Teapublicans: Wiping their A**es with the Constitution.

Seriously, what else can explain their actions of the past 35 years, since the Reaganistas took over a formerly rational political party? Consider these few examples of many:

Number A: Teapublicans in Congress are openly sabotaging negotiations between the USA and a hostile foreign power, even though the Constitution says that foreign policy is in the Executive Branch’s portfolio. So Boehner’s invitation to Bibi to “address” the Congress is more than just another of his drunkard’s hissy-fits: it violates the Constitution. Not that he is any stranger to extra-constitutional actions, of course. Look at his actions as they relate to women’s rights, minority rights, voting rights, and so on: Boehner and the rest of his party are actively breaking the law, based on an illegal premise, for an illegal purpose.

Letter 2: Teapubbies are a load of “Christian” evangelicals who want to trash the Establishment Clause and set up a Theocracy. They claim that this is a Christian nation, even though the law pretty clearly says otherwise:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[1]

Thirdly: Teapubbies are frequently Secessionist scumballs. Such as the seditious “Republic of Texas”, the Southern National Congress, and the League of the South, to name but a very few.

All of these groups and people are Right-Wing Teabaggers, Libertarians and Teapublicans. None of them are Liberals. And all of them obviously hate America and its Constitution. By their actions we know them.

Likewise we know that people who vote for Teapublicans also support sedition, legislative overreach, and religious totalitarianism.

What’s that you say, dear “Republican” voter? You claim that you support the Constitution?

Bull-f***ing-s***. When you vote for a person or party that treats the law of the land like a**wipe, you support that treatment, as surely as if it were your own toilet into which the soiled Constitution got dropped and flushed away.

By our votes people know us. If you are voting for Teapubbies… *flush*

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

So, if Boehner thinks Obama broke the law, why didn’t he take the President to court?

That is, after all, what one does when laws are broken, yes? And Little Johnny Boehner says laws were broken, yes sirree:

” This is not about, actually, the issue of immigration,” said Boehner after a closed-door meeting with rank-and-file Republicans. “What it is: It’s about the president acting lawlessly.”

We’re voting to block the president’s overreach,” Boehner told reporters on Tuesday, when asked about the potential impact on the Latino vote. “His executive overreach, which I believe is beyond his constitutional duty and frankly violates the Constitution itself.”

Ooooh, sounds like quite the crime spree. You’d think the Speaker would have platoons of lawyers clamoring at the doors of Federal courts, demanding that justice be wrought upon the Eeevil Obamanator.

But he hasn’t. Instead, he is trying to deport Hispanics. Uhhhhhh …. How, Mr. Speaker, does that address the Prexy’s supposed extra-constitutional, “lawless”, dictatorial actions?

The answer is, of course, these deportations have NOTHING AT ALL TO DO with any alleged illegal Presidential acts. It’s just Teapublicans being their usual racist, bigoted, corrupt, motherf***ing selves.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Two More Strong Arguments for the Separation of Church and State:

Michigan, a Blue state that stupidly elected a Red government, is learning just how stupid its voting choices were. The Michigan House of “Representatives” has passed a religious oppression “freedom” bill that pretty much gives the finger to our Constitutional rights as guaranteed by the Establishment Clause:

The Michigan House of Representatives, led by Speaker Jase Bolger (photo, above, left, with Gov. Rick Snyder,) just passed a bill that would allow discrimination to become sanctioned by the state. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, akin to one that made nationwide headlines in Arizona but was vetoed, appears to merely force the government to step aside if a person’s “deeply-held religious beliefs” mandate they act, or not act, in a certain manner.

Supporters of these bills claim they allow people of faith to exercise their religion without government interference, but in reality, they are trojan horses, allowing rampant discrimination under the guise of religious observance.

For example, under the Religious Freedom law, a pharmacist could refuse to fill a doctor’s prescription for birth control, or HIV medication. An emergency room physician or EMT could refuse service to a gay person in need of immediate treatment. A school teacher could refuse to mentor the children of a same-sex couple, and a DMV clerk could refuse to give a driver’s license to a person who is divorced. 

Fundagelicals who support such “religious freedom” laws claim that the Founders were all about having a theocracy, but that argument would wash a lot of hogs. The author of the First Amendment himself (Thomas Jefferson) said it himself, time and again:

Be it enacted by General Assembly that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities.

And, of course, he was not alone:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; 

That bit being written by one Mr. Ames, wih help from James Madison and others. Add in the Supremacy Clause, and you can see that what Michigan’s Teapublican government is attempting to do is not just unconstitutional, it’s extraconstitutional. Perhaps you could say “treasonous and seditious” instead. Or, how about “un-American and illegal as all Hell”?

This writer has occasional need to travel to the Thumb State, and would prefer not to be left to die by, say, a Nazarene physician from Michigan who doesn’t like Presbyterians and refused to work on me based on his religious objection. That would be allowed if the law in question were to be enacted.

People, here we have two reasons for the Separation of Church and State: the law itself, and what would happen if we did not have that law to protect us. It is time to run these Teapubbies out of office on an elctoral rail. And that soon.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Hobby Lobby is a threat to your religious freedom. And your health. And your wallet.

One year ago, this writer wrote a prophetic post about Hobby Lobby’s attempts to use their personal religious beliefs to screw over their employees. Here’s a brief excerpt:

However, there is a very scary paradigm emerging amongst the Religious Right. Example: Hobby Lobby tried to claim a religious exemption in order to undermine the care that their employees could get under the ACA. They said that the owners of the company had a religious objection to certain kinds of gynecological care, and so should be able to opt out of providing them to their workers.

Consider a more extreme (but highly probable) scenario: the First Church of Christ, Scientist. These people do not believe in medicine: they are faith-healers. So if your employers were Christian Scientists, they could deny you any and all health care coverage. You’d get nothing. Except, perhaps, for a bunch of nimrods praying by your bedside as you died of appendicitis.

Now they have made it to the Supreme Court,  which seems sympathetic to the religious loons’ point of view. And that means there could be a ruling that would take away employees’ rights to birth control, and any other health care offerings that your employer may object to on religious grounds.

In addition, there is a deeper matter to consider: whether your employer’s religious beliefs are allowed to control yours. You see, Hobby Lobby doesn’t believe in birth control. And if you, as an employee, DO believe in birth control, well, tough rocks pal: your religious freedom is not as important as that of your employer.

Remember Animal Farm, where everyone was equal, but some were “more equal than others”? That is what the Supreme Court is all too likely to decide. Don’t scoff, they did it before with the Citizen’s United ruling, in which they decreed that while we all have the right to freedom of speech, rich people have more free speech than do the rest of us.

We are talking about a potential assault on the very principles on which our nation was founded, and on which our Constitution was based. The idea that your boss’s religious beliefs can overrule yours is not all that different from having your government’s religious beliefs likewise trump yours. This would completely take away our constitutional freedom of religion as hitherto guaranteed under the Establishment Clause.

The Supreme Court has the power via this ruling to take away your personal religious freedom, deny you access to health care, and potentially bankrupt you by taking away that access: pushing us further towards an Orwellian dystopia, all at a single stroke.

Not scared? Then you’re an idiot.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

It does NOT say, “All men are created equal, except for f*****s, dy**s and qu***s”.

Or, for that matter, anyone else you happen to sling such pejorative names at. No, the Constitution says “All men are created equal”. It does not carve out exceptions for religion, skin color, or gender, and it sure as Hell doesn’t exclude LGBT Americans. All means all.

So it is sad that a law saying that little bit of obviousness even has to be created in the first place, and it is even more depressing that it is likely to get shot down again by our elected “Republicans.” All means all.

Sad though the necessity may be, the law needs passed. Just like the laws banning discrimination based on skin tone, X and Y chromosomes, religion and physical limitations. And anyone who opposes such equality can suck on the Constitution. Equality for all, that is what it says.

AND ALL MEANS ALL.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Lying Sack of S*** of The Week: Sandra Day O’Connor

Yes, this is a week late, but she’s 12+ YEARS late, so let’s not get too arsed about a mere seven days, OK? In this article: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/05/sandra-day-oconnor-shift-on-bush-v-gore.html, we read about her “misgivings” and “regrets” over her role in the Bush V. Gore ruling. Of course, her regrets are mostly because she didn’t like the reign of Bush The Dumber, which is pretty shallow of her, to put it mildly.

Putting it less mildly, she should be wracked with guilt for trashing the Constitution: http://archive.democrats.com/images/brief-1-6-01.html You see, the Constitution DOES NOT F***ING ALLOW THE F***ING SUPREME COURT TO DO ONE F***ING THING to resolve a slate of disputed Electors. That power is reserved to Congress. Period.

So, instead of being regretful over her unconstitutional actions in 2000, she’s hacked off because she didn’t like the Shrub. The Supreme Court violated the separation of powers, and crapped on the Constitution they claimed to respect, and all she cares about is her “legacy”. News flash: it’s already a tarnished, corroded piece of crap legacy, and crying crocodile tears won’t change it one whit.

What a lying sack of s***.

Sandra, we have your Crown O’ Polished Turds, and it should suit you to a Tee…

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Mike DeWine – A Strong Argument for the Separation of Church and State

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine has well and truly f***ed up: he wrote a letter to the Feds asking that employers not have to pay for birth control coverage if they have a religious objection to contraception. This “religious freedom” red herring is a load of hooey, as we have written before.

General DeWine has been a pretty fair AG thus far: he has done good work on prosecuting human trafficking, pill mills, sexual assault, fraud, and other important law enforcement tasks. But he is clearly out of his depth here.

The current “religious freedom” campaign is not about the freedom of we the people to worship (or not) as we see fit. Rather, it is about employers being able to:
Number A, weasel out of paying for employee health care by using specious religious claims, or
Letter 2, cram their own religion down the throats of their employees, or
Third option, both of the above.

General DeWine was a total right-wing tool in his previous government gigs, and we can see by this recent action that he has not changed one bit since. This is a clear example of why we have (and need to have) separation of Church and State; a concept so important to the Founders that it is set out near the beginning of the Constitution.

When greedy religious fanatics try to manipulate our system for their own benefit, we need to put a stop to it at the outset. It matters not if DeWine is a manipulator or being manipulated; what matters is that we take these attempts to insert religion into our government and squash them flat. And that soon.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

No, The American Public Cannot Make Anything They Want Legal or Illegal

Contrary to much crap being spewed about these days, we do not live on a nation where the majority can do whatever-the-hell we want whenever the mood strikes us. Yes, we hear people bellow “the American people have the power to decide about (fill in the blank here – gays, guns, gynecology, or another Flavor of The Month) and the Gummint and the Courts had better not get in our way”, but they are pretty often full of fertilizer.

Our nation’s laws are based upon a Constitution (as are those of the states), and any law that is enacted must, repeat must be in compliance with said Constitution. Period. End of friggin’ story.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky mentions this because he has noticed lots of confusion around the notion of who can make law, and what sorts of laws can be made. From Southern states trying to reintroduce Jim Crow, to Justice Roberts quaking with fear about public opinion on “gay marriage”, to various religious and political demagogues whipping the ignorant into frenzy after frenzy, these zeebs would have you believe that we can overturn or rewrite established precedent just with a loud shriek of our collective larynxes.

Nope, it doesn’t work that way. And thank God for such small mercies. People can’t just take a vote and then go put chains on black folk, or take away women’s rights to vote, or make it legal to barbecue illegal immigrants, or any of the other crazy-assed ideas one hears in the chaotic and nonsensical noise bomb that we call our national discourse. We cannot. do. that. s***.

So nut up, you “Justices” and Jurists; grow some, you “Distinguished Gentlemen and Gentlewomen” who are supposed to be running the country based on our votes and laws. And most importantly, we citizens have to pay attention, show some spine, and not let ourselves be jerked around by con artists and snake-oil salesmen peddling lies disguised as laws.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

A Week of Harsh Truths, Day Four: The United States is Not a “Christian Nation”, and Never Has Been

The United States of America is a secular nation, founded by (mostly) Christian men. They knew the dangers of a Theocracy, and so ruled one out in the first part of the First Amendment to our Constitution. It’s known as the Establishment Clause, and it goes like this:
“Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.

Pretty unambiguous, you’d say, and you’d be correct. But lots of corrupt, hateful, greedy, power-mad motherf***ers want to ignore that very clear part of our law and make their own personal church the official church of America. And God help you if you don’t go along, because the Churchies certainly won’t.

People, the law means what it says. If you don’t like the Constitution, feel free to try and amend it. But until then, just obey the friggin’ law. Please?

Mr. B & C

Another Strong Argument for The Separation of Church and State

Remember these Christian Soldiers?

Yep, the ones who think Jesus wants us to pack hidden heat so as to waste each other as needed. Them are the ones.

This week, they’re running a “Constitution Class”. The good Lord knows what they’re  teaching each other, but if their “understanding” of Constitutional law is anything like their “understanding” of Holy Scripture, this is some pretty scary stuff.

No picture of the Church sign this time: we considered the wisdom of pulling into the parking lot of a church full of gun-crazed Fundagelical loons, any number of whom are likely carrying weapons, and we decided that was NOT the prudent course of action. Kind of like driving by an Al-Quaida training camp – do you REALLY want to drop in on them?

Mr. B & C

P.S. A point of clarification: These zeebs are free to use their First and Second Amendment rights, as we see them doing (Mr. Blunt and Cranky is a Presbyterian who uses all of his Constitutional rights, after all). The reason separation of church and state was brought up here is this: entirely too many Americans (including elected and appointed “representatives” and officials at all levels and in all branches of government) want to trash the Establishment clause and make our nation into a Fundagelical Theocracy.

One thing our Founders knew well were the dangers of such a form of government, but too many of us have forgotten. So when we see churches like this one arming themselves and seeking political power, we need to be aware of the threat they pose