Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Cheapskate

Via the Washington Post:

In May, under pressure from the news media, Donald Trump made good on a pledge he made four months earlier: He gave $1 million to a nonprofit group helping veterans’ families.

Before that, however, when was the last time that Trump had given any of his own money to a charity?

If Trump stands by his promises, such donations should be occurring all the time. In the 15 years prior to the veterans donation, Trump promised to donate earnings from a wide variety of his moneymaking enterprises: “The Apprentice.” Trump Vodka. Trump University. A book. Another book. If he had honored all those pledges, Trump’s gifts to charity would have topped $8.5 million.

But in the 15 years prior to the veterans’ gift, public records show that Trump donated about $2.8 million through a foundation set up to give his money away — less than a third of the pledged amount — and nothing since 2009. Records show Trump has given nothing to his foundation since 2008.

It’s one thing to not give money to charities; not everyone can afford to chip in to every worthy cause.  But it’s entirely another when you’ve pledged to donate and then don’t follow through.  And even worse when you brag about your generosity and then have to be shamed into paying up.

To quote Archie Bunker, “it’s easy to be generous when it don’t cost you nothin’.”

Tuesday, June 7, 2016

Fair Warning

It’s been awhile since we’ve heard from Florida’s junior senator.  Here’s why.

Joining the chorus of Republicans condemning Donald Trump over his rhetoric toward a federal judge’s Mexican heritage, Marco Rubio offered a cutting remark: I warned you.

The Florida senator on Monday called on Trump to stop questioning Indiana-born U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel’s ability to preside fairly over Trump University fraud cases due to his Mexican heritage but appeared to take solace in having predicted that something like this would happen.

“I don’t defend what he says, and all I can tell you is I ran for president and I warned you this is what was going to happen,” Rubio told WFTV’s Christopher Heath. “I consistently said if he became the nominee, we’d face these sorts of difficult choices we now have.”

But he’s still going to vote for him and campaign for him.  He warned you.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

Selling Their Souls

From Sunday’s New York Times:

Activists and leaders in the social conservative movement, after spending most of the past year opposing and condemning Donald J. Trump, are now moving to embrace his candidacy and are joining the growing number of mainstream Republicans who appear ready to coalesce around the party’s presumptive nominee.

Though their support for Mr. Trump is often qualified, this change of heart is one of the more remarkable turns in an erratic and precedent-defying Republican campaign. It reflects the sense among many Republicans that, flawed as they may see him, the thrice-married billionaire is preferable to the alternative.

“Oh, my, it’s difficult,” said Penny Nance, the president of Concerned Women for America, a group that has openly campaigned against Mr. Trump. “He’s not my first choice. He’s not my second choice,” she added. “But any concerns I have about him pale in contrast to Hillary Clinton.”

And Mr. Trump — whose litany of offenses against cultural conservatives include support of Planned Parenthood, past positions on abortion rights and his more accepting views on gays and lesbians — is winning over this once deeply skeptical constituency.

He has made overt moves, such as suggesting last week that he would name Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade, and sent subtle signals, like employing people for his campaign who are well known in the movement.

Mr. Trump has, to a large extent, placated a vocal and powerful element of the Republican Party’s base, whose backing he will need if he wants to wage a general election campaign leading a united conservative movement.

In him, they see a convert to their cause, not a transgressor.

It’s more like they found a kindred spirit.  All of the groups named in the article are well-known for being pliable on their hard-core beliefs as long as they can manipulate them to their advantage and tap into someone else’s wallet.

So I’m not at all surprised that Christian conservatives would find their way to follow Donald Trump.  They know a fellow grifter when they see one.

Monday, April 25, 2016

Character Reference

Disgraced former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay invoked Jesus in an attempt to get the judge to go easy on Dennis Hastert for sexually assaulting teenage boys.

“He is a good man that loves the Lord. He gets his integrity and values from Him. He doesn’t deserve what he is going through.”

Can’t wait until we hear from Mark Foley.

Friday, April 1, 2016

Caught Another One

Yep, another family-values holier-than-thou Republican has been caught in flagrant hypocrisy.  This time it’s Gov. Robert Bentley of Alabama.

State Rep. Ed Henry, R-Hartselle, is moving to start impeachment against embattled Gov. Robert Bentley amid the scandal engulfing the governor’s office surrounding his former senior political adviser, Rebekah Caldwell Mason. If the House impeaches Bentley, it would bring the governor one step closer to being removed from office by the legislature.

House Minority Leader Craig Ford, D-Gadsden, confirmed to AL.com that Henry was planning on bringing the articles of impeachment against the governor as early as next week. Henry could not immediately be reached for comment.

Ford said “over half” of the House is in favor of impeachment. A majority is needed to impeach the governor.

I really don’t care what consenting adults do in private.  In fact, I don’t even want to know as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone or break the law.  But when someone has sold himself as a God-fearing Baptist deacon and stands behind laws that discriminate against consenting adults.

If he has any sense of decency, he’d find a reason to stop inflicting himself on the people of Alabama.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

When We Do It, It’s Good

When Tim Wolfe resigned as the president of the University of Missouri system over racial tensions, the right-wingers went into their expected rage over political correctness and mob rule.  When, they ask, has a leader ever been forced out of office because the people he is in charge of don’t like the way he’s leading them?  It’s anti-American and tantamount to terrorism.

Oh, really?  Steve M says “Let’s ask John Boehner.”

What did these students do to Tim Wolfe? They did exactly what the conservative movement did to Boehner: they applied pressure until he realized that his position was untenable and his only hope of heading off a possibly unquenchable rebellion was to resign. The defenestration of Boehner was, as I recall, hailed by conservatives as a great moment for American liberty, even though he’d been duly elected by both the voters of his district and the very House Republicans who went on to toss him out the window. But the forced resignation of Wolfe is fascism in a way that the campaign against Boehner wasn’t because, well, it just is.

This is just the latest example of right-wing outrage over someone else doing something they racked up goodie points for.  When Cliven Bundy, the freeloading rancher in Nevada refused to pay grazing fees to the Bureau of Land Management, he was hailed as a hero by Fox News for standing up for freedom; when Eric Garner sold cigarettes in New York without paying taxes, he was labeled as a thug by the right-wing media for defying the just laws of this nation and he got what was coming to him.

The two situations, however, are not at all alike: Cliven Bundy is white and armed; Eric Garner was black and unarmed.

Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Another Day, Another Hypocrite

It’s hardly newsworthy to find yet another anti-LGBT Republican with a profile on a gay dating site, so I point out this one because his allies are defending him against having his “private personal life be exposed, by no choice of his own, for what can only appear to be political motivations.”

No, dear, this person made the choice to go to a well-known website and put up his profile.  Presumably he knew the chances that someone in his town would see it; indeed he was probably hoping they would, although not because he was asking for their vote in his race for city council.

It’s getting to the point where there should be a website where closeted Republicans can meet.  Oh wait, there already is one: it’s called every gay dating website in the world.

Thursday, October 1, 2015

Caught Another One

This is getting to be a cliche.

The controversial House Majority Leader in Indiana — he cosponsored the state’s “religious freedom” law — resigned suddenly on Tuesday after a sexually compromising video was sent to all of the people on his “Contacts” list, the Advocate’s Bil Browning reports.

After news of the mass-texting began to circulate, Representative Jud McMillin (R) claimed that his “phone was stolen in Canada and out of my control for about 24 hours. I have just been able to reactivate it under my control. Please disregard any messages you received recently. I am truly sorry for anything offensive you may have received.”

But his “Canadian girlfriend stole my phone” defense apparently didn’t convince many of his “Contacts” — or at least, not the ones who mattered — and so Tuesday night he released a statement in which he said that the “time is right for me to pass the torch and spend more time with my family.”

I really feel sorry for his family.  Now they have to spend more time with this moralizing hypocrite.

Thursday, September 10, 2015

Limited Offer

Mike Huckabee held a huge rally in defense of the Christian county clerk who stood fast for her religious freedom to discriminate against same-sex marriage.  But when a Muslim loses her job for exercising her religious freedom by not doing her job?  [crickets]

After defending Kentucky clerk Kim Davis’ refusal to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) on Wednesday would not say whether a Muslim flight attendant should be able to deny alcohol to passengers on a flight.

CNN’s Alisyn Camerota asked Huckabee about Charee Stanley, a flight attendant for ExpressJet who was suspended for refusing to serve alcohol. She said it violated her religious beliefs.

In Mr. Huckabee’s world, only Christians get to do that.

Via Steve M, Jim Hoft at the right-wing Gateway Pundit mocked her plight, noting that she only converted to Islam two years ago and serving alcohol is 50% of her job.

All religions are equal, but…

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

What About “Religious Liberty”?

When the Supreme Court ruled that marriage equality was the law of the land — and even before — the Religious Right was all twitterpated about their loss of religious liberty and that they were going to be discriminated against.  To demonstrate what it’s like to be discriminated against on the basis of religion, let’s go to Farmersville, Texas.

A proposal to bring a Muslim cemetery to Farmersville has stoked fears among residents who are vehemently trying to convince community leaders to block the project. The sentiment reflects an anti-Muslim distrust that has been brewing over the last year in parts of Texas, most notably 25 miles away in Garland — the scene of a deadly May shooting outside a cartoon contest lampooning the Prophet Muhammad.

“The concern for us is the radical element of Islam,” David J. Meeks, pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church, told The Dallas Morning News. He said he thinks the cemetery would be the first step toward a broader Muslim expansion in town.

“How can we stop a mosque or madrassa training center from going in there?” he asked, referring to a type of Islamic school.

So “religious liberty” only counts if it’s the right kind of religion.  Got it.

Religion vs. Christian 07-07-12

Sunday, July 12, 2015

Sunday Reading

Divide and Conquer — From The Economist, the reason Donald Trump is rallying the base of the GOP.

Because America’s electoral system all but guarantees the irrelevance of small parties, there’s no point to an American version of the Green Party or, for that matter, of UKIP or the National Front, which would absorb the country’s most rabidly anti-immigration white voters. The Republican Party is therefore a very big tent, covering tolerantly wealthy Chamber of Commerce types and upbeat religious conservatives, as well as working- and middle-class whites anxious about their dwindling majority and declining status in an increasingly multicultural America. When it was possible for Republicans to win national elections with only a smattering of support from non-white voters, the occasional venting of xenophobic paranoia about the criminality and infectiousness of immigrants might have helped as much as it hurt. But those days appear to be gone for good. If a Republican is to win the White House in 2016, he or she really must put a serious dent in the Democrats’ advantage with black, Hispanic and Asian voters—which poses a serious problem for the GOP. They’ve got to somehow pack both non-whites and bigots, immigrants and xenophobes, into the same big tent. Mr Trump is now exploiting this tension to his advantage.

A viably inclusive Republican presidential campaign will have to mute the coded and not-so-coded messages of white cultural superiority that have turned Americans of colour into reliable Democrats. But many conservative whites are still twitchy about their waning dominance. And they still matter in Republican politics, and have the power to decide primaries in many states. Perhaps the wariness of their party’s leading lights to cater to them as conspicuously as they once did leaves them feeling jilted. And that spells opportunity for an enterprising Republican candidate who is willing to damage the GOP’s brand, and his own, among Hispanics in order to steal some spotlight and, possibly, an early primary. Presidential politics is the ultimate reality show and, like it or not, Mr Trump knows how to play.

A famous billionaire may seem an unlikely populist champion, but Donald Trump is brilliantly suited to the role. The gaudy Mr Trump has always been a poor-man’s idea of a rich man, cunningly embodying America’s by-the-bootstraps cult of can-do capitalist success. Mr Trump has spent decades assiduously cultivating a public image as an unabashedly prosperous, fearlessly candid, hard-nosed negotiator. He is to millions of Americans more a figure of admiration than ridicule. For conservative whites who also feel that their relative position is slipping in an increasingly multicultural nation, such an unflappably indomitable fighter and audaciously authoritative voice makes a most welcome standard bearer.

Although Mr Trump’s divisive primary strategy, and seemingly inevitable presence on the GOP primary debate stage, is a headache to his more inclusive Republican rivals, it also presents them with an opportunity to prove their political chops and run away from the pack. If a candidate emerges from the Republican field who can manage to win over Hispanics by persuasively denouncing the Donald, all the while maintaining the loyalty of conservative xenophobes, he or she is a unique, high-wire-walking coalition-building talent who deserves to, and very well might, win it all.

You Call It Hypocrisy, They Call It Legislating — Steven I. Weiss in The Atlantic on the deal-making that runs our lives.

Political hypocrisy is so pervasive that it calls to mind Gregg Allman’s objection to the term “Southern rock.” The one has so much to do with the other, Allman said, that one might as well say, “rock rock.” To many voters, the seeming lack of ideological consistency in our elected officials smacks of corruption.

But hypocrisy, suggests recently retired Representative Barney Frank, is less evidence of corruption than evidence of its absence. It is what makes Congress function. It is the only tool legislators have after they’ve rooted out real corruption.

“Legislators do not pay each other for votes, and every member of a parliament in a democratic society is legally equal to every member,” Frank writes in his new memoir, Frank:A Life in Politics From the Great Society to Same-Sex Marriage. For legislators, cooperation is a form of political currency. They act in concert with other legislators, even at the expense of their own beliefs, in order to bank capital or settle accounts: “Because parliamentary bodies have to arrive at binding decisions on the full range of human activity in an atmosphere lacking the structure provided by either money or hierarchy, members have to find ways to bring some order out of what could be chaos,” Frank writes. So trading votes is how the business of politics is conducted. “Once you have promised another member that you will do something—vote a certain way, sponsor a particular bill, or conduct a hearing—you are committed to do it.”

In other words, constituents might not find their representative’s vote on an environmental bill to be consistent with their ideology, or might think that their senator’s take on the filibuster is dependent almost entirely on which party is in the majority—and they’re probably right. What Frank is revealing is that elected officials understand their votes in the same way, but that there’s no shame in that. As Frank has it, legislators have to act in ideologically inconsistent ways in the short run if they want to advance their larger objectives in the long run, as those larger objectives can only be achieved with teamwork. And the other members of their legislative team are only going to play ball with them if they know that they’ll take one for the team, that they’ll vote for something they don’t like because the team needs it.

And Frank goes further: Instead of seeing political flip-flopping as a necessary evil, he suggests it is inherent to democracy. In an interview for the TV show I host on The Jewish Channel, Up Close, he explained that, “Any legislator is in an essentially compromised position, given the nature of democracy, because your decision about how to vote inevitably is a compromise—our system wouldn’t work otherwise—between your own views and your voters’.” Frank argues that observing a legislator in any single moment or vote can give a false perspective on that legislator. Votes cast in support of apparently contradictory measures on several different occasions offer a more accurate view of a particular representative than any single vote held up to exemplify their approach to legislating.

As legislators are pulled this way and that by public opinion and by their commitments to fellow legislators, there’s also another force at play: the passage of time. Legislatures have a “strong bias against relitigating an issue that has been legitimately decided,” Frank writes. So legislators are left to choose among the available options at the time of the initial vote, and then often unable to revisit the issue later, even as opinions shift. “If every issue is always on the active agenda, if an issue that was already disposed of by a majority can be reopened whenever the side that lost regains and advantage, instability infects not just the body that made that decision but also the society that it is governed by.”

[…]

This is how Frank, the first gay member of Congress to come out voluntarily, ended up as an early architect of the policy that would eventually become “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” To head off the prospect of gays being entirely banned from the military in 1993, Frank advocated a middle path that he felt was the best achievable result at the time. Even though Bill Clinton ultimately took the plan in a harsher direction than Frank had hoped for, Frank knew he couldn’t introduce a bill to remove it at every subsequent congressional session. But choosing not to revisit “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” at every opportunity didn’t say anything about his desire to see it end, in the same way that the initial proposal didn’t say anything about his desire to see gays serve openly in the military.

Frank’s view of hypocrisy is a self-serving narrative, to be sure, but it’s also a very rare example of a legislator choosing to actually explain such behavior, rather than pretending that such behavior does not exist.

The Perils of Snorkeling — Colin Stokes in The New Yorker explains why it’s better to stay on shore when you come down to the Keys.

Sharks

When you are in the ocean, you are exposing yourself to the extremely likely possibility that you will be attacked and subsequently eaten by a shark. All fish that are not brightly colored look like they could be sharks, especially against a backdrop of murky water, which is terrifying.

Non-Shark Fish

Fish swim in ways that will make you anxious. If they are swimming toward you, they must logically be swimming away from something that you should swim away from, like a shark. If they are swimming with you, they are probably escaping from a shark that is pursuing you. And the fish are much faster swimmers than you. They are also visibly defecating in the water near your face, possibly out of spite.

Coral

This is the thing that you are meant to swim near, but which is apparently lethal if you touch it.

Other Snorkelers

They will be sure to abandon you as they swim on ahead, pretending not to be paralyzed by the fear of being eaten by a shark, leaving you vulnerable to an attack. If they are not too far away, they will be too close, and they will either scare you to death by touching your leg with a shark-like fin or will swim directly in front of you, giving you a perfect view up their swim shorts.

Water

It is extremely salty, unlike the water that comes out of the tap in your apartment in the city, where you are comfortable and things are safe. The water will seep into your mask and make it extremely hard to see where the sharks are in the water. It will also fill your snorkel, giving you a glimpse of what it is like to be waterboarded while you are on holiday, which was not on the itinerary.

The Sun

You will be burned horribly on your exposed back as you snorkel. The only solution is to wear a T-shirt in the water and feel like the fat child at a pool that is filled with sharks who like to eat fat children.

Alcohol

You drank four beers and a Sex on the Beach before making the decision to get in the ocean, and you are now sobering up underwater, worrying about what will happen if you throw up into your snorkel.

Aquariums

You could observe all the tropical fish and coral that you are seeing now from the comfort of an air-conditioned room in Coney Island, with the added bonus of not having to pay the airfare to go to the Caribbean. Plus, there’s a roller coaster. But, on second thought, that might be something you should not do either.

Doonesbury — Through the lens, dimly.

Wednesday, March 25, 2015

He’ll Take What He Wants To Take Away From You

Via the Des Moines Register:

Ted Cruz, one of the loudest critics of Obamacare, will soon be using it for health insurance coverage.

“We will presumably go on the exchange and sign up for health care, and we’re in the process of transitioning over to do that,” Cruz, a Republican candidate for president, told The Des Moines Register on Tuesday.

Cruz’s wife, Heidi, is going on an unpaid leave of absence from her job at Goldman Sachs to join Cruz full time on the campaign trail, Cruz told the Register.

Bloomberg was first to report that Heidi Cruz has taken the leave. CNN noted that Cruz, who has boasted about not needing to receive government health care benefits, would no longer be covered under his wife’s health insurance plan.

Cruz confirmed that to the Register.

I’ll give him credit for being upfront about his hypocrisy.

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Calling Them Out

This has got to have some folks nervous in Birmingham:

Alabama’s only openly gay legislator is putting her anti-gay colleagues on notice: If they keep espousing family values rhetoric as a reason to oppose marriage equality, she’ll start making their marital infidelities public.

“I will not stand by and allow legislators to talk about ‘family values’ when they have affairs, and I know of many who are and have,” wrote state Rep. Patricia Todd (D) on Facebook over the weekend, as reported by the TimesDaily in Alabama. “I will call our elected officials who want to hide in the closet out.”

Todd’s post came after a federal judge ruled Friday that Alabama’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. She told The Huffington Post that she decided to issue her threat after reading some of the anti-gay rhetoric coming from certain elected officials in the state.

“If certain people come out and start espousing this rhetoric about family values, then I will say, ‘Let’s talk about family values, because here’s what I heard.’ I don’t have direct knowledge, because obviously I’m not the other person involved in the affair. But one thing you would never hear about me is that I ever cheated on a partner or had an affair,” said Todd.

“One thing I’m pretty consistent on is I do not like hypocrites,” she added. “If you can explain your position and you hold yourself to the same standard you want to hold me to, then fine. But you cannot go out there and smear my community by condemning us and somehow making us feel less than, and expect me to be quiet.”

I am not in favor of outing someone, straight or gay, as long as they’re not doing one thing in private and then condemning the very same thing in public (Hey, Newt!).  But hypocrites need to be called out, and then some.

Friday, June 27, 2014

But Not For Thee

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that Massachusetts’ buffer zone law around abortion clinics violated the First Amendment.

“The buffer zones burden substantially more speech than necessary to achieve the Commonwealth’s asserted interests,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the decision, concluding that the law violates the First Amendment. “Petitioners wish to converse with their fellow citizens about an important subject on the public streets and sidewalks — sites that have hosted discussions about the issues of the day throughout history.”

Oddly enough, the Supremes don’t have a problem keeping their fellow citizens away from them.

The Supreme Court, meanwhile, maintains a tight perimeter: “No person shall engage in a demonstration within the Supreme Court building and grounds.”

Supreme Court buffer zone 06-27-14

I think it’s about time someone had a serious conversation with the Court about both irony and hypocrisy.

Tuesday, June 3, 2014

An Expert On Marriage

Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi claims that same-sex marriage is equivalent to a plague.

The attorney general of Florida says in court documents that recognizing same sex marriages performed in other states would “impose significant public harm.”

Eight gay couples and the American Civil Liberties Union have sued the state in federal court. The lawsuit argues Florida is discriminating against the couples by not recognizing same-sex marriages performed in states where they are legal.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has filed a response that asks a federal judge to throw out the lawsuit.

Bondi’s office says the state has a legitimate interest in defining a marriage as between a man and woman because Florida’s voters adopted an amendment in 2008 that banned same-sex marriages.

I would be interested in hearing exactly why Ms. Bondi thinks a legal contract between two people represents “significant public harm.”  Based on the fact that she has been married three times, I assume she’s an expert on it.

HT to Riptide.

Monday, May 5, 2014

Dragging Him Out

Via TPM:

A Republican state senate candidate who supported North Carolina’s ban on gay marriage once worked as a female impersonator at a gay nightclub, the Winston-Salem Journal reported Saturday.

Real estate agent Steve Wiles, 34, went by “Mona Sinclair” when he worked at the now-closed Club Odyssey in the early 2000s, according to the club’s co-owner and another former employee. Wiles’ former co-workers claim he was gay at the time and was a frequent visitor at the nightclub before he began working there.

Wiles denied that he worked as Mona Sinclair in interviews with the Winston-Salem Journal, and responded “no” when the newspaper asked whether he was gay.

But Wiles also appears as Mona Sinclair in a cached version of the Miss Gay America website. The cached webpage said that Wiles was suspended from the organization for “conduct unbecoming to a promoter of the Miss Gay America pageant system.”

Wiles campaigned for North Carolina’s constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in 2012, according to the Winston Salem-Journal.

Doing drag is a noble art form; it takes a lot of skill to make it work, and there’s no shame in it, so he shouldn’t be scorned for it.

As far as whether or not he’s gay, that shouldn’t matter in the abstract, but if he is and he’s campaigned against marriage equality, then he’s a flaming hypocrite and deserves to be shunned.

Oh, by the way… “Mona Sinclair” is a terribly unoriginal drag name.  What’s wrong with something like Helena Handbasket or Hedda Lettuce?  I need to have my friend Sybil Bruncheon coach him on the finer points of dragdom.

Sybil Bruncheon 05-04-14

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Rubber The Wrong Way

Cardinal Timothy Dolan on where women can buy contraceptives:

“Is the ability to buy contraceptives, that are now widely available — my Lord, all you have to do is walk into a 7-11 or any shop on any street in America and have access to them — is that right to access those and have them paid for, is that such a towering good that it would suffocate the rights of conscience?” Dolan said in an exchange uploaded by Raw Story. “I don’t think so. I hope the Supreme Court agrees.”

This from a guy who, if he lives up to his vows, never bought a rubber in his life.

Or perhaps this is what he tells his priests when they’re getting ready for choir practice.

His Eminence was speaking on TV last Sunday about the Hobby Lobby case — he wants them to win — and getting just about everything wrong.  The case is not about having contraception paid for by Hobby Lobby, nor is it about over-the-counter methods like condoms.  It’s about a person’s right to have access to healthcare without the interference of holier-than-Christ employers.

The more women have access to birth control, the fewer abortions there will be.  I hear the Catholic Church has a view about that.

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Caught Another One

Just the other day I was wondering when we’d hear about yet another family-values Christian congressperson getting busted for having his hands where they shouldn’t be.

A local newspaper is reporting that it has obtained video of freshman Rep. Vance McAllister (R-La.) passionately kissing a member of his staff.

The Ouachita Citizen, based in West Monroe, La., on Monday published surveillance video that it says was from inside McAllister’s district office in Monroe.

The video shows a man, who the newspaper alleges is McAllister but whose face is not clearly identifiable, turning off the lights in a room and then embracing and kissing a woman.

The paper alleges that the woman depicted is a member of his staff.

McAllister, who is married and whose campaign message emphasized his conservative Christian faith, is allegedly shown in a romantic encounter that occurred in December.

The freshman congressman, who has gone to great lengths to solidify his social conservative credentials, is perhaps best known for inviting a member of the politically-controversial television show “Duck Dynasty” as his guest to the State Of the Union address.

He later released a statement begging for forgiveness from God and everyone else.  He’ll be re-elected, of course.  Meanwhile, his office fired the staffer he was groping.  Forgiveness only goes so far.