Atheists vs. repugs - Round One . . . .

Let the battle begin.

It's actually not much $$ involved.

It's the principle of the thing.

Per McClatchey today:

Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center
Rob Hotakainen | McClatchy Newspapers Posted: July 18, 2009

WASHINGTON — A California Republican congressman wants to do a little writing on the walls of Washington's newest federal building. If Rep. Dan Lungren gets his way, Congress will spend nearly $100,000 to engrave the words "In God We Trust" and the Pledge of Allegiance in prominent spots at the Capitol Visitor Center.

Lungren's proposal drew only a whimper of opposition last week when the House of Representatives voted 410-8 to approve it. Now, however, Lungren finds himself tussling with a national atheists and agnostics group.

The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation Inc. sued this week to stop the engraving, accusing Lungren of trying to force his religious beliefs on as many as 15 percent of all U.S. adults. That comprises "atheists, agnostics, skeptics and freethinkers, none of whom possess a belief in a god," according to the lawsuit.

"It really is a Judeo-Christian endorsement by our government, and so Lungren is wrong," said Dan Barker of Madison, Wis., a co-president of the foundation. "Lungren and others are pro-religious, and they want to actually use the machinery of government to promote their particular private religious views. That is unconstitutional, and that's what we're asking the court to decide."

_______________


The Freedom From Religion Foundation, which has 13,500 members, sued in U.S. District Court in Wisconsin. It alleges that Congress is trying to make belief in God synonymous with citizenship and "discouraging nonbelief" among Americans, a contention that Lungren rejects.

Lungren said that the phrase "In God We Trust" had a long history and was consistent with the beliefs of America's founding fathers. He also said that the Declaration of Independence referred to rights given by a creator.

_______________


Barker said the foundation had been waiting for the right case to challenge "In God We Trust." He said government actions could be challenged on state-church grounds if they had specific religious agendas. In this case, he said, backers of Lungren's plan have provided "the smoking guns" by giving specific, overt religious reasons for doing the engraving.

Barker said that atheists regarded the phrase "In God We Trust" as rude, uncivil and un-American.

"Tens of millions of really good Americans don't believe in God," he said. "In fact, there's many more nonbelievers than there are Jews, and we wouldn't think of offending Jews on our national monuments. . . . Why is it wrong to offend a Jewish minority but it's not wrong to offend those of us who serve in the military and sit on juries but we don't believe in God?"

This Freedom From Religion Foundation sounds like my kind of people.

Makes me proud to be a "Dairy Queen" originally from Wisconsin . . . .


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

dickhead cheney Involved. Quelle Surprise . . . .

When does this guy get his comeuppance, anyway?

Can't he share a room with Bernie Madoff or something?

Today's New York Times has the story:

Cheney Is Linked to Concealment of C.I.A. Project
By SCOTT SHANE | July 12, 2009

The Central Intelligence Agency withheld information about a secret counterterrorism program from Congress for eight years on direct orders from former Vice President Dick Cheney, the agency’s director, Leon E. Panetta, has told the Senate and House intelligence committees, two people with direct knowledge of the matter said Saturday.

The report that Mr. Cheney was behind the decision to conceal the still-unidentified program from Congress deepened the mystery surrounding it, suggesting that the Bush administration had put a high priority on the program and its secrecy.

_______________


Efforts to reach Mr. Cheney through relatives and associates were unsuccessful.

Damn.

The past couple of months he's been hard to miss on the cable news networks.

Guess he's gone back to the "undisclosed location" . . . .


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

Kucinich on Canadian Health Care . . . .

You GO Dennis, my man!



Take that, "Blue Dog" dems.

Dennis is the man, once again . . . .


(Isn't that John Conyers over gratzer's shoulder?!?)


H/T Crooks and Liars for the heads up.


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

Bang, Bang . . . .

Per Congressional Quarterly today:

House Panel Adopts Amendment Allowing Guns in Public Housing
By Karoun Demirjian, CQ Staff | July 9, 2009 – 11:40 a.m.


Gun rights advocates scored a victory Thursday as the House Financial Services Committee adopted an amendment to allow guns in public housing projects.

The amendment, offered by Tom Price , R-Ga., would bar any housing authority from restricting legal ownership of guns. It was adopted by 38-31, as the committee continued its markup of a housing bill (HR 3045) the panel is expected to approve next week.

While the Department of Housing and Urban Development does not have a specific policy concerning guns in public housing, several local agencies have banned them in an effort to reduce violent crime in housing projects. Major urban centers began to adopt gun bans in the 1990s, and advocates of such steps argued they have improved the safety of public housing.

“There was a time during the ’70s and ’80s when public housing developments were considered killing grounds,” said Emanuel Cleaver II , D-Mo., who grew up in public housing. “It is just foolhardy to place guns in developments of poor people, many of whom are unemployed, and place these guns around children. . . . Why would we try to put guns in the most densely populated areas in the urban core? It’s just unbelievable.”

Well, now that makes perfect sense, don't you think?

"Unbelievable" is right . . . .


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

Letterman on Caribou Barbie . . . .

Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

Nothing to See Here. Move Along, Please . . . .

Can we move along, now, people?




Fer cryin' out loud, already.

Set your priorities a little higher . . . .


Video H/T to the medical team @ ACR.
Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

The Rev. Is Preachin' to the Canada Day Choir . . . .

Amen.








And he even mentions Walter Ostenak.

Come on home, Rev. . . . .


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

"Poor" Exxon . . . .

The corporate power$-that-be decided to give up their fight and pay out $ome of their enormou$ profit$.

From the Anchorage Daily News:

Company decides not to fight to bitter end on interest payment

(06/30/09)

Exxon Mobil's decision to accept an appeals court judgment that it owes $470 million in interest to those hurt by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill is cause for celebration. The oil giant could have carried the battle to the Supreme Court but did not.

No explanation.

That's OK. Deeds count more than words anyway.

When added to $507.5 million in punitive damages, the interest payments will nearly double the award for the average claimant.

Well, it'$ not like they can't afford it . . . .


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

Bloggerpalooza III . . . .

We came.

We ate.

We drank.

We solved approximately 47% of the world's problems.

We adjourned 'til BPIV sometime later this year.

The remaining 53% of the world's problems will have to wait 'til then . . . .


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

Walking the Gay Walk . . . .

Lots of rumbling in the GLBT community of late about how President Obama may not be living up to their "hope" during the '08 political season.

His actions while in office don't exactly match the campaign rhetoric.


From McClatchy/Kansas City Star today:

To gays who supported him, Obama hasn't walked the walk

Rick Montgomery | Kansas City Star | June 26, 2009

If Diane Silver's blog reflects the sentiments of gay and lesbian Americans in the heartland, President Barack Obama is fast losing a serious fan base.

The Topeka woman's postings throughout June, which is Gay Pride Month, have railed about what she calls Obama's "awful record … token action and empty words."

She called his Justice Department's recent court filing — a 54-page defense of a federal marriage law that Obama had pledged to repeal — "hideous."

Many in the movement still speak hopefully of a president who won their overwhelming support in the 2008 elections. But the enthusiasm — and the same level of campaign contributions — may not be there for other Democrats in next year's elections.

Complaints over what many see as the administration's lack of zeal are found throughout the gay and lesbian blogosphere.

Stampp Corbin, a gay San Diego city commissioner who rallied supporters to Obama's presidential bid, wrote online: "When I wake up each morning, I feel a …' It's bit schizophrenic myself. 'I love Obama, I hate Obama, I am ambivalent maddening."

Corbin was among several leaders of gay and lesbian communities who Thursday boycotted a Democratic National Committee fundraiser in Washington. He suggested the White House had better start delivering results "or the coffers of the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community will be slammed shut on the fingers of your administration."

Nationally, gay-rights groups continue to count the president as a friend, at least in public. Given persistent pledges to end the military's ban on openly gay service members, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and to repeal discriminatory elements of the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, the White House hopes for a strong showing next week when Obama hosts a Gay Pride reception.

______________


Much of the anger centers on a June 11 Justice Department brief seeking to dismiss a constitutional challenge of the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA.

The law, limiting federal marriage benefits to opposite-sex couples, is the target of a federal lawsuit in California. Justice spokesman Charles Miller said that as attorneys for the government "we have to defend that law" when it's taken to court. "It's Congress' job" to change or chuck it if Congress sees fit.

The government's brief outlined a defense seen by gay-rights advocates as unnecessarily vigorous. "DOMA does not restrict any rights that have been recognized as fundamental," it stated.

"That just went too far," said Missouri Sen. Jolie Justus, a Democrat who recently seized upon Iowa's same-sex marriage law to wed her partner in Iowa City.

The brief went on to point out that incestuous relationships, too, were outside states' legal purview of marriage — as if to lump uncle-niece pairings with same-sex couples.

"The government could have defended DOMA without using the red herrings and insulting arguments that once were used to stop interracial marriages," Justus said. "We've been talking about this constantly … a slap in the face," though she said she expected Obama to press his pledge to undo the law in time.

_______________


The president's hesitation to push for an end to the Pentagon's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy has widened the divide, especially after the handling of Pietrangelo v. Gates.

The case, brought by James Pietrangelo, an infantry officer who was preparing for his third tour in Iraq when he was discharged for being gay, reached the U.S. Supreme Court — where the Obama administration urged that it not be heard.

Solicitor General Elena Kagan, the administration's lawyer before the court, said in her filing that the ban is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion."

Days earlier, however, in the wake of Rep. John McHugh's nomination to be secretary of the Army, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said McHugh shares Obama's commitment to repealing the ban, which isn't "working for this country right now."

After his lawsuit was disposed of, Pietrangelo called the president "a coward, a bigot and a pathological liar … who spent more time picking out his dog, Bo … than he has working for equality for gay people."

More than 250 lesbian and gay members of the military have been booted out since Obama took office.

_______________


Silver, in a telephone interview, said she and the families of same-sex couples have waited long enough.

Their options? One is to "just shut your wallets" when Democratic fundraisers come calling, she said.

"The GAY-TM is closed."

Should we be surprised? Disappointed, maybe, thinking he would actually be a different kind of politician.

"Fool me once, shame on you."

And all that . . . .


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers

S.P.P. DVD . . . .

At The Lady Alison's suggestion, I had placed the Paul Manly documentary "You, Me and the S.P.P: Trading Democracy for Corporate Rule" on my Vancouver library request list months ago.

Once released, it finally came to my local branch yesterday. I picked it up after lunch and watched it this afternoon.

Great stuff, and every Canadian should view it to become fully informed on the creeping US-ization of North America.

Scary stuff, Gang.

Tell your peeps . . . .


Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers