Patterico's Pontifications


Democrats And Republicans Guilty of Their Own Religious Bigotry

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:36 am

[guest post by Dana]

It’s very clear: the Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. Article VI, Clause 3.

In recent weeks, we have witnessed several ugly religious tests taking place from members on both sides of the aisle.

With their bigotry on full display and making an obvious effort to waylay the nomination of federal judicial nominee Brian Buescher, Democratic Senators Kamala Harris (CA) and Maizie Hirono (HI) challenged Buescher because of his involvement with the 136-year old Catholic charity, Knights of Columbus, whose members have raised more than $1.5 billion for charity in the past decade. Or, as Kevin D. Williamson slyly observes, “funny who is an “extremist” these days”:

“The Knights of Columbus has taken a number of extreme positions,” said Ms. Hirono, Hawaii Democrat, citing the group’s opposition to same-sex marriage. “If confirmed, do you intend to end your membership with this organization to avoid any appearance of bias?”

Ms. Harris asked Mr. Buescher, who became a member 25 years ago as a teenager, “Were you aware that the Knights of Columbus opposed a woman’s right to choose when you joined the organization?”

Mr. Buescher, who said he would abide by the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges regarding his affiliations, said his participation has centered on “charitable and community events in local Catholic parishes.”

“I do not recall if I was aware whether the Knights of Columbus had taken a position on the abortion issue when I joined at the age of 18,” he replied.


Harris raised a statement from Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson, who said that abortion constituted “the killing of the innocent on a massive scale” and asked Buescher if he agreed with Anderson.

Buescher said he was not responsible for drafting statements or policies made by the Knights and that, as a federal judge, he would consider himself bound by judicial precedent regarding abortion.

“I did not draft this language. If confirmed, I would be bound by precedent of the United States Supreme Court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and would not be guided by statements made by others,” Buescher told the senator.

Of course, religious bigotry is nothing new in the Democratic party. Sen. Diane Feinstein raised a red flag at the 2017 judicial confirmation hearing of Amy Coney Barrett, and claimed that Catholic “dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s a concern,” to which her Democratic colleague Dick Durbin (D-IL), concurred. And if that itself isn’t a concern for lovers of religious liberty and the specific prohibition of any “test,” then I don’t know what is.

Anyway, Ramesh Ponuru gets down to brass tacks, noting the ridiculousness of these attacks on the Knights of Columbus, and suggests the Harris and Hirono just be honest about it:

Among the many stupidities of this campaign against the Knights is its superfluity. Buescher is voluntarily affiliated with two even larger organizations that are on record in opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage: the Catholic church; the Republican party…If Harris and Hirono want to maintain that all judicial nominees must support abortion, beyond just saying that they will respect existing law, then they should just say that there are scores of millions of Christians they would never allow on the federal bench on account of their beliefs. There is no need to launch an attack on the Knights.

Obviously, it is in the senators’ best interest – and political survival – to keep up appearances and further their charade, no matter how easily we see through it. However, in a bit of a pleasant surprise, a colleague of Harris and Hirono’s brought some moral and legal clarity to the situation, as she refused to accept such discrimination within her party.

From Sen. Tulsi Gabbard’s (D-HI) scathing op-ed:

While I oppose the nomination of Brian Buescher to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, I stand strongly against those who are fomenting religious bigotry, citing as disqualifiers Buescher’s Catholicism and his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus. If Buescher is “unqualified” because of his Catholicism and affiliation with the Knights of Columbus, then President John F. Kennedy, and the ‘liberal lion of the Senate’ Ted Kennedy would have been “unqualified” for the same reasons.

…No American should be told that his or her public service is unwelcome because “the dogma lives loudly within you” as Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said to Amy Coney Barrett during her confirmation hearings in 2017 to serve as U.S. Circuit Court judge in the 7th Circuit.

While I absolutely believe in the separation of church and state as a necessity to the health of our nation, no American should be asked to renounce his or her faith or membership in a faith-based, service organization in order to hold public office.

The party that worked so hard to convince people that Catholics and Knights of Columbus like Al Smith and John F. Kennedy could be both good Catholics and good public servants shows an alarming disregard of its own history in making such attacks today.

We must call this out for what it is – religious bigotry. This is true not just when such prejudice is anti-Catholic, but also when it is anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, anti-Hindu, or anti-Protestant, or any other religion.

Elected leaders engaging in religion-baiting are playing with fire. They are sacrificing the well-being, peace and harmony of our country to satisfy their own political ambitions for partisan political interests.

Read the whole thing.

Another sort of religious test on the right side of the aisle drew to a close last night. I wrote about members of the Tarrant County GOP pushing to expel a Muslim from a leadership position within their ranks here:

Members of the Tarrant County Republican Party will vote Jan. 10 on whether Shahid Shafi, a 53-year-old trauma surgeon and city councilman in the Fort Worth suburb of Southlake since 2014, should be removed as a vice chairman.

A precinct chairwoman forced the vote after making unproven claims that Shafi, who has served as a delegate to several GOP state conventions, has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorism and wants to impose sharia law. Other precinct chairs have joined in the calls to remove Shafi.

Still unbelievable.

Last night, Texas Republicans put the ugly dog of religious discrimination down by voting to keep Shafi in the position of vice chairman. That this even came to a vote will be to the everlasting shame of the Tarrant County GOP. As it should. (Note: The Republican Party of Texas, GOP senators, governors stood firmly against the religious bigotry directed toward Shafi and stood firmly in support of religious freedom):

Executive committee members voted 139-49 to keep surgeon Shahid Shafi in his role in a meeting Thursday evening that was closed to the media at Faith Creek Church in Richland Hills.

“Today, the beacon of liberty held by the Statue of Liberty is shining brighter,” Shafi said after the vote. “My faith in our party, in our country, has been reaffirmed.”

Shafi said he held no animosity for his detractors, instead attributing the dozens of votes against him to a difference of opinion. Other minorities should draw inspiration from the night’s events, Shafi said, because the vote proved the Tarrant County GOP is open to all conservatives.

“Religious liberty won tonight,” Tarrant County GOP chair Darl Easton said in a prepared statement. “And while that makes a great day for the Republican Party of Tarrant County, that victory also serves notice that we have much work to do unifying our party.”


GOP precinct chair Dale Atteberry courted controversy by hosting an anti-Muslim speaker to address party members and others last month so they “know the truth” before the vote.

Atteberry resigned as precinct chair after the vote, according to Sam Bryant, a member of the State Republic Executive Committee for Senate District 22.

Religious bigotry is not limited to any side of the aisle. Both parties are comprised of narrow-minded bigots willing to manipulate the law as much as possible to see their end goals realized. This should not be acceptable to anyone on any side of the aisle. Especially when it concerns lawmakers elected to represent “all” of the people within their districts and states.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)


129 Responses to “Democrats And Republicans Guilty of Their Own Religious Bigotry”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (023079)

  2. Religious bigotry does exist.

    This post seems to suggest that it’s equally divided among faiths and political affiliation.

    I see one side of the political spectrum and one religion in particular seeking to curb our freedoms much more than others.

    If anyone is seeking to deny a chair on a committee to someone strictly based on religion, they should be called out for it.

    If the good doctor supports Shariah law he should be called out for it.

    If one religion is responsible for most of the honor/terror attacks in the world it should be called out for it.

    harkin (3f355b)

  3. If the good doctor supports Shariah law he should be called out for it.

    The good doctor has said many times that he doesn’t support Shariah Law. But that wasn’t good enough, apparently.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  4. I couldn’t really find any objections on his part,

    Narciso (2e9b7a)

  5. for my part i don’t think i could ever vote for a mormon for anything ever again, and some people count that as a for reals religion

    the ones that don’t turn into terrible people once they’re elected you can count on one hand

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  6. This doesn’t even count the Gaians.

    Kevin M (cb624b)

  7. I might have a problem with voting for a member of the Nation of Islam. Is that bigotry, or is that wondering why they belong to such a racist organization?

    Kevin M (cb624b)

  8. This does not suggest a zealous Muslim….

    kishnevi (d764f4)

  9. Its religious cover for black supremacism…suppose we truly had a pogrom against muslims post 9/11…most of those bow tied clowns would have been in the front row or joined the choir of their old AME or Baptist church by September 16 of that year.

    urbanleftbehind (fd650f)

  10. Islam is not a religion. It is a political system masquerading as a religion. Change my mind.

    Gryph (08c844)

  11. I couldn’t really find any objections on his part,

    Maybe if you looked, you could find where Shafi objected to Sharia Law

    “Here are the facts. I have never had any association with the Muslim Brotherhood nor [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] nor any terrorist organization,” he wrote. “I believe that the laws of our nation are our Constitution and the laws passed by our elected legislatures — I have never promoted any form of Sharia Law. I fully support and believe in American Laws for American Courts.

    Was that statement not strong enough?

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  12. Both sides now agree that are bases demand you and me don’t make we. when you here a commentator say most americans he means half of america at best.

    lany (ee1332)

  13. the chick what tried to run this muslim guy out of texas is a kook

    that’s her primary problem and it explains the difficulties she’s having in realizing her political aims

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  14. Credit where it’s due: good job on the part of the Tarrant County Republicans voting down this insane measure.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  15. 5… you have just unleashed the ghost of Porter Rockwell. May the Lord have mercy on your soul.

    Colonel Haiku (3116bd)

  16. Colonel, you sounded like some old innkeeper in the first five minutes if a Scooby Doo episode, after Shaggy said something like “nice beard, do clean pots and pans with it?” to his painting.

    urbanleftbehind (fd650f)

  17. normally I won’t vote for a mormon but its for political reasons not religious. my first vote was for a mormon named mo udall.

    lany (ee1332)

  18. yes yes for political reasons

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  19. Porter can’t hurt me cause i didn’t cut my hair yet this year

    i’m unvinzable!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  20. Unfortunately, my sarc/y instapundit post bumper motto would be “They told me if I voted for mormon presidential candidates in 2 consecutive presidential elections, there would be rampant religious persecution”.

    urbanleftbehind (fd650f)

  21. I should have been clear, objectionable reasons to vote him down, jihadwatch was indeed reaching,

    narciso (d1f714)

  22. My apologies for misunderstanding, narciso

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  23. 16… lol…

    Colonel Haiku (3116bd)

  24. “I don’t give a damn how a man prays! There’s enough room in hell for all of us!” – Mad Jack Duncan [Ray Walston] ‘Paint Your Wagon’ 1969

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  25. That’s also Mr. Hand admonishing the lil Duncan Hunters and Dana Rohrabachers against messing with Dr. Shahi’s California nephews in the Fast Times of Ridgemont High reboot while eating Spicoli’s grandsons puzza.

    urbanleftbehind (fd650f)

  26. Alexandra DeSanctis posits that perhaps the attack on Brian Buescher re KoColumbus is just a test run for Amy Coney Barrett:

    One way to understand the Democratic opposition to the judicial nomination of Brian Buescher over his membership in the Catholic group the Knights of Columbus is as a test run in preventing their worst nightmare: the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.

    The Democratic focus on Buescher’s membership in the Knights is tied not to anything inherently sinister about the organization — which is wholly innocuous and, in fact, most widely known and respected for its charitable work and donations — but to their desire to use it as a proxy for his adherence to Catholicism, which they believe will lead him to rule against their pet precedents.

    In raising a similar fuss over Buescher’s nomination, Democrats have revealed the basis of their strategy for what surely will be an all-out campaign to stop Coney Barrett from being seated on the Supreme Court, should President Trump have the chance to make another nomination and should he choose the Seventh Circuit judge.

    This is a dangerous precedent, and one with implications that the Democrats may not like. Feinstein, Harris, and Hirono are proposing that if a judicial nominee belongs to a civil institution that holds differing views from our legal status quo, he or she is necessarily incapable of upholding the law. Such a standard would prevent members of any religious faith, not only Catholics, from serving as judges, as well as cast in suspicion members of political advocacy groups whose positions differ from established law or jurisprudence.

    Because abortion is the mother of all litmus tests, any religious individual who adheres to their faith’s goal of protecting life in the womb would automatically be considered a no-go if nominated. There would no longer be the need for any hearings. A time-saving cut-to-the-chase methodology at work. I think DeSanctis is on to something.

    Dana (023079)

  27. Link.

    Dana (023079)

  28. Because of course it’s impossible for someone to be personally pro-life but believe that the law protects the right of a woman to choose to abort, and of course it’s impossible for someone who holds that set of beliefs to believe that their oath of office as a judge requires them to serve the law regardless of their religious beliefs?


    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  29. Yep.

    Dana (023079)

  30. IMO, you can’t fully talk about the bigotry among our elected representatives without addressing the racial bigotry of Steve King (R-IA), and it’s not the first time his racism has peeked above the waterline for the rest of us to see. Republicans should be listening to fellow Republican, Tim Scott, and speak out as well.

    Paul Montagu (254294)

  31. Mr. King is a reliable vote for doing many good things on america for example the fence-wall

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  32. I was going to write a separate post about that, Paul Montagu, but maybe I’ll just let the matter be addressed here in the comments section.

    With that, King’s incredible excuse that he simply made a “freshman mistake” is laughable, given his history. It also shows that he is simply who he “mistakenly” said he was. In spite of his apology and regret (of which is convenient and doesn’t solve the historical problem he has), the GOP should be done with him, once and for all. I would like to see more than just a Republicans hold his feet to the fire. Ted Cruz, for one, would set a great example by cutting ties with his form campaign co-chair.

    Dana (023079)

  33. Hm, Tulsi Gabbard told CNN that she will run for president in 2020.

    Dana (023079)

  34. the short answer is we must abjure the culture of the west, now usually those espousing white supremacy have little pride about, but I think jesse Jackson punctuated the point at Stanford in 1988. ‘western culture’s got to go’ what they want to replace it with is more of an open question, with frantz fanon’s African nationalist, rigoberta manchu’s Marxist feminism, as you realize there is a kernel of western thought, from freud or marx in this gumbo,

    narciso (d1f714)

  35. Dana (023079) — 1/11/2019 @ 3:46 pm

    I like Tulsi better than Kamala. I saw Kamala on Morning Joe this morning and I couldn’t watch more than five minutes, where she said basically nothing that wasn’t boilerplate. The Dems can do better than another freshman Senator at the top of the ticket. Oh, and sorry if I stole your thunder.

    Paul Montagu (254294)

  36. If Tulsi’s smart she runs and exits by Super Tuesday, avoids the VP nomination, and remains viable 4 tears later. The smart dems will be the ones who reach out or are contacted to get this Wall through with the hope the return to their district is good enough for the partisans to forgive by 2024.

    urbanleftbehind (fd650f)

  37. “The good doctor has said many times that he doesn’t support Shariah Law. But that wasn’t good enough, apparently.”

    When his own religion permits and even endorses lying to help spread submission, it can be hard to know how someone really believes:

    Muslims are permitted to lie: (1) to save their lives, (2) to reconcile a husband and wife, (3) to persuade a woman into a bedroom and (4) to facilitate one on his journey. Muslims are even permitted to disavow Islam and Mohammed if it is not a genuine heart-felt rejection. Muslims will tell you that concealment of a truth is not an abandonment of that truth if it benefits Islam.”

    harkin (e6b10c)

  38. Women don’t even need a religious reason to lie. Or any reason at all. It’s part of their physiology like their other anatomical features.

    nk (dbc370)

  39. And I don’t see all that much of a parallel between the Texas cow and the California termagants. What does a Tarrant County precinct chairwoman represent? A handful of her redneck neighbors, that’s all. The California shrews were elected statewide by nearly 40 million people. The problem is Californians.

    nk (dbc370)

  40. , any religious individual who adheres to their faith’s goal of protecting life in the womb would automatically be considered a no-go if nominated

    It is in this case a bit more than that. I have heard from Catholic anti-abortion activists that Church teaching is clear that abortion is intrinsically evil and that any public official or politician who does not work to end it, or even worse (Pelosi is often invoked here) supports abortion, is committing a grave sin and possibly worthy of excommunication.

    I don’t know if that is the Church’s actual teaching on the subject, but certainly a large number of conservative Catholics think it is, and therefore that if they were a judge called on to rule on an abortion related case, that they would be required as matter of avoiding grave sin to rule against abortion no matter what the legalities require.

    Beuscher’s answer to Harris shows he is not that sort of Catholic, but that can’t be assumed about any other nominee without actually asking.

    But it would have been a lot more honest of Harris to openly ask that question instead of using the KoCs as a stalking horse.

    Kishnevi (b7169d)

  41. Therein lies the rub, this culture forces one to lie in order to be in line with ones faith. So take a page from our brethren of the book.

    Narciso (d89b9d)

  42. Well, even God shaded the truth a bit when needed.
    Genesis 18

    12 Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?

    13 And the Lord said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?

    Notice that in repeating Sarah’s comment to Abraham, God leaves out the part about Abraham being old. The Midrash says He did it so that Abraham would not be upset with her.

    Kishnevi (b7169d)

  43. It’s interesting you bring up Pelosi. She was taken to task by the Catholic Church because she:

    misrepresented the history and nature of the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church on abortion.”

    Consider: her church teaches against abortion and she is a lifelong Catholic, and yet has said that she is against abortion on demand but is obligated to hold to the laws protecting a woman’s right to choose. So if Pelosi is able to set aside her personal views, why isn’t the same benefit of the doubt given to Buescher or Coney Barrett? Serious double standard at play. Of course we know why.

    Dana (023079)

  44. Old in those days meant that Abraham was 17 and Sarah was 16.

    nk (dbc370)

  45. “When his own religion permits and even endorses lying to help spread submission, it can be hard to know how someone really believes”

    What’s Trump’s excuse?

    Davethulhu (9a0ae2)

  46. Um he was at least 75, tulsi is an attractive moloch priestess but she still is one

    Narciso (d89b9d)

  47. My valued friend Kishnevi wrote (#40):

    [A] large number of conservative Catholics think it is, and therefore that if they were a judge called on to rule on an abortion related case, that they would be required as matter of avoiding grave sin to rule against abortion no matter what the legalities require.

    You’re doubtless right that there are a large number of people who think this, but assuredly almost none of them are, or understand, judges.

    In politics, the issues are presented as pro-choice versus pro-life. And especially when special interest groups are involved, litigation often parallels that, at least roughly and at some distance: We’re unsurprised to see, for instance, Planned Parenthood bringing litigation to challenge laws regulating abortions.

    But in theory, all judges — and in my personal experience, most judges in real life — don’t see the cases before them in the same terms. Their cases aren’t named Pro-Choice v. Pro-Life, Docket No. 19-cv-05765.

    They’re called upon instead to preside over disputes between litigants who have a ripe, non-theoretical actual case or controversy asserting specific legal causes of action that they must have standing to assert.

    That’s the big picture. At a granular, but still critically important level, individual rulings — does this testimony or that exhibit get admitted, is that expert qualified under Daubert, does this instruction go into the jury charge? These rulings and decisions may become outcome determinative, but reasonably honest real-life judges generally don’t perceive themselves to be making these decisions based upon which side they favor or which side they want to see win — not even which side they think Jesus would want to see win.

    The theory that a Catholic judge would behave as you postulate presumes that his entire professional effort is a sham, and that he’s dishonestly working backwards from a pre-destined conclusion as to who should win.

    Now, I’ve also seen more than my share of real-world judges who have points of view and biases which have affected them unconsciously to the point of skewing their legal judgment or predisposing them toward particular litigants or classes of litigant. And I’ve also a much smaller number of judges who are outright corrupt — who are not only biased, but deeply compromised and sometimes literally on the take. I can’t recall a single instance, however, in which the judge’s own religious views were the source of that skew.

    That’s why the whole line of attack is so offensive, from the point of view of a judicial nominee and his supporters: The argument amounts to, “You shouldn’t be confirmed because you’re too incompetent to decide issues on their merits and you instead merely work backwards from who you want to win.” If that’s true, then fine — document the assertion with examples. But presuming, without evidence, that someone’s faith is going to override his or her professional judgment, despite best efforts to be professional and independent, is deeply illogical and unfair.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  48. 47. Truth, Beldar. All of it. But what Dems know instinctively, and the only thing your analysis omits, is the idea of precedence as relates to stare decisis. It is most certainly possible that those individual rulings, though granular taken individually, can set precedent for those who rule after them — especially, but not only, at the Supreme Court level. Panic on the part of Dems is not entirely illogical when it comes to losing abortion rights. They know that a court that can rule abortion rights into existence can rule them away just as easily.

    Gryph (5efbad)

  49. That it was a cheap political stunt is obvious. What is disturbing is that they felt free to pull it. Two U.S. Senators from the most populous state.

    nk (dbc370)

  50. We’ll have to do a full-blown post on Tulsi Gabbard when she formally announces her candidacy, but I’m here to tell you that I like her. I can forgive her for endorsing Sanders because it seems what she was truly saying is that she was part of NeverHillary, and that puts her on the side of the angels. Meeting with Assad in Syria was not a good idea, but I’m willing to chalk that up to her inexperience. In fact, the one thing about Rep. Gabbard that can’t be said about Biden, Sanders, Warren, Gillibrand, or any of the others is that she could truly grow in office. But stay tuned for a deeper level of analysis when she officially announces.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  51. She does have the virtue of being hated by the hard Left because she lacks ideological purity.

    Kishnevi (b7169d)

  52. What Beldar says about judges’ role the legal process makes sense, but ultimately, the survival of abortion in large swaths of the country depends on judges accepting Roe as the supreme law of the land.

    I interpret Kishnevi’s hard-line Catholics as saying doing that is sin.

    Dave (1bb933)

  53. I interpret Kishnevi’s hard-line Catholics as saying doing that is sin.

    That is exactly what they say.

    It is a bit ridiculous when the target is Judge Barrett, since she wrote a law review article suggesting that the appropriate course of action for a judge who felt that way is…recusal.

    Kishnevi (b7169d)

  54. Clarification
    I was referring to Judge Barrett being targeted by pro-abortionists.

    Kishnevi (b7169d)

  55. See you miss the point, when your view dominates the education, media landscape and a large part of corporate America, only defending traditional values can be considered ‘bigotry’ see how the splc has deplatformed so many outlets.

    Narciso (d89b9d)

  56. JVW: couldn’t it also be said of Harris, that she would grow in office?

    aphrael (3f0569)

  57. As it happens, the Catholic Church has positions about the relative sinfulness not just of abortion, but of a great many other things. This is true also of many other religions besides the Catholics.

    Depending on the bench and to a considerable degree the luck of the random assignments, a federal judge may spend years between cases that have anything at all to do with abortion. Do these anti-Catholics imagine that on the 99-point-something percent of the other cases a given judicial nominee might handle, he or she likewise is going to be ruling based on pronouncements about what is and isn’t sinful? Are we likewise grilling our Methodists and our agnostics about this?

    Pah. It’s shallow, seedy anti-religious bigotry, wearing hipster clothes. Churchmen who claim that a judge is “sinning” in his or her rulings are, as a general matter, full of crap — just as the alarm-criers about the imminent doom of western civilization at hands of judicial theocrats. Crackpots religious and ir-, as far as I’m concerned.

    But both categories are certainly more common than judges who think it’s their duty to rule from the bench based on divine inspiration. The most prominent one that springs to mind, of course, is Judge Roy Moore, who was twice — twice! — removed from an elected position as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court for doing exactly that. He’s in a tiny, tiny minority of judges in modern America.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  58. He’s in a tiny, tiny minority of judges in modern America.
    And thank God for that.

    Kishnevi (712fff)

  59. And thank God for that.

    Amen, brother.

    Dave (1bb933)

  60. The attack on the KoC is absurd on too many levels to count.

    As (IIRC) Allahpundit pointed out, the “extremist” KoC position that marriage is between a man and a woman was the public position of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton until 2012, and in 2008, over 52% of voters (7M+ of them) in Harris’s own state voted to enshrine that principle in the California constitution.

    It may be inconsistent with more recent case law, but is hardly “extremist”.

    Dave (1bb933)

  61. I think you’re missing the point, the three institutions mentioned above force feed all this cultural Marxist alienation carp, heck its cant be gay and lesbian anymore but transgender with bestiality and body mutilation next up as normal, and something like traditional masculinity as aberrarional

    Narciso (2517c6)

  62. It doesn’t matter that was the stance 10 years that was 100 years ago. Just like my complain with ths cartel bloc on latin tv

    Narciso (2517c6)

  63. Oh good grief vox dials to 14.

    Narciso (2517c6)

  64. When his own religion permits and even endorses lying to help spread submission, it can be hard to know how someone really believes:

    Did you even read the quote from Shafi I posted at #11? He doesn’t support Sharia Law. He fully believes that the law of the United States rests in the US Constitution and the laws enacted by Congress. How can a reasonable person possibly construe otherwise?

    Chuck Bartowski (a2c25f)

  65. Dorrie O’Brien’s a kook all she wanted was the exact kind of attention the virtue signalers are showering on her like milk (milky attention shower)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  66. Hmmm the idea that lying is permissable in order to spread one’s ideas. Ya know, that *is* pretty horrible. Downright uncivilized. Good thing Republicans would never countenance that in the White House.

    JRH (fe281f)

  67. It’s the way they fundamentally transformed this country, stole your liberty and indoctrinated the next generation deal with it.

    Narciso (49b187)

  68. Good thing Republicans would never countenance that in the White House.

    why do you think dirty lying mil-coward John McCain never got into the white house

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  69. Yes McCain is gone yet his presence lingers like Jacob Marley with the Russian interlocutors like klimnik and deripasha which continue the story.

    Narciso (49b187)

  70. Oh yay let’s sh*t on the dead. Sounds like a good time.

    JRH (fe281f)

  71. obama-netflix is getting sued again

    Netflix sued over ‘Black Mirror’ movie by ‘Choose Your Own Adventure’ book publisher

    i’ll just note this as evidence our favorite prancing unicorn streaming service is getting sloppy

    and it stinks of missed opportunity

    they should have been at the top of their game while their biggest rival wallows in the jeff bezos dick pic sewer

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  72. Good grief that’s derivative, so is deadly class Joe and Anthony Russo take on the 80s.

    Klimnik was hired from the Iri, who in turn hired him from being a translator for an arms dealer

    Narciso (49b187)

  73. I cancelled Prime. Dave Ramsey advice. Feels better.

    JRH (fe281f)

  74. that seems smart

    i got that YouTubeTV subscription and i’m gonna let that go

    i can’t handle the way they force you to watch the sleaziest commercials it’s like they want to forcefeed you raw sewage

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  75. There’s a great ad blocker, ublock origin. it should get rid of those commercials.

    JRH (fe281f)

  76. i have that but it didn’t help for that one

    i use it to scrape that twitchy garbage off Mr. Instapundit’s page

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  77. Truly original programming is scarce, so the hot take against tulsi is she’s a hindu nationalist (snorfle) and Syrian sympathizer

    Narciso (49b187)

  78. Klimnik was hired from the Iri…

    And then the IRI sacked him in part because they suspected him of being a Putin spy. But that didn’t stop the unpatriotic un-American Manafort from hiring him.

    Paul Montagu (254294)

  79. What you guys don’t even suspect is that the Pistachio People of the far future invented a time machine and they are now among us, kidnapping every entertainment industry figure they can get their fronds on, taking them to a prison camp they call Lardworld, and replacing them with Pistachio People in rubber human suits and face masks.

    nk (dbc370)

  80. maybe that’s why emma stone keeps defining her brand further down

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  81. It toads the wet sprocket you have to drive 40 miles to say the favorite.

    Narciso (49b187)

  82. The other thing you guys don’t suspect that is the interactive TV sets of Orwell’s “1984” which spied on people and ordered them around are here in the guise of your internet browsing devices with cameras and microphones and AIs to alert the Thought Police to Crimethink and you only think that you can turn them off.

    nk (dbc370)

  83. Yes then I have rifftrax and Malaysian cooking shoes to mess up their algorithm.

    Narciso (49b187)

  84. Deripaska drinking game is back on, though the Sepah game is better for obtaining optimum buzz. Points for the Toad reference, a guilty pleasure aling with Gin Blossoms given my innate hostility to all things within whiff of Cobra Kai.

    urbanleftbehind (bae6a3)

  85. My Netflix thinks I’m a black comedian.

    urbanleftbehind (bae6a3)

  86. Cobra kai has to adopt krav maga and sistema, get into the 21st century, sensei was some kind of operator I’m the original.

    Narciso (49b187)

  87. In the original, toad from x men,

    Narciso (49b187)

  88. Sistema I only learned of from burn notice, it was also featured in mcmafia. Which curious had not moved another platform like BBC has done with killing eve now on hulu.

    Narciso (49b187)

  89. i miss toad from x-men he should have his own series

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  90. the disneytards would probably make him some kind of he-she boy-girl toad though

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  91. nk (dbc370) — 1/12/2019 @ 8:01 am

    You seem to know an awful lot…hmm…

    How do we know you’re not one of Them, or working for Them?

    Spoiler alert: we DON’T

    Dave (1bb933)

  92. Yes, but that is a futurama reference. Not yo be confused with the hypno toad.

    Narciso (49b187)

  93. corrupt yalie chris wray’s done nothing to clean out the dirty sleazy men and women of the nazi-lick fbi

    what a dirty dirty unamerican bordello that place has become anymore

    wouldn’t you be mortified if you had to tell people your mom or dad worked there

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  94. So the reality is not Jodie comers ruthless assassin but the Russian version of grosse pointe blank.

    Narciso (49b187)

  95. I am a voice crying in the wilderness. The Pistachio People’s biggest success so far has been to make humans believe that Pistachio People do not exist.

    nk (dbc370)

  96. That’s what keyser Soyze would ask us to believe.

    Narciso (49b187)

  97. Wray was head of the Eurasia group having left the Enron task force where he had been supervise by Mr. Freidrich of the q division of main justice.

    Narciso (49b187)

  98. Getting back on track, tulsi is smarter (and hawter) than Kamala, hence she is more dangerous because she can look more reasonable.

    Narciso (49b187)

  99. You can kind of tell who the Pistachio People are because they don’t get the skin tone exactly right, giving it kind of a fake sun tan orange tint; and the same thing with body proportions such as, for example, making themselves 6’3″ tall but giving themselves the hands of someone who’s only 5’4″.

    nk (dbc370)

  100. They both sicken and disgust me. Tulsi and Kamala.

    nk (dbc370)

  101. Yes but because of her manner, Tulsi will get farther.

    Narciso (49b187)

  102. Four years ago was the Charlie Hebdo slaying, just another varsity outing

    Narciso (49b187)

  103. Pistachios are green like the skrulls. You realize you are borrowing from an old kris kristofferson vehicle millennium which was based on a John varley story ‘air raid’

    The third captain marvel trailer is passable.

    Narciso (49b187)

  104. I am not! I am shamelessly stealing from Milo Murphy’s Law, the successor to Phineas And Ferb. They brought back the cast of Phineas And Ferb for the first episode of the second season of Milo Murphy’s Law, BTW. I hope they do it more.

    nk (dbc370)

  105. Yes but they borrowed from millennium, lovecraft for kids gravity falls has its moments as well.

    Narciso (49b187)

  106. I don’t like Kris Kristofferson, either. And I would say Robert E. Howard over H.P. Lovecraft for Gravity Falls. Most of his stories combined adventure with the supernatural, horror, or humor.

    nk (dbc370)

  107. I think it was worst role till Amerika, really I didn’t get that vibe from gravity falls.

    Narciso (49b187)

  108. I wish a film version Varley’s PRESS ENTER ■ was made.

    harkin (e6b10c)

  109. The gruncle is really Joe Maddon. And unless you want to hypnotize, control and arm someone with oval office access, QYB.

    urbanleftbehind (bae6a3)

  110. if you tell alexa to “play kris kristofferson” you get a LOT of good stuff

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  111. kamala makes too many squelchy noise as she walks onto the stage

    and tulsi has the gravitas of a dirty sports illustrated swimsuit model what takes it all off on instagram

    are not serious women

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  112. Take a looksee. All of his stories are here. (Scroll down to Howard) Browse a few, they’re kind of categorized, too. Check out the Conan story, “Red Nails”, in particular, for a little of everything. He combines prehistoric lizards with sorcery, cannibal zombies, and immortal vampires, as well as swords and muscle, and Conan’s interactions with Valeria seem kind of lighthearted to me.

    nk (dbc370)

  113. Hispanic sheldon cooper is all in.

    urbanleftbehind (bae6a3)

  114. You can kind of tell who the Pistachio People are because they don’t get the skin tone exactly right, giving it kind of a fake sun tan orange tint; and the same thing with body proportions such as, for example, making themselves 6’3″ tall but giving themselves the hands of someone who’s only 5’4″.

    I heard they also occasionally screw up and slip words from their own language like “covfefe” (which roughly translates to: “is there anything I could say that you idiots *wouldn’t* believe?”) into their speech or writing.

    Dave (1bb933)

  115. Imagine being against Catholics because they might believe things that normal people also believe, instead of solid, traditional, historic American reasons like ‘keeping the Irish Papist Menace down.’

    I am strongly FOR religious bigotry against central-office-outside-American-HQ Catholics and Muslims for solid, simple reasons of ‘they ain’t like us and they’re likely to turn on a dime for their transnational relations’, a real interview would ask questions like ‘DO YOU RENOUNCE ALL TIES AND LOYALTIES TO THE CURRENT ANTICHRIST IN THE VATICAN’ or ‘IF YOU HAD TO NUKE ONE CITY, WOULD IT BE MECCA OR DETROIT?’ to keep our American Know-Nothing tradition strong.

    Father Jerry (ead630)

  116. Move along, nothing to see here:

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  117. It was supposed to be Europe by 2020,

    Narciso (49b187)

  118. Ivanka Trump is reportedly under consideration to lead The World Bank

    All those years of Ms. Trump working in the banking sector has really paid off.

    Paul Montagu (254294)

  119. Btw that study about fake news actually ended up being retracted.

    Narciso (49b187)

  120. @121. Would get her out of the WH; ‘paid off’ for scoundrels Wolfowitz and MacNamara, who ran and hid there, as well.

    “Always look on the brighter side of life…” – ‘Monty Python’s The Life of Brian’ 1979

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  121. As compared to zoellick, Fannie Mae lobbyists who kept the oligarchs in clover, we lost out when they took down wolfowitz.

    Narciso (49b187)

  122. remember how cowardly army-turd Colin Powell let Mr. Libby twist in the wind?

    i sure do

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  123. Not to mention Richard Armitage who Comey knew he had leaked to a number of reporters

    Narciso (49b187)

  124. Dana, the phrase “Religious bigotry” is in a sense a nonsensical phrase.

    When the term “bigotry” is used, it is regarding some trait that a person has, which they have no control over, such as the color of their skin.

    On the contrary, a person’s religion is chosen – you are not born into it. You have a choice about your religion, but not about your race. So I do not see that phrase as really legitimate.

    By the way, you can of course be “born into” a certain religion, say the Baptist Church’s. But as an adult, it is still your choice to stay with and heed that religion, or not. There is no “moral holiday” for it as William James would say: even if we ignore and blindly accept a given religion, we are still nevertheless responsible for believing in that religion.

    Still, we should respect each other’s religions for the most part – I do agree with your main point there.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  125. Jonah’s reaction to Kamala Harris on Morning Joe is much more eloquent than mine. And funnier.

    About 20 minutes ago (my time), I caught some of Senator Kamala Harris’s road show on Morning Joe. If there were a platitude-eating fungus that rapidly reproduced, by the end of the segment, everyone would have died from the crushing weight of the world’s largest mushroom.
    I don’t really take offense at the platitudes, given that we are talking about a politician and also a U.S. senator running for president. What did bug me quite a bit, though, was how she oozed the sense that she was just nailing it. And no, this isn’t a sexist thing. I know we’re in the phase of the asinine conversation when we’re supposed to believe that finding a specific liberal woman annoying or unlikable proves that you hate all women.
    I reject all of this and all attempts to bully me into compliance. I belong to the school that says women are human beings, and that means they are distributed up and down the likability scale, just like men. I find Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez likable, but not as likable as Amy Klobuchar, and more likable than Elizabeth Warren. And, just to establish a baseline, compared to, say, the late Helen Thomas (the Stygian goblin who used to roost in the White House press gallery, her scaly talons glistening under the camera lights), they’re all so likable I’d join their cross-country Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants if it meant not sitting next to Thomas on a short flight.
    Anyway, former senator Bill Bradley had the same quality as Harris. He’d say something like “Elections are vital to democracy” and then stop talking, as if the audience needed time to absorb the shockwave of a truth bomb of such magnitude. I read somewhere that Bradley didn’t like to hear applause at the end of his speeches because he interpreted silence as a sign of the audience’s awe at his wisdom.
    Harris wasn’t that bad, but it was close.


    Paul Montagu (254294)

  126. The issue is not at all about religion. Islam is first and foremost seeking the political power to overthrow American government. This is their global jihad and this Muslim doctor is right in the middle of it.

    Our stupid politicians are ignorant of Islam’s goals for the conquest of America and are blind to their tactics. Freedom of Religion is a sacred concept that brought our founding fathers to our shores long ago. The separation of church and state accounted for how great America has become. Islam uses this freedom to lever its way into our and our political bunglers are oblivious of Muslim tactics.

    Whirlwinder (4aaf19)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1668 secs.