprises, NO freedom without money to back it up, NO law without money to back it up, NO rights without money to back it up, NO America unless it was renamed America, Inc.

Here’s what the GOP really thinks of Obama:

And who could forget the music to play at all your Klan rallies:

No, Mr. President the Republicans aren’t interested in bipartisanship.  They’re not interested in making America a better place for ALL Americans.  What they’re interested in is taking America back to the 19th century; back to when minorities ‘knew their place’, women stayed in the kitchen, the middle and lower class had absolutely no say in government, and if you were White and Rich than you were above the law.

Ghosts of the KKK/Faux news team.

Insert freaky ghost noises, cue the rattling shutters the 2010 Census is taking place and it’s time to be frightened. Frightened, I say. Oh noes, thay be cowntin us!

Look, it’s a necessary thing. It helps tell us how many people are in what areas so that the proper amount of schools, elected officials, etc. can be given to that area. It takes all of 10 sec. to fill out and it’s completely harmless. That is unless you’re one of the paranoid fuck-heads on the Right or at Faux News. Liz Peek, dumbass extraordinaire, the author of “Confessions of a TARP Wife” (pluck heart strings now) seems to think the end of the world is taking place because of the Census. Her words:

the Obama administration is pushing the Census Bureau to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to reach minority communities that have been “undercounted” in the past. Reporting higher numbers of residents in poor black or Hispanic neighborhoods will attract more federal (needed) funding, and more importantly, will boost the regions’ House seats, which will likely be filled by Democrats. It’s a cozy arrangement.

Catch that?  It’s not that the Obama administration is doing something dark and sneaky, its that they want everyone to be counted that’s supposed to be scary.  Oh noes, all dem poore peoples wil be cownted!  That’s right, she seems to be worrying that the Obama administration wants to be more accurate when it comes to poor neighborhoods so that they are given their fair share of federal funding and elected officials; as she notes those elected officials, “will likely be… Democrats.”  Hmm, the scary part is that more Democrats will be elected by these minority neighborhoods?  Am I missing something here, or is Peek literally saying that she doesn’t want the lower and middle classes to have a vote? I

The Bitch and the Beast

guess it shouldn’t come as any surprise coming from a woman whose sole concern during these economically hard times is fashion:

“God forbid someone catches me out in something new. Keeping up with fashion seems somehow decadent in this new era, like getting Botox injections or catered dinners.”

God forbid, indeed.  Yes, you rich bitch, you should be ashamed at your and your husband’s business operations and the upper class rape of Americans.  Though you’ve blamed your husband and others for messing up the economy, you’re lying to think that you weren’t fully aware and partially to blame for the mess.

When are the RWs and Republicans going to wake up to the bullshit scare tactics of the rich and wealthy of the nation?  When are they going to see that living standards for middle America have dropped significantly while these punks have accumulated more and more wealth.  Do you think they EARNED this money?