We need to make sure these Christian nationals do NOT win and get into power. This is running to be the top law enforcement official in the state, yet he said what he thinks his god wants is above the laws of the country. Hugs
Michael Peroutka has made clear that if he is elected, his view of Christianity will determine his decisions. And he has said that as attorney general he will not support laws enacted by the legislature if he believes they are in conflict with his understanding of God’s law.
He elaborated on many of these positions at the Turning Point USA forum, repeatedly returning to the idea that laws created by men and women are not legitimate unless they are in accordance with God’s law.
And Peroutka has said he wouldn’t disavow his association with the League of the South, which has been categorized as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. At a League of the South conference in 2012, he sang “Dixie,” calling it “the national anthem.”
Peroutka has appeared a JMG over a dozen times in the last decade for anti-gay and racist stunts, including when he headlined a rally for anti-gay Kentucky clerk Kim Davis.
The League of the South is best known for burning the Israeli flag, making Hitler salutes, and calling the Holocaust the “Holohoax.”
You may also recall that the League Of The South recently celebrated the 150th anniversary of the assassination of “tyrant” Abraham Lincoln and provided the signage for anti-gay rallies in Alabama.
Peroutka was the largest financial backer of now-former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore’s successful campaign to be returned to the bench.
He last appeared on JMG in August when he declared 9/11 to have been an “inside job.”
For GOP’s attorney general nominee, God’s law comes before Maryland’s https://t.co/T3jPxDsv9Z
It has long been know that the we need higher prices to find or develop new drugs has been a dodge and a ruse. It is entirely for profit. Katie Porter showed that on during a House of Rep. hearing with a Pharma CEO and with his own testimony showed it was about personal profit for the company / himself / the investors. Hugs
A new study finds no correlation between R&D spending and outlandish drug prices.
At the end of September, a spot of good news: Relyvrio, a new drug for treating amyotrophic lateral sclerosis—or ALS, a neurological disorder without a cure—was approved in the United States. The ALS community rejoiced; the drug’s authorization was described as a “long-sought victory for patients.”
But the next day, the price of the medicine was revealed: $158,000 a year. This was far higher than what the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, an independent nonprofit that analyzes health care costs, had estimated would be a reasonable price, which it deemed to be between $9,100 and $30,700.
Americans, though, probably weren’t shocked. Prescription drugs in the US cost about 2.5 times what they do in other countries, and a quarter of Americans find it difficult to afford them. Almost every new cancer drug starts at over $100,000 a year. And a 2022 study found that every year, the average price of newly released drugs is 20 percent higher.
How drug prices are set in the US is a mysterious black box. When rationalizing their lofty price tags, one of the most common reasons pharmaceutical companies will cite is that a high price is needed to makegoodon the money invested in research and development.
But is that true? “You hear it so much,” says Olivier Wouters, an assistant professor of health policy at the London School of Economics and Political Science. “That’s why I was like, well, let’s get some data, because I don’t believe it. I don’t think anyone believes it.”
So Wouters did just that. In September 2022, he and his colleagues published a new paper in JAMA that took this simple argument and put it to the test. In the study, they looked at the 60 drugs that had been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2009 and 2018 for which there was publicly available information about both R&D spending and pricing. And then they matched up the figures. “Essentially, it was like investigative journalism—check all the receipts, trace back in time on what they spend,” he says. If it were the case that R&D spending was the reason behind high drug prices, you’d expect to see a high correlation between the two. Instead, they found no correlation.
Wouters acknowledges that the sample size in the research is small, but this is because pharmaceutical companies keep most of their financial data under lock and key. If the industry wants to refute the conclusion reached in his paper, then pharmaceutical companies need to make more data available, he says.
To anybody in the field, the response to the paper’s finding is: Well, duh. We know what drives drug pricing, says Ezekiel Emanuel, chair of the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania. “It’s, ‘How far can I go? What will the market bear?’” Still, Emanuel says, it’s important to have empirical data like this study to refute the industry’s claim.
Intuitively, it feels plausible that a drug’s price would be linked to its R&D costs—the risky biz of innovation is super expensive, right? It turns out even this is highly contested. In 2020, Wouters published another paper in JAMA that dug into how much it actually costs to bring a new medicine to market, something experts have been trying to work out for decades. The number thrown around the most comes from one paper, which relied on confidential data provided by pharmaceutical companies, estimating that it takes around $2.8 billion. “These estimates are sort of shrouded in secrecy. There’s a lot of controversy around them,” says Wouters. He and his colleagues instead found the number shook out at closer to $1.3 billion, less than half the commonly held estimate. Substantially lower R&D costs would suggest that this spending shouldn’t have such a big bearing on drug pricing.
Every so often, there are small glimpses behind the curtains into how pharmaceutical companies actually decide on a drug price. An example of this is the hepatitis C drug Sovaldi, which was put on the market in 2013 for a steep $84,000 per 12-week course. In 2015, an 18-month-long US government investigation that reviewed some 20,000 pages of internal company documents revealed that Gilead, the company that owned the drug, had set the high price as a way “to ensure its drugs had the greatest share of the market, for the highest price, for the longest period of time”—in essence, that it was prioritizing profit. In response Gilead said it “stand[s] behind the pricing of our therapies because of the benefit they bring to patients and the significant value they represent to payers, providers, and our entire healthcare system by reducing the long-term costs associated with managing chronic [hepatitis C virus].”
In other countries, the price paid for a drug is decided by bodies that look at the value the drug provides. In the United Kingdom, for example, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) lands on the value of a new medicine by working out how much it costs to give a patient an extra year of “quality life” in comparison to current treatments on offer. If the drug offers too little value, NICE won’t recommend it to the National Health Service. Countries like France and Germany negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to land on a price determined by the clinical benefits a drug provides compared to others on the market.
In the US, things may be beginning to slowly move in this direction. Under the new Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare will be allowed to negotiate prices for a small selection of drugs. However, Emanuel is skeptical it will actually have a big impact on drug price regulation, given the way that law was designed—too many loopholes, he says.
As for holding pharmaceutical companies to account, it shouldn’t fall to academics to do this, says Tahir Amin, founder and executive director of the Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge (I-MAK), a nonprofit that addresses inequities in how medicines are developed and distributed. “We need the government authorities and bodies to be doing this work,” he says of the analysis by Wouters’ team. “How are they setting policy when they do not have this information?”
Wouters doesn’t see his paper as a game changer, but it’s another weapon in the arsenal of those with power to refute excuses made by pharmaceutical companies. “I never thought this was a gotcha,” he says. “No, we always expected this to be the case. But I’m a firm believer that we need some evidence to point to.”
I agree. The keyword in any relationship is consent. If the people involved can’t give consent for any reason then they are being forced against their will and that is wrong. I am thinking of women and young girls forced into marriage against their will. That includes sexual relations, if there is full consent from those involved then it is no one else’s business. I do not think on person in a marriage owns the other. Originally all the men owned the woman. Or many women in some places. If the people involved all agree that this is the way they want their lives / relationship to be, they should get to choose. Before anyone raises the false argument of “Well that leads to kids / animals / vacuum cleaners etc. getting married, think about it. Can any of those consent to marriage? No! Marriage is a legal contract between people controlled by the state and federal government. Yes religions like to claim they own marriage and god says it is this or that. But the fact is different religions have different views of what a marriage is, and for years religion did not even deal with marriage. “For much of the early Christian Era, the Church stayed out of weddings and let the state handle the union of man and woman. Finally, sometime after 800 AD, the Church began to perform weddings, and a few centuries later the Catholic Church made marriage one of the sacraments. Apr 26, 2017″ https://www.sagu.edu/thoughthub/the-history-of-marriage/#:~:text=For%20much%20of%20the%20early,marriage%20one%20of%20the%20sacraments. Marriages in the US are not done under the authority of the church but under the state. Churches / religions try to dictate what marriages should be, and are against all social remedies for bad marriages, but the US is not a theocracy so why should a person who is not part of a church / religion be forced to live under the ideas / dictates of a religion they don’t belong to? Also notice the other places that are expanding the idea of marriage. Hugs
The judge concluded that polyamorous relationships are entitled to the same sort of legal protection given to two-person relationships.
New York City’s eviction court – the venue of a landmark same-sex relationship decision long before Obergefell v Hodges – is now the source of a legal opinion that comes down clearly on the side of polyamorous unions.
The decision came in the case of West 49th St., LLC v. O’Neill, decided by New York Civil Court Judge Karen May Bacdayan, concluded that polyamorous relationships are entitled to the same sort of legal protection given to two-person relationships.
The case revolves around three individuals. Scott Anderson and Markyus O’Neill lived together in a New York City apartment. Anderson held the lease, but was married to another man, Robert Romano, who lived at another address. After Anderson died, the building’s owner contended O’Neill had no right to renew the lease since he was just a “roommate” of Anderson’s and not “a non-traditional family member.”
The court concluded that there needed to be a hearing about whether Anderson, Romano and O’Neill were in a polyamorous relationship.
Before gay marriage was legalized in any state, Braschi v. Stahl Assocs. Co. was decided in 1989 and made the New York State Court of Appeals the first American appellate court to recognize that a two-person, same-sex relationship is entitled to legal recognition.
“Braschi is widely regarded as a catalyst for the legal challenges and changes that ensued,” Bacdayan wrote in her opinion. “By the end of 2014, gay marriage was legal in 35 states through either legislation or state court action. Obergefell v Hodges (2015), the seminal Supreme Court decision that established same-sex marriage as a constitutional right was also heralded as groundbreaking.”
“However,” wrote Bacdayan, “Braschi and its progeny and Obergefell limit their holdings to two-person relationships.” This case, Bacdayan wrote, “presents the distinct and complex issue of significant multi-person relationships.”
The judge cited legislation enacted since the advent of federally recognized same sex unions. “In February 2020, the Utah legislature passed a so-called Bigamy Bill, decriminalizing the offense by downgrading it from a felony to a misdemeanor. In June [2020], Somerville, Massachusetts, passed an ordinance allowing groups of three or more people who ‘consider themselves to be a family’ to be recognized as domestic partners. The neighboring town of Cambridge followed suit, passing a broader ordinance recognizing multi-partner relationships. The law has proceeded even more rapidly in recognizing that it is possible for a child to have more than two legal parents.”
“Why then,” posited the judge, “except for the very real possibility of implicit majoritarian animus, is the limitation of two persons inserted into the definition of a family-like relationship for the purposes of receiving the same protections from eviction accorded to legally formalized or blood relationships? Is ‘two’ a ‘code word’ for monogamy? Why does a person have to be committed to one other person in only certain prescribed ways in order to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one?”
The attorney for the property owner characterized defendant O’Neill’s affidavit, claiming himself as a non-traditional family member, as a “fairytale.”
The case returns to court after further investigation of the three individuals’ relationship.
I would again like to point out this is not about protecting kids, it is entirely political. Look how often they attack Biden and the administration on a local school board issue. This is being used by the republicans to rile up their base with misinformation and to hurt a group of kids they don’t like. Hugs
: A supporter holds a sign that says “Support Trans Youth” in Washington Square Park on the 8th Annual Trans Day of Action on June 22, 2012 in New York City. Photo: Shutterstock
In a victory for trans Ohioans, the Ohio State Board of Education decided to delay voting on an anti-trans resolution that would ban trans girls from women’s sports teams, force teachers to out trans students to their parents, and ban classroom discussions on LGBTQ issues in kindergarten through third grade.
The resolution was introduced by board member Brandon Shea and rejects a proposed rule from the Biden administration to apply Title IX anti-discrimination protections to LGBTQ students nationwide.
It aligns with a lawsuit against President Joe Biden’s proposal put forth by Ohio’s Republican Attorney General Dave Yost (along with other state attorneys general) and states that sex is an “unchangeable fact” and that “there are observable, quantifiable, and immutable differences between males and females.”
“Denying the reality of biological sex destroys foundational truths upon which education rests and irreparably damages children,” it declares.
The resolution blasted the Biden administration for “federal overreach” and criticized its assertion that schools who fail to adhere to gender anti-discrimination policies could lose federal funding for free and reduced lunch programs.
Activists, teachers, parents, students, and the like showed up in droves to testify against the resolution – after many in favor of it also spoke.
“The mental, emotional and psychological toll will be huge if it is passed because it takes away protections from the students who need those protections the most,” said Rev. Andrew Burns of the King Avenue United Methodist Church. “And I would be one of the people who would have to clean up the mess left behind.”
After four hours of public comments, trans rights won the day, and the board decided to delay a vote on the measure.
Happening now… The waiting room is overflowing in Ohio as people pack the building in order to speak out against a policy that will force teachers to misgender Ohio trans students and ban them from bathrooms statewide. pic.twitter.com/x4ZYafOd5t
In a 12-7 vote, the board decided to send the resolution to an executive committee. Some board members believe it will probably die there, according to Cleveland.com. A softer version of the proposal will also reportedly be considered by the committee.
But the decision is still a huge victory.
Activist Erin Reed tweeted, “I can’t overstate how big a victory we just won in Ohio for trans people was. We got a boardroom full of Republican school officials to vote AGAINST moms for Liberty anti trans policies. The activists speeches objectively swayed things. The anti-trans group was stunned.”
People like Rep Clock, who has proposed legislation to detransition all trans youth, now will see that his own bill is enormously unpopular and will result in major blowback.
Reed continued to explain that the vote shows that being anti-trans is becoming an extreme position, also praising Jon Stewart for his recent skewering of Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge (R) for the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for youth.
“The same arguments were repeated multiple times in the testimony,” Reed continued. “Ultimately though the credit goes to the activists who showed up. It was a pleasure to watch this and help mobilize from the VERY beginning. The fight isn’t over in Ohio. It isn’t over anywhere. but we won one for the kids today.”
Ultimately though the credit goes to the activists who showed up. It was a pleasure to watch this and help mobilize from the VERY beginning.
The fight isn’t over in Ohio. It isn’t over anywhere.
Now that you have read the article I want to point out several things. First l want you to look at the trans man in the video above. This is a man. However republicans want to force this man to use women’s restrooms. For those women that say they would be uncomfortable knowing a trans person was using the same bathroom as they were, tell me you as a woman wouldn’t be uncomfortable seeing this man entering the female bathroom with you. This is the problem first with judging gender on looks, and second this is the end result of the republicans anti-trans agenda. Second the anti-trans people tried to make sure that they spoke first and took as many spots as they could, knowing that many board meetings have a time limit and they hoped to run out the clock so the trans positive people could speak. Also notice that the anti-trans activists used lies, myths, debunked talking points, to the point of claiming that trans people simply did not exist. They throw so much false misleading and wrong information out that as one of the people said it would take longer than the meeting like refute them all. It is called a Gish gallop. But what was nice was a real geneticist who destroyed the anti-trans arguments with scientific medical facts, not that the anti-trans people would ever listen to facts. Below is the unrolled tweets from the story. Hugs
Happening now… The waiting room is overflowing in Ohio as people pack the building in order to speak out against a policy that will force teachers to misgender Ohio trans students and ban them from bathrooms statewide.
I know the people fighting on the ground. People like @CamomileOgden who have devoted so much to ensuring this doesn't go through.
Unfortunately Moms 4 Liberty has shown up to this meeting, unlike last time where all speakers were against this policy.
We've already had two speakers propose that people shouldn't be able to transition up to 25 years old because of "brain development."
And now there's a teacher saying that trans youth are a sign that "society is in decay"
I'm being told that the Moms4Liberty folks snagged the first 20 spots, and then later spots will be heavily opposed to the measure.
Its still a nonstop stream of people speaking in favor of the resolution. Soon the flavor of speakers will change. There seems to have been some shenanigans in how approved speakers were handled.
We are finally getting to the speakers in opposition to the policy.
"We already know how this policy works… the state practiced this policy for years and it killed LGBTQ+ people."
Oh cool cool cool, now they are saying that "[transgenderism] is moral decay in our public institutions that is growing like a cancer spread by globalists."
Reverend Andrew Burns of the United Methodist Church is speaking passionately against the measure.
This girl is AMAZING and is making an economic argument for rejecting this bill. She’s so good! I missed her name.
Getting word that there has been a disturbance outside of the hearing and mood is tense. Many speakers are now effectively speaking against this policy. I hope to clip some later.
This trans man speaking is amazing. "I am a trans man. I WAS one of the students who would be affected by this policy."
"I'm here today for all the trans kids in Ohio who are not able to be here to speak up for themselves"
I'll get his name later when I clip.
Amanda Erickson from Kaleidoscope Youth Center is AMAZING.
She's speaking on behalf of students who gave her quotes.
She says, "You are actively failing the students you have been elected and appointed to serve"
This geneticist is absolutely ripping the measure and teaching them about genetics and how there are hundreds of intersex conditions, and that "Sex is NOT binary"
Now a speaker is comparing trans acceptance to "Hitler youth"
🙄
"gender confusion" is the most garbage transphobe dogwhistle.
We're not confused about our gender – YOU are.
Although early speakers were ALL in favor of the resolution, it has been a nonstop wall of those opposed.
This is great. People are speaking powerfully and persuasively.
Oh look who else it is! This woman also spoke in favor of the Ohio bill to detransition all trasn youth.
Her SON has transitioned and is now an adult, and is living away from her.
She's mad at that so she's trying to stop youth transition.
You can see the previous speaker when she spoke earlier this year.
Her son has repeatedly stated that he is trans and is an adult and does not support this.
Ohio HB454 which would detransition all trans teens in Ohio, Rep Liston @Liston4Ohio asked the non-affirming parent of a trans son (now 18 and free) if she believes trans people exist.
She, like many others asked, does not. All of these witnesses deny trans people ENTIRELY. pic.twitter.com/qJUFS9cbTA
The ever amazing Cam Ogden just spoke, I didn't get a screenshot of her, but she pointed out how so many lies have been spoken and debunking them would take all the time in the world, and how the board should take more time to address and research the truth. @CamomileOgden 💜
I will clip the 2 or 3 best moments a little bit later this evening and probably post them in separate posts as well as to my TikTok.
Young republican speaking out in favor by saying that Biden "changed title IX by executive order" (All he did was interpret gender, as title IX law does not provide such an interpretation)
But its particularly rich to see Republicans complaining of executive actions.
The mother of a trans former student:
"How can you say that trans students should be included when you say they don't even exist?"
Public testimony is over – they will proceed to vote this evening.
Please tell the Ohio Board of Education to protect trans kids, not force teachers to misgender them, and not to ban them from bathrooms of their gender.
We are getting closer and closer to a vote that will determine the fate of so many trans students in Ohio…
Here we go…
They have moved to refer this motion back to committee (which would, for the time being, delay the motion for quite a while)
The vote on this motion has NOT happened yet. Lets hope this motion passes, if not then it will be outright voted on.
Sorry I want to be clear- they have MOVED to send it back to committee, but that motion must now be voted on. Its not a victory or defeat yet – lets see what happens with this vote.
"these kids exist… and there has been absolutely nothing said about what we can do for these kids."
– Member arguing to send this back to committee.
They are currently debating back and forth through parliamentary procedure and everything is kind of running into each other.
The Ohio Board of Education is completely trapped in a Roberts Rules loop.
We may get a vote from them in the next century.
THE OHIO BOARD OF EDUCATION HAS VOTED TO SEND THE PROPOSAL BACK TO COMMITTEE!
They have decided not, at this time, to force teachers to misgender their trans students and ban them from bathrooms.
Thank ALL the activists who did this.
The vote to send back to committee was done 12-7.
I have clips coming of many moments today. Thank you all for following along.
Next stop – Virginia, where we must defeat a very similar proposal.
The important part of this article is not what Marge Greene says about Alex Jones. It is what her intern says about trashing the Bill of Rights and getting rid of the 1st amendment to create a theocracy. He wants only Christians to be able to hold office, to have guns, and to be able to publish online. Hugs
She defended Alex Jones while her intern called for “meaningful penalties for insulting, irreverent or contemptuous language about Our Lord.”
Milo Yiannopoulos (l)/Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Photo: Screenshots
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) is defending Infowars host Alex Jones in the wake of the nearly one billion dollar civil judgment against him for defamatory claims he made on his radio show about the parents of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, arguing that he is facing “political persecution.”
But while she argues that “freedom of speech” should allow Jones to avoid the consequences of defaming those kids’ parents – even as it inspired his followers to harass them and allegedly pee on the child victims’ graves – her most famous intern, Milo Yiannopoulos, is telling his followers on Telegram that the U.S. should ban blasphemy and “institute meaningful penalties for insulting, irreverent or contemptuous language about Our Lord.”
Yesterday a jury in Connecticut awarded $965 million to the parents of some of the victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting after Jones repeatedly claimed that the shooting was a hoax staged by actors.
One father of a six-year-old boy who was killed in the shooting said that Jones made his life a “living hell,” that his fans harassed him in the street, shot at his home and car, and made threats against him for years.
“As time went on, I truly realized how dangerous it was,” the father said during the civil trial. “My life has been threatened. I fear for my life, I fear for my safety.”
Greene was enraged that the jury would order Jones to pay damages in the defamation case.
“No matter what you think of Alex Jones all he did was speak words,” she tweeted yesterday after the verdict was announced. “He was not the one who pulled the trigger. Were his words wrong and did he apologize? Yes. That’s what freedom of speech is. Freedom to speak words. Political persecution must end.”
“I legitimately thought it might have been staged, and I stand by that, and I don’t apologize for it,” Jones said during the trial.
While Greene was arguing for such an expansive definition of free speech that includes immunity for deliberate defamation, someone from her office was saying that the U.S. should ban free speech when it comes to criticism of religion and God.
“Christian nationalism will succeed only if we are honest about the profound structural failures in the American system, and are prepared to do something about them,” Greene’s intern, Yiannopoulos – who identifies as ex-gay – wrote on the rightwing social media platform Telegram. “This will involve the commission of some pretty gigantic offenses against ‘American conservatism.’ For a start, we must be prepared to say that the Constitution and Bill of Rights are hopelessly broken, because of course they are.”
“You will know America is serious about saving itself, and that it has absorbed the scale of the undertaking, when you see a president adding his signature to revivified blasphemy laws, which will prevent the open promotion of sedition, institute meaningful penalties for insulting, irreverent or contemptuous language about Our Lord, and moreover restore to general society an understanding that words matter, they carry consequences, and they may not be capriciously and arbitrarily redefined by mentally unstable graffiti artists with PhDs,” he wrote.
“The wide disputational berth granted by the First Amendment and the destructive potentialities of the Second are privileges that can only be granted to Christians…. No other belief system produces individuals capable of responsibly wielding such daunting, awesome freedoms.”
“You cannot grant these powers to the citizenry without also requiring that every elected official and federal employee is a churchgoing Christian and that the nation explicitly identifies itself with Jesus Christ and governs in a manner informed by the Church,” he wrote.
“I ruined my knees in my 20s. Not through prayer, as if you had to ask. I think about this every day when I pray now, and I am disgusted by it.”
While Greene has not made such an extreme statement against freedom of speech for non-Christians, she, like Yiannopoulos, has vocally defended Christian nationalism, the idea that the U.S. should be a Christian nation and that the government should give Christianity a privileged position in politics.
“We need to be the party of nationalism and I’m a Christian, and I say it proudly, we should be Christian nationalists,” Greene said last month.
In the first 21 months of the Biden administration, Republicans in the House have introduced articles of impeachment a record-breaking 14 times – with a third of those coming from Marjorie Taylor Greene. This averages out to one impeachment attempt every 45 days, and not one single time have Republicans been able to identify a single “crime” that Biden may have committed. Farron Cousins discusses this.
*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos. President Biden has been President Biden for 21 months now, and during those 21 months, republicans in the House of Representatives have introduced 14 different impeachment resolutions against either Biden or members of his administration. But either way, we’re talking about 14 different articles of impeachment against Biden because even the underlings, it all leads back to Biden in these people’s minds, which means if we do the math, you know, estimate 30 days per month, 21 months, divide by 14, you end up with an even 45. So 45 days every 45 days since President Biden has been sworn in. And that’s not even accurate. I’ll get to that in a moment. But every 45 days on average, they have filed a new set of articles of impeachment, all of which of course have gone absolutely nowhere. Now, as I said, it’s not exactly accurate to say that all of these have been filed since his inauguration because, uh, the first one by Marjorie Taylor Green herself, she actually introduced that in committee at the time, uh, on January 3rd, like I think it was her first day in office, she put forward a resolution to impeach a guy that hadn’t even been sworn in yet. So it hasn’t been since January 20th, It was actually since January 3rd, because on her first day she’s like, I’m gonna do this and totally prove I’m not crazy to everybody. So here’s what has happened. Um, this is from Axios House Republicans mostly, but not all members of the right wing Freedom Caucus have introduced a staggering 14 impeachment resolution since January 3rd, 2021. Biden has been the target of nine two have been aimed at Attorney General Merrick Garland and one each against Vice President Kamala Harris, Secretary of State Anthony Lincoln and Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro, Me Orcas Marjorie Taylor Green has introduced five five of the 14. So we’re, we’re talking about a third of these articles of impeachment filed just by Marjorie Taylor Green. Marjorie Taylor Green, who by the way recently confirmed an attack from Adam Kininger saying that she will absolutely try to impeach President Biden every single week when Republicans take back the House of Representatives. And they’re not kidding. Like that’s the worst part about all of this. They’re not kidding. They’ve tried 14 times to impeach Biden or his administration officials in 21 months because they got nothing better to do because they think, Oh, we’re gonna pop him on this crime. Listen, if Biden Committed a crime, I would be right there with you saying let’s impeach him. And I actually have history, by the way, to back me up on that, because prior to Donald Trump’s first impeachment, prior to that, we had Democrats that were out there actually trying to impeach him for, for stupid things. As I said at the time, over at Ring of Fire, I said, No, I did videos saying this is stupid. I don’t support this because you do not have evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors. So that’s my evidence to say, Listen, I’m all for impeachment. If somebody has done something worth impeaching, I don’t care if it’s Republican, democrat, if it’s a good impeachment, if they, you got evidence of crimes, do it. If you don’t, shut the hell up and move on. And that’s unfortunately where we should be at with impeaching President Biden or any of these other administration officials. Y’all are coming at with absolute nonsense, just the dumbest things you could imagine. Um, what sh most recently, by the way, Marjorie Taylor Green Week and a half ago introduced new articles of impeachment, uh, against Biden for selling oil from the strategic petroleum reserve to foreign nations, which yes, for those paying attention, Donald Trump actually did that too. But she wants to impeach Biden for doing something he’s legally allowed to do. Yeah, we’re, we’re not exactly dealing with, you know, the brightest bunch out there. But don’t worry if Republicans win back the house, it’s about to get a hell of a lot stupider than it is right now. And that is saying a lot.
This statement says it all, clearly and you have to ask why politicians and religious leaders are allowed to do this? The local LGBTQ group called the attack “the result of a long and systematic campaign against them by state officials, churches, and extremist groups.” “A heinous act of a radicalized individual can happen at any time, but it is a testament to the time and society who he chooses to target his attack,” the group wrote. “The fact that he has chosen LGBTI people is the result of a long and systematic campaign against them by state officials, churches, and extremist groups.” Hugs
The local LGBTQ group called the attack “the result of a long and systematic campaign against them by state officials, churches, and extremist groups.”
Two people died and one was injured in a Wednesday night shooting at a gay bar called Teplaren in Slovakia’s capital city of Bratislava.
The suspected shooter was found dead the following morning. While police haven’t released details about the shooter’s identity or suspected motive, Slovakian media said that he had posted messages on Twitter using the phrases “hate crime,” “gay bar,” and aired anti-Semitic views, Express reported.
On Facebook, local LGBTQ Pride group Dúhový Pride Bratislava named the victims who died (two young people named Matus and Juraj) as well as the injured person (Radka). The group also expressed shock about the shooting, calling it “unprecedented in the history of our community.”
“A heinous act of a radicalized individual can happen at any time, but it is a testament to the time and society who he chooses to target his attack,” the group wrote. “The fact that he has chosen LGBTI people is the result of a long and systematic campaign against them by state officials, churches, and extremist groups.”
The group called on the government to take steps to condemn and make systemic reform to prevent such violence in the future. It has also organized a “march to condemn hatred against the LGBTI community” with four other allied organizations. Local police will provide security for the event.
In a public statement, Slovakian Prime Minister Eduard Heger said, “I strongly condemn yesterday’s attack in which two people died… It is unacceptable that anyone should fear for their life because of the way they live.”
Slovakia has anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people, allows queer citizens to serve in its military, allows people to change the gender on their government documents, and recognizes same-sex marriages that occur elsewhere in the European Union (EU). However, the nation has no hate crime laws, does not recognize same-sex marriages that occur within its borders, nor does it allow adoption or surrogate births for same-sex couples.
According to a 2019 study by the Pew Research Center, only 44 percent of Slovaks consider homosexuality to be acceptable in society. This places Slovakia well below the EU average in terms of social acceptance of LGBTQ people. These attitudes have been influenced by neighboring anti-LGBTQ nations like Poland as well as by the influential Slovakian Catholic church.
Again this is a made up myth, a lie repeated to attack trans kids and to mock allowing trans gender kids to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with. This is done so these republicans don’t get called bigots. An attack by proxy. The truth is their base, the people in their party understand what it is about and glory in the hate. That is what these kind of people do. Trans people and trans kids do not harm them. The majority of major medical associations support affirmative gender care for trans
kids which includes full medical work ups, mental health exams, social transitioning, puberty blockers when needed, hormone therapy when needed, and finally when old enough and sure of the gender intensity sexual reassignment. That cannot be argued by the anti-haters that want to use the fringe skeptic doctors and fake studies to pretend the hate they spread is correct. Just like vaccine deniers and Covid hoax fringe claimants. The truth is the major medical organizations have looked at the issue and have formed best practices, and until they change their minds the haters can stay silent with their lies. Hugs
At a luncheon for Republican women in Mesa County, Colorado, last week, Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., warned that educators “are putting litter boxes in schools for people who identify as cats.” The week before, on Sept. 29, Minnesota GOP gubernatorial nominee Scott Jensen asked during a campaign stop, “Why do we have litter boxes in some of the school districts so kids can pee in them, because they identify as a furry?”
At least 20 conservative candidates and elected officials have claimed this year that K-12 schools are placing litter boxes on campus or making other accommodations for students who identify as cats, according to an NBC News review of public statements. In Colorado, GOP gubernatorial nominee Heidi Ganahl insisted in several recent interviews that students were dressing and identifying as cats, disrupting class, and the state’s schools were tolerating it.
The data shows how the "litter boxes in schools" rumor that cannot die, mostly due to the incredulity of adults.
According to @graphika's Cristina Lopez G, kids on TikTok are creating videos mocking adults who believe in it wind up providing fodder for the oblivious on Facebook. pic.twitter.com/5P60ky5AtE
How pathetic. The litter is there for terrified students who are locked in during a school murder spree. And now it’s spun into a filthy lie to use against another vulnerable group.
Cat litter can be used to soak up vomit. Not uncommon to have it around for many things at a school. We never had cats growing up, but always had some kitty litter to soak up oil or other car fluids in the garage (Dad was a mechanic).
After all this time – why on earth isn’t there some prominent, loud, rapid response entity to debunk the fuck out of this shit before it literally drowns us to death in mass mental illness?
What happened to that Jersey girl (e.g.) who was briefly tweeting for the WH and slew all kinds of crapola in single deft snarky strokes?
Why, why, WHY do we allow this poison to go unanswered?????!!!!!
That ship sailed with the death of mass media. There was a time when Walter Cronkite could go on television and, for better or worse, be believed by the vast majority of people. Now we are utterly beholden to the rumor mill and the “social media” profiteers who depend on it.
This. Decentralization of “truth” means that you get a bunch of cheap hacks, rather than a few experts.. In one way, it was an unintended consequence of cutting the cord..
There is no way to publicly humiliate these losers because their echo chambers have become so large that they never see the rest of us pointing and laughing at them.
The right has for years (Tea Party anyone?) interrupted town halls and other candidate and representative events. We need to put them into defensive put up or shut up mode.
“Miss Politician, can you, within 24 hours provide concrete proof of these litter boxes for students who identify as cats. The school address, classroom, etc. If you cannot, do you agree to resign from office, as we cannot trust you to make intelligent decisions for your constituents if you promote such a laughable claim with zero evidence.”
At school, I will occasionally see see student, usually a girl, wearing those slip on cat ears. They are just being silly teenagers, there’s nothing to it. I guess they will be banning those now.
And as we laugh at the lies and the media reports, no one is talking about negotiating drug prices, yesterday’s stock market surge, DeSantis being sued, Trump’s deposition in the defamation case, etc. etc.
In this day and age when everyone can take photos and record videos on their phones why isn’t there visual evidence of at least one school litter box? You’d think some disgruntled custodian who has to dispose of the waste and refill the box with clean litter would have already been a special guest on Tucker.
The right has tried hard to equate drag shows with sexual orgies. They have convinced a lot of people that drag shows are the same as strip shows. Drag shows are not trans gender events either. Drag shows, doing drag is simply dress up role playing. It is no different than Halloween. The right loves to demonize anything they dislike or cannot understand. One last point. Dragging your kids to a hate protest where you are screaming and saying nasty things about a group of people is indoctrination and grooming them to hate. If these parents don’t want their children to go to drag show events then don’t take them there, but don’t try to deny parents who do want their kids to see them and enjoy them their parental rights to grant their permission. You raise your kids, don’t try to force others to live by your hatreds. These people want to force everyone to have their views of things, their idea of right and wrong, they don’t care that others disagree with them. They don’t care about the many parents and others that know these events are just good fun, but they want to rule over others and force everyone to live by their views. Hugs
Some protestors carried signs that read “No drag shows inviting our kids” about the family-friendly event.
Parents reportedly took issue with the event, specifically the drag show and some of Boo Bash’s sponsors, which include Fabulous Hillcrest, Rich’s San Diego, SD Loyals, North County LGBTQ Center, and San Diego Pride. An earlier version of the flyer also listed Align Surgical Associates, which provides gender-affirming care, as a sponsor.
“A lot of people are just generally not comfortable with the idea of pushing drag queen shows on little kids but separate and apart from that I think the biggest concern with this event are the sponsors,” said Paul Jonna, an attorney who says he was contacted by concerned parents. “We submitted a public records request to find out more about their involvement, their communication with these sponsors and sort of this event.”
“It is very clear what the agenda is,” said Joleene Burts, who home schools her children. “It is not a family-friendly event and the district is lying to our children and these are our children.”
According to a September statement from the school district, Boo Bash is a “non-district event” and all digital flyers distributed through Peachjar feature a disclaimer noting that “distribution of this flyer does not imply endorsement by the Encinitas Union School District.”
But TransFamily Support Services director Kathie Moehlig told San Diego’s NBC7 that the flyer would not have been delivered to Encinitas parents via Peachjar if the district had not approved it. The frequently asked questions section of the platform’s website clearly states that flyers submitted to Peachjar by community organizations are “routed to the appropriate school district(s) for approval.”
On Tuesday, the district released a statement claiming the flyer had been removed from the platform three weeks ago because it did not meet approval criteria.
Moehling said that the flyer remains on the Peachjar sites of four other schools. She also dismisses the idea that Boo Bash’s Disney-themed drag show is inappropriate for kids.
“These drag queens are going to be performing a Disney villain show and they are going to be dressed appropriately to Disney villain themes, just as you would see any other entertainer wear who is doing entertainment for young children,” she said.
Despite the protest, Moehling said that Boo Bash will take place as scheduled on October 29.
“We’re not going to back down from doing what we know is right and appropriate to support these youth and their families, just because some people think they can use it as their mega piece to get talking points and get attention,” she told KGTV in September.
This guy has a long history of hating the LGBTQ+ community. He hates gays and trans people for some reason and doesn’t even bother to understand what being trans is. Worse he doesn’t understand that what these don’t say gay bills do is not stop gender indoctrination from happening in schools, but it makes sure that only cis gender is accepted, and that only straight orientation is seen. The object of these bills is to deny gays, lesbians, and trans people / kids exist. By not letting it be talked about or married same sex teacher show their spouse they are telling the kids that it is bad to be gay, lesbian, or trans and it is bad to be in a same sex marriage. By removing the books about gay, lesbian, and trans kids from libraries the kids are denied seeing people in stories that feel and are like themselves. It is an attempt to wipe the LGBTQ+ from society. But it won’t make kids stop being gay or having gender identities different from the born gender assignment. Kids were born gay long before positive stories about gay people were written or positive gay characters in movies. Same with gender identities. These things are inborn, you are born with sexual orientation and gender understanding, they are not something you can get from others, it is not a disease, it is not caused by sexual abuse or reading about it in a book. Hugs
“Why in the world are they fighting so hard for the ability to indoctrinate kids?” Adam Laxalt said of LGBTQ opponents of the Don’t Say Gay law.
Republican Senate candidate Adam Laxalt of Nevada is getting attention online for comments he made earlier this year about how LGBTQ people want to “indoctrinate” young children with “transgenderism in kindergarten” during a discussion of child sex abuse.
Laxalt appeared on the Breitbart News podcast on March 31 and the host brought up the conservative accusation that Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is “soft on child predators.” Laxalt responded by bringing up Florida’s Don’t Say Gay bill, which banned discussions of gender identity and sexual orientation in younger grades and restricted such discussions in older grades.
“I mean, why in the world are they fighting so hard for the ability to indoctrinate kids from age, kindergarten to third grade?” Laxalt asked. “Why are they fighting – I should say – against this bill if it were not because they want to be able to indoctrinate kids at these ages?”
He said that there “can’t be virtually any parents that would actually support the indoctrination, by strangers, of their children in schools,” referring to learning about diverse groups of people.
“And so, you know, kudos to DeSantis for signing this bill,” Laxalt concluded. “And then for going on offense.”
The Las Vegas Review-Journal asked Laxalt’s campaign about his comments and a campaign spokesperson said he was referring to “transgenderism in kindergarten.”
The spokesperson said that Laxalt’s opponent, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), “should be explaining to Nevada parents why she has cozied up to fringe elements of her own party who push transgenderism in kindergarten.”
“Cortez Masto sides with the most vile elements of the radical left as they continue poisoning our education system,” the spokesperson said.
“We will not hide like the millions of those who came before us, who would be arrested for being gay, beaten and killed or given electroshock therapy,” Gender Justice executive director Sy Bernabei said in response to Laxalt’s positions. “No matter how much you try to break us, invalidate us and terrorize us, we will prevail.”
Laxalt has a long history of opposing LGBTQ equality. In 2018, HRC Nevada pointed out that Laxalt had an “obsession with attacking the LGBTQ community.”
This obsession included a 2014 statement against marriage equality and opposition to LGBTQ people serving openly in the military. In a 2010 op-ed, he wrote, “Senior officers and non-commissioned officers will have to, under the color of Military Law, proactively endorse and eventually foster homosexuality.”
RealClearPolitics shows Laxalt and Cortez Masto neck-and-neck in the election, with Laxalt averaging a 1.7-point lead in recent polling.
The left likes to talk about “democracy” while they try to kill it with propaganda.
Real democracy and real leadership is standing up against giant corporations on behalf of parents and children being bullied by the rich and the powerful.
Scottie's Playtime 
