GOP: No Obama Benghazi Wrongdoing

In a stunning rebuke to its base, the United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence voted to declassify on Thursday the results of its nearly two-year, $3.3 million taxpayer-paid investigation on the September 11, 2012 attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, finding no intentional wrongdoing by President Barack Obama, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, or by the Obama administration.

Meanwhile, Republicans will start yet another series of hearings, led by GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy, trying g once again to prove that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were somehow to blame for the deaths of four Americans.

For a look at Tea Party memes of Benghazi, including Obama hang nooses, see our compilation on Storify.

I can't get this link to hyper.. http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/_breaking_gop_house_intelligence_committee_report_finds_no_obama_administration_wrongdoing ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Over 3 million on Benghazi, 50 show-votes to repeal the Affordable Health Care Act, AKA Scary black man in the White House-care, 26 Billion to close down the Government last year, at a time of war! These people aren't just fiscally irresponsible, they're a threat to National Security.

Rep. Brad Sherman: ♫ In an L.A. Minute... ♫

He was given one minute (too long, imo) on the House Floor last night.

Rep. Brad Sherman D - California, 30th District Woodland Hills, Granada Hills, Studio City

Transcript:

Rep. Brad Sherman: We’re told that if we want the government to stay open for just another five or seventy-five days, we should torpedo the Affordable Care Act [“Obamacare”].Then, what happens in November or December? Are we told that to keep the government open any further we have to strip-mine YellowStone? We have to abolish Medicare? 

The fact is, it is wrong to take hostages, it is wrong to say that the government will shut down if that is the only way you can achieve your legislative objectives. 

What would the country think of us if we said we were going to shut down the government unless we get gay rights, gun control, cap and trade, immigration reform? 

Or what would the country think of us if we said, “Gay rights, but only for one year -- keep the government open for one year, get gay-rights for one year.

Taking hostages is wrong. Holding hostage, the greatest country in the world is wrong.

But his heart was in the right place, and all, right?
--
Op-ed: Can Democrats Scare Ted Cruz With LGBT Rights?

Yeah, what he said.

"Hozier's 'Take Me To Church' Echoes Russian LGBT Violence"

Hozier, an Irish singer-songwriter whose debut EP "Take Me To Church" premiered in early July, just released the video for his track of the same name.

The video follows the relationship between two gay men and the violently homophobic backlash that ensues when the community learns of one of the man's sexuality.

For more information on Hoozier and his "Take Me To Church" EP, visit the artist's website, Bandcamp or Twitter.

---
H/T HUFF PO

PFOX: "Does the ex-gay community need civil rights?"

(If being gay [same-sex attracted] is a sin and we’re all sinners all the time forever no matter what, wouldn’t the term “ex-gay” be tantamount to claiming that one is an “ex-sinner” and thus be blasphemous and a sin in and of itself? Which begs the question, How in the universe would God even take the victimhood complaints of blasphemers seriously?)

PFOX stands for Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and is an anti-gay counter group to PFLAG, Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays. (Gee, PFOX, I don't know, do you think that "ex-sinners" are being deprived of their civil rights?) Granted, this one paragraph alone is autopsy-worthy, just check the last part of it out:

In August alone, the ex-gay community has been the victim of a number of injustices by high-ranking officials. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie signed a bill into law that outlaws therapy for children who wish to overcome unwanted same-sex attractions, some of whom developed such attractions in the wake of sexual abuse at the hands of homosexual predators. Also, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld California’s law banning therapy for minors who wish to go from gay to straight, despite statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showing an increase in HIV infections by MSM (men who have sex with men) aged 13-24.

I believe the hyperlink was placed and worded very carefully in the original article. It’s a CDC PDF and it is true, according to the GRAPH on page 7 you will find that the largest HIV increases are occurring in the 13-24 year old age range.

Read it on the original article and -- correct me if I’m wrong -- does it not read like they’re insinuating that the Court dismisses evidence of a connection between same-sex attraction -- in and of itself -- raping kids, turning them gay and giving them AIDS?
--
Titles? Tags? One-liners? … Anyone?

George Tekei: "Gays Beware"

Mostly preaching to the choir, but those who claim their objection to marriage equality is based on "deeply held religious beliefs" may want to remember that Jesus on remarriage = adultery.

Gays Beware with Jesse Tyler Ferguson and George Takei from Jesse Tyler Ferguson

MORE Than "77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Man/Woman Marriage"

Another comment I thought I'd share -- the very last one, #70 in this post:
---
It's a pro-gay watchdog site that found a PDF on an anti-gay site listing: "77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Man/Woman Marriage"

The author then lists all the reasons, but instead of refuting them, out of sarcasm I began to add more:

Reasons # 78 and 79.From p22 of the book “Marriage On Trial” by Glenn Stanton and Bill Maier (two Focus on the Family hacks):

#78: "Wives help men channel their sexual energy in socially acceptable and nonpredatory ways."

#79: "Husbands help protect women from the exploitation of other males." 

-- Because, as we all know, ALL women "put out" for their husbands as much as, and in every way he wants, all the time. And NO husbands are womanizers or adulterers who ever feel the need to hike the appalachian trail.

Then further down I said:

Reasons # 80 - 87From the same book quoted earlier, Marriage on Trial, pages 60 - 63

#81: "Does the father pay for his daughter’s lesbian wedding?"
#82: "Does the father walk her down the aisle?"
#83: "Do you attend the wedding shower?"
#84: "What about the baby showers that could follow?"
#85: "What kind of discussion develops when some coworkers want to share in buying a wedding present for their colleague and some don’t?"
#86: "Will in-laws really be able to celebrate the coming together of two families via the "marriage" of two guys or gals…"

How insensitive of the wedding couple to not put the "ick"/"I hate gays" factor in front of their own! As the book says:

"This will not bring us closer together but rather drive us further apart."

And my all time favorite:

#87: "It would alienate … "married" gays from gays who don’t want marriage…"

Priceless.

To which an "anonymous" commenter countered:

Patrick

you have to be honest here

gays have based their lives on breaking down a traditional taboo

why then are they so concerned with another tradition: marriage?

oh, you can talk about all the financial benefits, but even as "civil unions" rose, they still kept pushing for the title of "marriage"

but, really, few gays ever really wanted to be married

its just a stepping stone to normalization so homosexuality will be advanced in public schools, through sex ed classes which portray this deviancy as just another part of a big beautiful rainbow

you know, the part where public exhibitionism, sado-masochism, random promiscuity and incurably fatal sexual diseases are the norm

To which I replied:

"Patrick … you have to be honest here … gays have based their lives on breaking down a traditional taboo" 

More accurately, the social "tradition" of defining same-gender attraction as "taboo."

"why then are they so concerned with another tradition: marriage?"

You mean like the "tradition" of arranged marriages and underage marriages and racially homogeneous marriages?

For as long as there have been committed gay relationships there has been gay marriage, it just hasn’t been socially recognized and respected as such.

What you really mean is your personal et al., definition of marriage as being between a male and a female. The misnomer, "traditional marriage," is disingenuous enough, but what lies beyond that is the insidious implication that only male/female union is possible.

Marriage = union = love, ergo, marriage is a euphemism for love, thus the need to put marriage in quotes. It’s a surreptitious way of saying that you consider the love between two people of the same gender to be inferior to your own to the point that comparing it to bestiality makes sense to you.

Which answers your next point as to your perception that we’re simply pushing for a "title" as opposed to equal protection under the law.

"but, really, few gays ever really wanted to be married"

There’s 18,000 gay couples who were married in CA in the few months it was legal who would beg to differ.

"its just a stepping stone to normalization so homosexuality will be advanced in public schools, through sex ed classes which portray this deviancy as just another part of a big beautiful rainbow … you know, the part where public exhibitionism, sado-masochism, random promiscuity and incurably fatal sexual diseases are the norm"

Not just sex-ed classes or just in public schools, but everywhere, to help minimize the devastating effects of your obsessive, vindictive and malicious attempts to smear LGBT Americans -- of all ages -- as sexually promiscuous disease spreading perverts in order to convince us and the rest of society that we deserve all the rights and respect reserved for fecal matter.

I understand and can accept that you don’t believe our love for each other is equal to your own. What I object to is the virtually ubiquitous cowardice shown by your incessant use of euphemisms to hide that fact, and your demonic LUST to malign our very humanity with scurrilous invectives in the name of "Christianity" and "morality," and yet you have the temerity to suggest that I’m the one who’s not being honest?

Take off your human masks and show yourselves for the shame feasting monsters that you are.

NOM and Al Qaeda, like two peas in a pod, both waging their pet jihads.

h/t Vigilance blog
---
Mother Jones:

Al Qaeda says the United States has another crime to add to its litany of atrocities: support for same-sex marriage.

In the latest issue of Inspire, the Al Qaeda-produced English-language magazine that teaches readers how to cause traffic accidents, torch parked cars, and "make a bomb in the kitchen of your mom," the terrorist group goes after President Barack Obama for "evolving" on marriage equality.

Much more at Huffington Post:

Al Qaeda On Gay Marriage: Terrorist Group Slams Obama's 'Evolution' On Same Sex Marriage

NOM and Al Qaeda, like two peas in a pod, both waging their pet jihads.

Too far? Try this one on for size:
 
What Does Albert Mohler* Have In Common With Al Qaeda?

[*President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary]

In 2004, when Massachusetts became the first state in the Union to affirm marriage equality Mohler compared the day the court decision came down to 9/11. And Pearl Harbor.

Compared to all this, anti-gay activists will LONG for the days they hated being associated with Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist “God Hates Fags” Church.