Former Bush Official Slams Social Conservative Leader For Opposing Marriage Equality

Nicole Wallace, a former adviser to President George W. Bush, called out social conservative leader Gary Bauer for his outdated opposition to marriage equality during a discussion on Fox News Sunday about the Supreme Court’s upcoming hearings on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8.

In a contentious segment, Bauer described the effort to legalize same-sex marriage as a “radical movement” that is “trying to redefine marriage so it is a profoundly unconservative thing.” He accused supporters of marriage equality of being brainwashed by a “full-court blitz by the popular culture” and the “elites,” who, he charged, “intimidate” and “cower people into no longer defending marriage as being between a man and a woman.”

Wallace pushed back against the claims, noting that a growing number of conservatives have evolved in favor of equality and predicting that the Court will come down “on the side of freedom” when it hands down its ruling in June:

WALLACE: Chris, Chris, the biggest problem that Mr. Bauer faces, not just this morning but moving forward is that more than 65% of his own base, self-describing Evangelical Christians, under the age of 33, support marriage equality. 80% of people in this country, right, left, Democrat, Republican, man, woman, support marriage equality. More than 60% of all Americans, everyone, supports marriage equality. And that very some activist court that he railed against, with such hostility this morning always sides on the side of freedom. They are the same court that overturned gun bans, for overreaching. They’re the very same court that overturned campaign finance reform for overreaching, so we can despise the courts for its activism when we don’t like their behavior, but we can’t say that this is a court that always sides on the side of liberals.

Watch it:

Indeed, a Washington Post poll released on Monday found that 58 percent of Americans now believe it should be legal for gay and lesbian couples to get married, including 81 percent of young people, and 52 percent of Republican-leaning Independents. More conservatives, Evangelicals, Republicans, and senior citizens support marriage than did nine years ago.

View the original article here

Senate Majority Leader Scolds GOP For Unprecedented Hagel Obstruction: ‘What A Shame’

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) today filed a cloture motion on Chuck Hagel’s nomination to be the next Defense Secretary, saying he was forced to file the motion — which effectively means that 60 votes will be required for an up or down vote on Hagel — because Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member James Inhofe (R-OK) and other Republicans “aren’t willing to consider” the Nebraska Republican’s nomination.

“This is the first time in the history of our country that a presidential nominee for Secretary of Defense has been filibustered,” Reid said on the Senate floor. “What a shame.” Watch the clip:

The cloture vote is scheduled for Friday and It’s unlikely Senate Republicans will be able to derail Hagel’s confirmation. At this point, their obstruction and delay appears to be just that: obstruction and delay.

But it’s worth remembering who wants Chuck Hagel to be the next Secretary of Defense — former top military and defense officials from both parties, 50 former U.S. ambassadors, veterans and military families, a bipartisan group of former national security advisers, and the country’s most prominent newspapers and journalists — and who doesn’t: James Inhofe, Ted Cruz, Bill Kristol, Rick Santorum, Elliott Abrams, and Jennifer Rubin. You do the math.

View the original article here

GOP Senate Leader Endorses National Union-Busting Law

Michigan workers protest "right-to-work" in December

Republicans across the country have pushed a variety of anti-union laws in the last two years, with the most heinous coming in the form of so-called “right-to-work” laws that effectively bust unions and their ability to collectively bargain for wages and benefits. Both Michigan and Indiana, traditional union states, passed such laws last year, and now, the push is moving to the federal level.

Republicans typically voice concern about federal intrusion on states’ rights and the government’s intervention in agreements between employers and their workers. But Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has apparently cast those concerns aside, as he announced today his support for a national “right-to-work” legislation introduced by fellow Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (R):

“As working class Americans continue to face daunting challenges to provide for their families, I believe the federal government has an obligation to ensure every American has the right to choose whether they want to spend part of their paycheck to support a union. The right to work should not be negotiable but unfortunately there are still twenty-six states across the country that turn a blind eye towards forced union membership. It is long past time that the federal government remedy this problem. If states like Michigan, with its proud tradition of organized labor, can look their problems in the face and address them by passing meaningful Right to Work legislation, then it is high time for the federal government to act. I proudly support the National Right to Work Act and will work with my friend Sen. Rand Paul to do all I can to ensure it receives a vote.”

It’s worth noting that Kentucky, the state both McConnell and Paul claim to represent, does not have a right-to-work law on its books. And though just 10.3 percent of the state’s workers are unionized, unions in Kentucky have played a big role in protecting workers in the state’s factories and coal mines, and national unions have made strong pushes for better mine safety laws that both McConnell and Paul have opposed.

But the effects of a national “right-to-work” law wouldn’t be limited to Kentucky. Such laws cost workers, union and non-union, $1,500 a year, according to the Economic Policy Institute, and its research “shows that there is no relationship between right-to-work laws and state unemployment rates, state per capita income, or state job growth.” Decreases in union membership that result from such laws have a negative impact on middle-class workers, and if “benefits coverage in non-right-to-work states were lowered to the levels of states with these laws, 2 million fewer workers would receive health insurance and 3.8 million fewer workers would receive pensions nationwide,” according to the Center for American Progress’ David Madland and Karla Walter.

Further, McConnell is wrong that a national “right-to-work” law would finally ensure that “every American has the right to choose whether they want to spend part of their paycheck to support a union.” Workers, of course, already have that choice, since none is forced to join a unionized workforce. “Right-to-work” simply undermines the central point of unionization by creating a free-loader problem that allows workers to directly benefit from union membership without paying dues to support the actual union.

View the original article here

House Republican Leader Calls For Defunding The United Nations

Rep. James Lankford (R-OK)

Rep. James Lankford (R-OK), the fifth-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives has called for defunding and abandoningof the United Nations, in favor of conducting U.S. international relations “in another way.”

Speaking before a town hall meeting earlier this month, Lankford gladly weighed in on every topic that his constituents threw at him. One resident seemed particularly riled by the insidious effect the U.N. has on the United States’ policies, particularly the ominous sounding “Agenda 21? and its aims of achieving sustainable development. When asked about his views on the relationship between the U.N. and United States, Lankford didn’t hesitate to make his distaste for international partnerships clear:

CONSTITUENT: The UN in my opinion is a continuing criminal enterprise. I would like to know why we are still funding them?

LANKFORD: Right. [Loud applause] You know where I am on that completely. The UN had a set purpose in its earliest days of trying to form relationships, but it has far left that. Our technology has far exceeded the purpose of what we have in the UN. The “benefits” of what we could get out of the UN we can do with a telephone now and over a Skype. […] It is a transition of wealth from wealthy nations to poorer nations is what the UN’s sole purpose is now. I would be glad to defund it and do our relationships in another way.

Watch his remarks here:

Lankford is previously on record as supporting the concept of a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the U.S. from paying its dues to the United Nations, that time at another town hall in 2011. The Congressman was also one of 130 representatives who signed onto a letter warning of the dangers of any potential U.N. Arms Trade Treaty to the rights of Americans.

These stances put him well within the mainstream of GOP thought on international organizations, considering that the foreign policy plank in the 2012 Republican Platform firmly declared that Republicans “strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty.” Unfortunately for them, that places the GOP well outside the mainstream among the public, as polling shows approximately eight in ten voters believe that the U.S. maintain a strong role in the United Nations, and that the U.S. keep up a strong relationship with the U.N.

Contrary to the belief of Lankford and his questioners, the United Nations does much more than serve as a forum that can be replaced by Skype. The U.N. provides critical relief in the event of wars and natural disasters, sheltering thousands of refugees in the countries surrounding Syria and Mali, as well as feeding millions on the verge of starvation. Current U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice has also previously stated that the U.N. saves the U.S. millions in terms of providing security. “If the US was to act on its own – unilaterally – and deploys its own forces in many of these countries, for every dollar the US would spend, the UN can accomplish the mission for twelve cents,” Rice said in an interview in 2009.

Even U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton — a harsh U.N. critic — has praised the role the U.N. plays in providing humanitarian relief in times of disaster. That hasn’t stopped Republicans from pushing massive cuts to the organization and to the U.S. State Department since they retook control of the House in 2010 or spiking multiple treaties in the Senate.

View the original article here

Boy Scout Camp Leader Comes Out And Condemns Organization’s Policies

Last July, a 22-year-old Eagle Scout named Tim Griffin was fired from his position on the staff at Camp Winton, where he’d worked for eight years, because he was gay. Officials from the Boy Scouts of America claimed it was because of his appearance and mannerisms, but other staff at the camp confirmed it was because of his sexual orientation. That, along with numerous other manifestations of the BSA’s anti-gay policy this year, prompted Derek Nance to come out as well.

Nance is also an Eagle Scout who has worked as a program director at Mataguay Scout Ranch in Southern California for 10 years. In a video posted on YouTube on Thursday, he explains that he couldn’t bear to keep his secret from his camp family any longer:

NANCE: I am gay… I live with camp friends, I attend school with camp friends, and I go out drinking at night with camp friends, and yet I’ve had to keep part of my life secret from them. The little things are the most frustrating. For instance, I can’t giggle when a boy texts me while I’m at camp. I can’t comment on how cute an actor looked in a movie we went and saw that weekend. And I can’t share with them the emotional roller coaster everyone feels while they fall in and out of love. I’m open to all my friends and family in “real life,” but to the people I truly feel closest to, I’ve had to remain distant.

Which is why I’ve chosen this moment to open up to them, and to every other staff member of the Boy Scouts of America who is in the same position I am in. The only way we will change the Boy Scouts’ discriminatory policies is if those of us who are on the front lines representing them to thousands of scouts every single summer start engaging in some open dialogue on this issue. Lawsuits from the ACLU or “confidential reviews” by the Boy Scouts are not going to change policies. The first step to coming to an agreement on this issue is to drop the old pretenses and stereotypes and to start actually talking.

Watch Nance’s courageous video:

Nance joins a growing coalition standing up against the antiquated policy. Every instance in which the Boy Scouts maintains that it is better off without gay scouts and leaders further demonstrates how pointless the discrimination truly is.

View the original article here