Skip to main content

While I do cheer this statement, I think it rests on a faulty presumption that outwardly religious House Republicans give a flying damn about the working poor or anyone else. While certain of them are quite loud about their supposed beliefs, those beliefs never quite put a dent in the larger agenda of not helping poor people, period.
More than 90 Catholic, evangelical and Protestant leaders have signed a statement rebuking “pro-life” lawmakers for the shutdown, saying they are “appalled that elected officials are pursuing an extreme ideological agenda at the expense of the working poor and vulnerable families” who won’t receive government benefits.

That's probably going to fall on deaf ears, of course. More pressing is that many of the religious charities that are supposed to be caring for the sick and the poor in the first place, according to Republicans, are themselves reliant on government funds. And those funds are going away along with everything else:

As Catholic News Service reports, the Diocese of Wichita (Kansas) is covering the costs of programs for homeless families and battered women run by the local branch of Catholic Charities. In Washington, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said it would be able to continue assisting immigrants through its Migration and Refugee Services for a couple of months if necessary.

But officials also made it clear that these are only stopgap measures that still leave the poor and vulnerable at greater risk.

There's a cascade effect at work here. The shutdown of government-run programs for the poor will result in greater need for private efforts; those private efforts, however, rely themselves on other shuttered government programs. While the House frets over whether military chaplains will be considered essential or—shudder—have to curtail their activities, many religious groups are seeing rather more urgent problems continue to stack up.

Short version: in addition to being stupid, reckless and fiscally irresponsible, shutting down the government turns out to be not a very godly thing to do. I mean, duh.

Originally posted to Hunter on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 02:49 PM PDT.

Also republished by Street Prophets and Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The word "hypocrite" has lost its sting (18+ / 0-)

    Republicans wore the word to shreds.

    look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

    by FishOutofWater on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 02:54:45 PM PDT

    •  it sure has... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      worldlotus, jayden

      Either they've forgotten what it means (an oath doctors take maybe?) or they take pride in it, I can't decide which...

      A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams

      by dougymi on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 03:23:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Face-palm Jesus is really starting to grow on me. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AuroraDawn, wintergreen8694

      I think it may very well become the de facto GOP mascot.

    •  Harry Truman had them pegged in 1952 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, wintergreen8694

      Pres. Truman's Address at the Jefferson-Jackson Day Dinner - Mar 29, 1952

      For 20 years the Republicans have been wandering in a political desert--like camels looking for an oasis. They don't drink the same thing that camels do, though. And if they don't find it pretty soon, the Republican Party may die out, altogether...

      There are some very good reasons why the Republicans have been out of office so long and haven't been able to get back in control.

      The first reason is that they were voted out in 1932 because they had brought the country to the brink of ruin. In the 1920's the Republican administrations drew back in petrified isolation from our world responsibilities. They spent all their time trying to help the rich get richer, and paid no attention to the welfare of the workers and the farmers. All in all, they paved the way for the biggest economic smashup this country has ever seen. That is the reason the Republicans were thrown out of office in 1932 and one of the very good reasons why they have been kept out ever since. People don't want any more "Great Depressions."

      The second reason why the Republicans have been out of office for 20 years is that the Democratic Party has been giving the country good government. Instead of trying to build up the prosperity of the favored few, and letting some of it trickle down to the rest, we have been working to raise the incomes of the vast majority of the people. And we have been steadily expanding the base for prosperity and freedom in this country. The people have kept right on reelecting Democrats because we have been serving them well and they know it.

      The third reason the Republicans have been kept out of power for an years is because they have never been able to agree on a sensible program to put before the country. They have been on almost every side of every question, but they have seldom or never been on the right side. In 1936 they said the New Deal was terrible and they were against it and all its works. And in the election that fall they just lost by a landslide. In 1940 they admitted there might be some good in some parts of the New Deal, but they said you needed a Republican to run it. And they were overwhelmingly beaten again. In 1944 the Republicans said the New Deal might have been good in its day, but it had gotten old and tired and it was no good any more. But the people didn't agree, and the Republicans were snowed under once more. Now in 1948 they said--well, as a matter of fact, by 1948 they were so sure of winning that they really didn't bother to take a position on anything. And they got just exactly what they deserved--they got another good licking.

      And by now the Republicans can't figure out what to do. Every day you hear a new Republican theory of how to win the election of 1952.

      One theory they have is that they ought to come right out and say they are against all advances the country has made since 1932. This is the kind of dinosaur school of Republican strategy. They want to go back to prehistoric times. Republicans of this school say: "Let's stop beating about the bush--and let's say what we really believe. Let's say we're against social security--and we're against the labor unions and good wages--and we're opposed to price supports for farmers--that we're against the Government doing anything for anybody except big business."

      Now, I have a lot of sympathy for these Republicans. They have been hushed up for a long time. They would certainly be happier if they could tell the truth for once and campaign for what they really believe. It would be good for their souls. But it wouldn't be good for their party, or for the country either. This dinosaur school of Republican strategy would only get the dinosaur vote--and there are not many of them left, except over at the Smithsonian...

      And there is another group of Republicans who attack our foreign policy by advocating the "all-out" or "let's get it over with" theory. These are the Republicans who say they want to expand the fighting in Korea, and start dropping atomic bombs, and invite a new world war. They figure it's good politics to talk that way. They don't stop to count the cost. They think people don't understand that the hardest and bravest thing in the world is to work for peace--and not for war. But if war comes--and God forbid that it comes--if the showdown comes, these loud talkers would be the first people to run for the bomb shelters. And the voters know it.

      None of these Republican theories of how to win the election holds much promise of success this year. All they show is that the platform that the Republicans write in Chicago in July will have to be a fearful and wonderful thing to cover all these different theories. It will have to be a bigger tent than the Ringling Brothers circus--and it will have to cover just about as many freaks. It has even become fashionable for the Republican candidates to saw themselves in half and put part on each side of the fence. That would fit under the tent, too.

      The real Republican campaign is not going to be fought on the issues. The Republicans are going to wage a campaign of phony propaganda. They are going to try what we might call the "white is black" and the "black is white" strategy. The reasoning behind it is this: The Republicans know that the Nation is strong and prosperous, that we are building up defenses against communism, that the Democratic administration has worked for the good of the people. The only chance for the Republicans, therefore, is to make the people think the facts aren't so. The job for the Republicans is to make people believe that white is black and black is white... But the Republicans have some reason for thinking it might succeed. They will have the support of most of the press, and most of the radio commentators. And they may have the professional poll-takers with them again--as they were in 1948. The Republicans, as always, will have a lot of money. They have slick advertising experts. And they don't have too many scruples about how they use them...

      The Republicans are all set to try this "white is black" technique. And this is the way it will work. First of all, they will try to make people believe that everything the Government has done for the country is socialism. They will go to the people and say: "Did you see that social security check you received the other day--you thought that was good for you, didn't you? That's just too bad! That's nothing in the world but socialism. Did you see that new flood control dam the Government is building over there for the protection of your property ? Sorry--that's awful socialism! That new hospital that they are building is socialism. Price supports, more socialism for the farmers! Minimum wage laws ? Socialism for labor! Socialism is bad for you, my friend. Everybody knows that. And here you are, with your new car, and your home, and better opportunities for the kids, and a television set--you are just surrounded by socialism!" Now the Republicans say, "That's a terrible thing, my friend, and the only way out of this sinkhole of socialism is to vote for the Republican ticket." [...]

      The next part of this "white is black" campaign is to try to make people believe that the Democratic Party is in favor of communism. That is an even tougher job than selling the socialism nonsense, but the Republicans are desperate, so they are going to try it...They will go to the voters and say, "Did you know the Government was full of Communists?" And the voters say, "No. What makes you say that?" And then the Republicans explain that somebody named Joe Doakes works for the Government, and he has a cousin who sells shoelaces, or a ribbon clerk in a department store, and this cousin has a wife who wrote an article, before Joe married her, that was printed in a magazine that also printed an article in favor of Chinese Communists-and they will continue that ad lib. This may sound very silly, and it is. But some political fakers spend all their time trying to pull the wool over the people's eyes with this sort of nonsense...

      The next part of the Republican "white is black" campaign is to try to fool the voters into thinking that the Democratic Party is dishonest--that the Government is full of grafters and thieves and all kinds of assorted crooks. To hear them talk you wouldn't think that there was an honest man in Washington. And that includes some of them, too, maybe.

      As for rising inequality, many on the right don’t even think it’s a problem...Conservatives seem to believe that the rich will work harder if we give them more, and the poor will work harder if we give them less ~ E.J. Dionne

      by AuroraDawn on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 05:38:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  loaves & fishes Inc. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

      by annieli on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 05:50:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If charities support the GOP then stop all support (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    enhydra lutris, Nailbanger, jayden

    to them.

    Start new ones to do the same things, or force changes in the management positions of the charities.

    •  I'm sure... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      There will still be plenty of priests in the palpate on Sunday demanding their congregation vote Republican because Abortion and Birth Control!

      “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” - John Steinbeck

      by RichM on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 03:08:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Charities should not be supporting either party (5+ / 0-)

      That really isn't the point here; in fact it is somewhat the opposite. It is Republicans who keep insisting that a good portion of the social safety net (created between the New Deal and the Great Society) has usurped the responsibilities historically given to religious and other sorts of charitable organizations. The give-back has not only been to provide favorable tax treatment by not taxing the income of such institutions, but also by making contributions to those charities deductible. And since the Bush II administration, to encourage religious-based charities to apply for and make use of federal programs and funding for specific projects. So it is the height of hypocrisy to get religious charities to become reliant on that sort of funding and THEN cut the money supply off.

    •  We're not talking charities, we're talking (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blueoasis, viral, Pluto

      religious organizations.

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

      by enhydra lutris on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 04:39:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Uh... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gchaucer2, Nailbanger, jayden, blueoasis

    I thought the Catholic Bishops WANTED the shutdown because Birth Control?  Don't these charities talk to the Bishops?

    This is another fine legacy created by Dubya and perpetuated by Obama - faith based initiatives.  I wonder how the GOP feels now that their beloved churches are now Welfare Queens.

    (That was snark - I do feel sorry for those affected).

    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” - John Steinbeck

    by RichM on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 03:07:08 PM PDT

    •  Thank you (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The bishops don't care about the charities -- actually, the charities skim off the $$ from the lifestyles of the overstuffed and famous in the hierarchy.

      " My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total." Barbara Jordan, 1974

      by gchaucer2 on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 03:44:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The bishops don't talk to the charities (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      viral, I love OCD

      Or to most of the Catholics. Nor do they speak for many of us. I haven't heard a peep from my bishop in months, and I'm quite good with that, thanks. ;)

      I know that the food pantry at my parish is churning along. I assume they're getting more requests for help right now, and figure we'll find a way to make up the slack. All without the awareness or involvement of the bishop. (We are not part of the "faith-based initiatives", and get no federal funding.)

      "I like to go into Marshall Field's in Chicago just to see all the things there are in the world that I do not want." M. Madeleva, C.S.C.

      by paxpdx on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 05:23:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Optics (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sillycarrot, jayden

    Republicans have no knowledge and/or care of history.  One reason they should probably at least silently support things like food stamps and WIC is that they really don't want the "optics" of soup lines that sunk Herbert Hoover's career.  

    It's one thing to see a homeless person at an intersections but when shanty towns start perking up on vacant plots of lands, the American people will wake up.  The shutdown is showing them now.

  •  Rs stole the $ off/Saint (0+ / 0-)

    Don Benedetto was murdered.-IgnazioSilone(BreadAndWine)

    by renzo capetti on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 03:16:35 PM PDT

  •  In the Republican Bible (4+ / 0-)

    Jesus separated the sheep from the goats, then furloughed them all and kept the loaves and fishes for himself.

    I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his payroll. - Edna St. Vincent Millay

    by Tara the Antisocial Social Worker on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 03:47:09 PM PDT

  •  From Hunter's link (8+ / 0-)
    The government shutdown also threatens to reduce or shutter charitable services operated by faith-based groups that use federal funds.
    And the 'office of faith-based initiatives' which is run out of the White House, set up by Dumbya with one of his first executive orders is also illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL because it violates the separation of church and state.  Under NO circumstances should any religious organization receive any percentage of our collective tax money.  Period.  This is THE 'gateway' office that gives fanatic religionists the toe in the door to introducing a state-mandated religion somewhere down the road (perhaps sooner than anyone expects).  This office needs to be disbanded; the sooner the better.

    I don't care if people give some, part, or all of their own hard-earned money to a religious charity.  They can do what they want with their privately earned money.

    I DO very much care about keeping our tax dollars from going to any religious organization and keeping religion OUT of our secular government with a secular constitution to guide secular elected officials wherein it stipulates in Article VI, third paragraph (and it's the only sentence in the US Constitution that refers to religion):

    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.

    I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

    by NonnyO on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 04:32:29 PM PDT

    •  Haaarrummpfff! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NonnyO, sfbob

      Sep of church & state... Yeah... "Decider.."

      Awesome comment..

    •  Set up by William Jefferson Clinton, it is (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roadbed Guy, jayden, blueoasis

      a scam to allow religious groups to "brand" government services for the needy, as if they had actually done it themselves.

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

      by enhydra lutris on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 05:40:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Set up by Dumbya.... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        viral, a2nite

        From the Wiki link I posted, near the top of the page (I remember when Dumbya signed this horrible executive order):

        OFBCI was established by President George W. Bush through executive order[2] on January 29, 2001, representing one of the key domestic policies of Bush's campaign promise of "compassionate conservatism." The initiative sought to strengthen faith-based and community organizations and expand their capacity to provide federally-funded social services, with the idea having been that these groups were well-situated to meet the needs of local individuals. As Texas governor, Bush had used the "Charitable Choice" provisions of the 1996 welfare reform (which allowed "faith-based" entities to compete for government contracts to deliver social services) to support the work of faith-based groups in Texas.
        If you go to the link, scroll down to the part headed "Controversies."

        WJC did sign one piece of legislation that helped propel us to the bailout for the "too big to fail" organizations when he signed Gramm-Leach-Bliley late in 1999 because it repealed Glass-Steagall and deregulated all those financial institutions.  He was a fool for having done so!

        I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

        by NonnyO on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 07:35:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I was thinking of "Charitable Choice", 1996, (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NonnyO, blueoasis, on the cusp

          by WJC Clinton, really pissed me off. A junior version of the faith based crapola bill, it allowed churches to rebrand government care and services for the needy. Then W came along and greatly expanded it, creating the framework of the current animal, and then Obama expanded it a bit more and seemingly further empowered it too.

          All in all, a completely odious provision, and the worst of it was, in fact, done by W, Clinton just stuck the tip of the wedge under the door.

          At any rate, it is more government programs than charities.

          That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

          by enhydra lutris on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 08:50:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ah, I was unaware of the WJC program (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            enhydra lutris, sfbob

            Thanks for filling me in about it.

            Totally agree.  "Odious" is a very polite term for a disastrous mingling of religion and politics/government.

            As a student of history and the horrors of what happened in the Middle Ages and later eras (and some of my ancestors left England because of the religious controversies starting clear back in James I's reign and later, plus being treated with extreme prejudice once they arrived here, esp. the Quaker ancestors), the full-blown impact of what could happen if the government dictates a particular government-mandated religious belief is not to be contemplated.  It must be avoided at all costs.

            I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

            by NonnyO on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 09:39:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  The important question is, are corporations (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, GrindtheHills, on the cusp

    getting their subsidies?

    Funding for the disposable class is wasted on them!

    Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

    by The Dead Man on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 04:46:06 PM PDT

  •  This is not about "Charities" but about (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roadbed Guy, blueoasis

    government funded programs filtered through religious organizations. It is part of that wedding of church & state Clinton performed.

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 04:50:47 PM PDT

  •  The Government Shutdown. (6+ / 0-)

    has led to the furloughing of the seraphims and the cherubims after the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships was forced to be closed. As a result, Christianity in America has been temporarily suspended, and Compassionate Conservatism will be replaced with a more secular, and affordable public outreach. We apologize for the inconvenience.

    reposted from:

    I brought home a ‘rescue cat’ yesterday. It only has three legs. I refuse to notice its fourth leg. - UID 16382

    by glb3 on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 05:22:41 PM PDT

  •  This is one of those, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    enhydra lutris, jayden, PinHole, sfbob

    no shit Sherlock moments that Republicans never consider.

    In the time it took Adam Lanza to reload, eleven children escaped. What if...

    by Sixty Something on Wed Oct 09, 2013 at 05:26:35 PM PDT

  •  Initiative-Based Faith. That trick *never* works. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The GOP finally wrote checks our party won't cash.

    by here4tehbeer on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 05:03:11 PM PDT

  •  This is a desired and intended result..... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    on the cusp

    ....for Republicans. Every time a liberal whines about poor people being hurt by the shutdown, it underscores the Republican belief that the government is giving handouts to "takers" -- the 47%.  They could care less.  THEY WANT THIS TO HAPPEN. It isn't negligence on their part. It is what they intend.

    They will restore the parts of government they like. They are in the driver's seat.

    If you hate government, don't run for office in that government.

    by Bensdad on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 05:04:24 PM PDT

  •  maybe we need this pain (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    on the cusp, Pluto, AmazingBlaise

    to put to rest once and for all the myth that government is bad and everything can and should be privatized.  Maybe, somewhere down the road, we'll talk about this time as the beginning of true healthcare reform leading to a national healthcare system.  One can always hope, anyway.

  •  Now the GOP will want to eliminate these programs (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    completely because the church will take care of it.

  •  How to answer the GOP's latest "demand" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfbob, Pluto, a2nite

    Repubs - Hey Mr. President, why don't we raise the debt by tying the hands of the Executive branch and waiting 6 weeks on the CR?

    Obama - So you want me to sit on my hands forever, freeze out the American people for 6 more weeks, and pay China before taking care of your fellow Americans who pay taxes?

    Repubs - Winning!

    Obama - No.

  •  teh gop will get theirs in the end (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    on the cusp, AmazingBlaise, a2nite

    Jesus or karma will see to it.

  •  I don't think you understand (0+ / 0-)

    this is what the GOP WANTS to happen.

    They WANT to cut off money to these people.

    I'm not an athiest. How can you not believe in something that doesn't exist? That's way too convoluted for me. - A. Whitney Brown

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 05:26:40 PM PDT

  •  It's really weird to me (0+ / 0-)

    how the Movement Conservative Right keeps demonstrating, again and again and again and again, that they are hugely motivated by bad faith.


    People, good people, passionate people, committed people, who have seen the bad faith over and over and over and over again, keep it in their hearts and heads that there is good faith in a shameless mob.

    It's like watching folks, some I agree with and some I disagree with, keep expecting a group of Sociopaths to experience shame and remorse if they just keep treating them as if they feel shame and care about what they say they care about.

    Maybe Social Services Minded Conservative Catholic is the New 90's era Very Serious Centrist Democrat. "Wait, but you said you cared about this, and this, and that...." and.... shovel to the face. No spinning the disrespect and contempt. No misunderstanding what the real agenda is, unless you are so naive or clueless you keep nibbling at the same poisoned bait expecting good cheese this time.  

    You cannot beat the Movement Conservative Right until you recognize and acknowledge that you are not in a debate with them, accepting that the bad faith component of their actions is a feature and not a bug of how they roll.

    They will royally screw over born-again Christians who want something the Teahadi Jihandi and the Kochheads see as "liberal" in a moment. And they will cast that vote five minutes after hitting them up for money or saying they agree with them to muddy the waters and confuse those who are not paying attention as closely as they should be.

    I am a Loco-Foco. I am from the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party.

    by LeftHandedMan on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 05:39:47 PM PDT

  •  This may be one of the few very good things (0+ / 0-)

    about the shutdown.  I have absolutely no problem with homophobic fundamentalist and Catholic charities going under.
    In an ideal world, they would lose their tax exemption and go under regardless.

  •  as ye sow "faith-based", so shall ye reap (0+ / 0-)

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

    by annieli on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 05:48:49 PM PDT

  •  No more faith-based anything with tax money (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    enhydra lutris

    sorry, against the Constitution!

    "Lets show the rascals what Citizens United really means."

    by smiley7 on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 06:07:10 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site