Joni Ernst: Right-Wing Psychopath

From Crooks and Liars:

During the [Iowa Republican Senatorial Primary] debate, a viewer questioned whether she would change her ad which shows Ernst on a firing range promising to unload on Obamacare. TPM:

The moderator then asked Ernst if she would change the ad or its timing in light of the UCSB shooting.

“I would not — no. This unfortunate accident happened after the ad, but it does highlight that I want to get rid of, repeal, and replace Bruce Braley’s Obamacare,” Ernst replied, referring to a Democratic Senate candidate. “And it also shows that I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. That is a fundamental right.”


I wonder if Ernst would support an “accident” defense (manslaughter, be it voluntary or involuntary) for the shooter had he survived and gone on trial.

And I wonder why more members of the alleged lib-rul media aren’t demanding an answer to that question from her.

If You’re Anti-Abortion…

…and if your gun fetish is more important to you than stopping mass murder, then – whether you’re Joe the Fake Plumber or any other nutwad – you’re not pro-life.

You’re pro-forced-birth.

You don’t give a shit about life.

Balance and Perspective

From Cristan Williams at TransAdvocate:

[W]hen the then 26 year old Amanda Bynes wrote, “Follow me on twitter you faggots!” RuPaul blasted Bynes tweeting, “Derogatory slurs are ALWAYS an outward projection of a person’s own poisonous self-loathing.”

But, for RuPaul, tranny is somehow different.

The majority of people who use both tranny and faggot mean it as a slur. Moreover, these are the slurs people use when they are murdering us. When the non-trans gay man, Neil Patrick Harris said his deep voice sounded like a tranny to a largely cisgender heterosexual audience, what and more importantly, who was the heterosexual cisgender audience laughing at?

That, then seems to be the issue for the trans community. While a gay man might know who he’s laughing at, the trans community seems to know who the cis community is laughing at when a gay man uses tranny.

Spellcheck is a Public Accommodation


…or not.

But, of course, if it was, in Massachusetts it could STILL be legally denied to trans people by married gay people.

I Now Believe that ‘Wheel of Fortune’ is Less Relevant than Most of the Crap that Contestants Used to Have to ‘Go Shopping’ to Buy with Their Winnings


“So they leave it all up to God, then seek out Science when they don’t like God’s plan. Typical Talibangelicals”

A comment from Gregory Gadow on Facebook to a posting of this disgusting story:

Duggars Visit Fertility Doctor to See About Having a 20th Kid

Kool-Aid Isn’t Just Purple-N-Yellow-Flavored Anymore


I’m not sure who deserves the credit for this – but it is well-deserved.

Shmuck Dynasty (Or: Everything That’s Moldy is Gnu Again)

From the Houston City Council earlier this week:

This should be the only – and relentless – line of questioning whenever a christofascist demands a special right to discriminate against LGBs and Ts based on religion.  Ask – and continue to ask – if the asserter believes that he/she/it has that same right to discriminate against Jews if being non-christian is as offensive to them as being Teh Gay.



its the concrete hair that’s offensive to me.

But I digress…

all the way back to 1983.

The Houston City Council member who forced the concrete-hair-oid to eat a fistful of logic is Ellen Cohen.  Coincidentally, the reality-based legislator in this next example is also named Cohen – in this case, Richard.  He’s currently in the Minnesota Senate but in 1983 he was in the House…

when a christofascist named Arthur Owens decided to testify against that year’s (trans-inclusive) gay rights bill.  Owens was, at the time, on the short end of multiple lawsuits against health clubs he owned – for, among other things, the ‘Rules for Sodomites’ signs that he hung in some of the clubs.  Those suits were under the already-LGBT-inclusive Minneapolis Civil Rights Ordinance; other suits, brought under the not-yet-LGBT-inclusive state civil rights law, involved, essentially, him deciding that the presence of non-males and non-Christians among his employees offended his christianist sensibilities.

With that in mind, lets visit the Minnesota House Judiciary Committee, in session approximately 31 years ago:

Rep. Cohen: “Mr. Chairman, Sir, If I’m not mistaken, aren’t you the individual or wasn’t it your business that there was considerable amount of publicity about in regard to employment practices that were found by some people to be discriminatory that had nothing to do with homosexuality?”

Mr. Owens: “Yes, sir.”

Rep. Cohen: “Mr., Chairman, if I may, what, as I understand it, people, who didn’t fit your concept of Christianity, they couldn’t be retained as employees.”

Mr. Owens: “No, sir, that is incorrect. Let me make a statement on that. We will not knowingly hire anybody that is antagonistic to the Gospel. We will not knowingly hire anybody that is actively involved in an immoral situation, and we will not as far as our business is concerned, and I think that you have probably been influenced by the paper reports, where most of our complaints have been of a religious nature, it turns out to be a attitudinal problem, not of religious nature.”

Rep. Cohen: “Mr. Chairman, which Gospel is that?”

Mr. Owens: “What do you mean, sir, which Gospel is that?”

Rep. Vanesek: “We seem to be drifting. . .”

Rep. Cohen: “Mr. Chairman, it will take a minute…. You indicated that if you were not, if you didn’t have a certain belief in the Gospel, I assume that’s what, the New Testament?”

Mr. Owens: “That’s the whole Bible – 66 books, all woven together into one book – written by some 40 authors over some 1400 years with one author.”

Rep. Cohen: “Mr. Chairman, I guess when we talk about the Old versus the New Testament, I don’t accept the New Testament as my Gospel, because I happen to be Jewish. Does that mean that I couldn’t be employed by you?”

Mr. Owens: “No sir, but if you were antagonistic to Christ as the Messiah, and you openly professed this, and became a problem within our company, you could not be hired by us. If you were not openly antagonistic, you could be hired by us, just so you know where we’re coming from.”

Rep. Cohen: “Mr. Chairman, just for the record, Jews do not believe that Christ is the Messiah. I’m not antagonistic toward that belief if others hold it, but it’s not my belief.”

Mr. Owens: “I realize, sir, that when you say Jews you’re trying to say that all the Jews. Remember that Jesus was a Jew, salvation comes from the Jews, all our first disciples, apostles, were Jews, and so we have to realize that there’s a difference between the Jews, and those that hold to the belief of Abraham, father Abraham in faith. So there is a difference. Many completed Jews today are professing Jesus Christ, and there is a very active movement to try to reach the Jewish community with the truth.”

Dana International is a completed Jew – but it wasn’t her Jewish religious beliefs that ever needed completing (if that needs an explanation, I have to ask: Why are you reading ENDABlog2?)

I’m just sayin’ – and occasionally antagonizin’….

What Will Probably Be Shown To Be The Truth

From a comment by Will Kohl – at the Bilerico Project, whatever that is – on Queen Elizabeth III’s latest attempt to con the people she spent a decade conning while being overpaid and underworked at HRC:

Here is some more info on Ms. Birch that might call her objectivity into question. – HRC has hired the political consulting firm SKDKnickerbocker to help run the Communications War Room for Americans for Marriage Equality. Hilary Rosen is managing director of SKDKnickerbocker and has a long history with HRC as a board member and donor. Her former partner, Elizabeth Birch, also served as executive director of HRC for nearly a decade. According to [Jo Becker, hagiographer and fraudmistress], Rosen was the first to float the idea of [Rosa Parks, Jr.] becoming HRC’s new president following the departure of Joe Solmonese in 2012.

More Truth


H/T Crooks and Liars