One More Dangerous Right Winger Running For Office

I just saw this ad, last evening, on television, for one Republican Will Kraus running, as I'm told, for Secretary of State.



And he is, once again, dangerous as so many Right Wingers and Republicans are.

And here's why.

First, he begins by injecting (infecting?) religion into what is a race for a government position by saying he's "Sustained by faith in Christ..."

Could we have at least a LITTLE separation of Church and State?  Please?

Next, he comes out to support the Republicans' voter ID laws and we know what those are.

Proposed voter ID law is both 

unnecessary and expensive

'Free' voter IDs are costly, Harvard Law 

report finds

New Study Says Voter ID Laws Suppress Votes

He follows that up by saying he will "... report Liberal schemes to cheat at the ballot box", all the while showing a sign for the Acorn group.

Investigations and facts from these have since shown that the group that tried to "expose" the Acorn group lied and that Acorn was doing good and important work.

ACORN Vindicated of Wrongdoing

Congressional report clears ACORN of wrongdoing

ACORN Report Finds No Illegal Conduct

Voter ID laws are famously, provenly expensive for governments, wasteful, unnecessary and discriminate against minorities, most notably Blacks and Hispanics but also the poor and elderly. Voter ID laws are created to take away the votes, disenfranchise Americans. Voter ID laws are decidedly un-American.

Finally, he ends this ad with the claim that he will "...protect the voting rights of our troops fighting abroad..."

Since when was that an issue? For whom is that a problem? Who is attacking American soldiers' voting rights?  Who's doing that?  No one I know. Not one person, not one group. I don't know where this is coming from.

It needs to be said. It needs to be clear. This guy, given this ad, is just either empty or out and out dangerous. Disenfranchising Americans, for one, to begin, is just un-American. 

He's dangerous the way Catherine Hanaway is dangerous and the word needs to get out.

Who knows what else he's for but just this one, brief ad shows he's dangerous and should be avoided at all cost.

Quote of the Day -- Sunday Edition

“It is only when the people become ignorant and corrupt, when they degenerate into a populace, that they are incapable of exercising the sovereignty. Usurpation is then an easy attainment, and an usurper soon found. The people themselves become the willing instruments of their own debasement and ruin. Let us, then, look to the great cause, and endeavor to preserve it in full force. 

Let us by all wise and constitutional measures promote intelligence among the people as the best means of preserving our liberties.”

~Founding Father James Monroe, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1817

The Founding Fathers on religion and our government?

Here you go. Here's one of our Founding Fathers and how serious he took the separation of church and state:



Faith based initiatives?  Funded by government?

I don't think so.

This should seal it---tax the Catholic Church

It's my contention that this video--and anything and everything else the Catholic Church is doing about this coming election--should get them, once and for all, taxed by the nation and our government, since they're so clearly getting into government and governmental matters:



If they're happy and willing to get into politics, then let 'em pay.

Unfortunately over far too many American's heads

Click on picture for legibility.

That "separation of church and state" thing? That applies here. Or should.

On this day in history: The First Amendment. Remember that?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." First Amendment in the Bill of Rights created September 25, 1789 and ratified December 15, 1791.

Quote of the day, from 1875

"Declare church and state forever separate and distinct; but each free within their proper spheres." --President Ulysses S. Grant, Seventh annual message, Congress December 7, 1875

Some Constitutional and national history

Rather made all the more important since it's an election year, I thought.

It's not just "Governor Brownback", that's for sure

I've written here before, ever since Sam Brownback turned in his one elected seat as senator in Washington for this, more local one, as Governor of Kansas, that hasn't been his only role, by a long shot.

His other, bigger role, at least to him?

"Candidate Brownback."

Senator Brownback knew it's very difficult, if not impossible for Senators to become President of the United States so he turned in that role, became governor of Kansas and has been "Candidate Brownback" ever since.

And he's doing it all on the backs of Kansans.

First, he began slashing the state budget which, admittedly, with both their deficit and the mandate to balance the budget, he's been doing.

But in order to make a big, national "splash", Scott Walker-style up in Wisconsin, he did away with the Arts Commission in Kansas and more recently started slashing the education budget, too.

You see, he has to get that national media attention or it's all for nothing.

No, he's not running for the November, 2012 presidential contest, no, no.

He has his eyes squarely set on the next race, in 2016, when it's more likely someone from the Republican Party has a shot at getting in the White House, what with President Obama at the end of his final term.

All this in mind, look what came out yesterday in The New York Times:

Texas Governor Draws Criticism on Prayer Event

AUSTIN, Tex. — When Gov. Rick Perry invited fellow governors to join him on Aug. 6 for “a day of prayer and fasting on behalf of our troubled nation,” some speculated that he was trying to raise his national visibility for a possible presidential run.


Forget about the very real possibilities of problems with the separation of church and state that need to be addressed, what's this got to do with our own Governor Brownback?  Glad you asked:


So far only one other governor, Sam Brownback of Kansas, who is a conservative Roman Catholic, has said he will attend.


This could possibly give the Guv more national political attention from both his own political party as well as those on the religious right who organize oh-so-well most every Sunday morning while they're attending their very Christian church services.


I'm sure Governor B just has one regret about it all.


He's just sorry he didn't think of it himself.

The stupid coming out of Jeff City, part II

Sometimes it's just difficult to believe what people come up with.

Case in point:

Proposal: Missouri parents to get public money for religious schools 


JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) -- A state House member wants to amend the Missouri Constitution to let parents receive public funding to send children to religious schools.


The proposal by Republican Jay Barnes, of Jefferson City, would repeal a prohibition on public money going to religious schools. If approved by the full House and Senate, it would go on a statewide ballot.


Barnes's measure would allow parents to get a state stipend to help pay for their child's education at a religious school or any other accredited school outside of their assigned district. The stipend would be equal to the amount of state and local funding a public school would have received for their child.


The proposed amendment would also let the government donate money or items to religious schools, but not real estate.


Well, isn't that comforting?  It would "let the government donate money or items to religious schools but not real estate."  What a relief that is.  At least we're not giving them real estate, too.


Let's realize religion for what it is in America, too, by the way.  It's a business with very little overhead since most of the workers or staff are volunteers, the money comes in at least every week and, finally, it's all tax-deductible.


And now we're going to give them money, too?


I have to get in that racket, I have to tell you.


Then, this is to "amend the State Constitution"?


What about the much older, national Constitution the country is based on?  Don't you think we should amend that, first?


What part of "separation of church and state" do these people not get?


You want to know what the biggest problem with this is, folks?


Sure, you start by putting this in the constitution and you begin giving "money or items to religious schools" because right now, what you're thinking is those nice Christian, Protestant and Catholic. right?  Right?


But down the road, when a Muslim or Buddhist or Zen or Wiccan school wants y'all to pony up some money, watch all the hypocrites down there in Jeff City--and all over the state, really--go blood-red-in-the-face-crazy because they don't want their money going THERE.


Besides the fact that in case no one was noticing, we have a budget crisis already.  Why would we start giving "money or other items" to one more group in a time of budget deficits?


And these people, these Republicans, are fiscal conservatives?  


I don't think so.


Link to original post:  http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Proposal-Missouri-parents-to-get-public-money-for-religious-schools-116298019.html

Quote of the day--separation of church and state

As Article 11 of the 1797 treaty first-President George Washington and Founding Father negotiated (and John Adams signed) with the Barbary pirates put it:

"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."


Just to be clear.


Link to original post here:
http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/the-great-republican-rollback

Separation of Church and State

Remember that?

Remember how we used to stand for this principle?

No more.

Ever since that idiot 43rd President of ours ("W", to be clear) screwed up our country--and in so many ways--we've done away with this intelligent idea.

The whole term "Faith-based Inititatives" is enough to make me nearly scream.

Government doesn't belong in religion in any way, shape or form, period.

And religion, conversely, doesn't belong in government.

If you'd have been listening to our country for the last dozen or more years, you'd have thought some boneheaded Liberal came up with this idea, to get more money to the poor or something.

But no.

It was a Republican--a "Conservative" politician--that same George W. Bush.

It should never have been done.

And then, once created, once these same religions started both discriminating against people not of their same faith by not giving them jobs or whatever and, further, proselytizing people, with this same money or the promise of money or help, so that the person needing assistance was maybe talked into becoming part of that religious group, the money from "Uncle Sugar" should have been pulled.

Then, "Mr. Change", our new President (of whom, I have to say, I'm still a supporter), to add insult to this injury, promised to change this policy during the campaign but hasn't done anything near it yet:

"During a July 1, 2008, Zanesville, Ohio, speech, Obama promised to end Bush administration policies that permit publicly funded faith-based social service programs to proselytize and discriminate in hiring based on religion."

To date, no such thing. His council on this is studying reports, I see but that's it so far.

No, this "Faith-based" crap should never have been started.

And it should end now.

I want a bumper sticker: "Government out of religion. Religion out of government."

Let's get to it, Mr. President.


Link to related story:
http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/03/obama-inaction-on-faith-based.html