New Jersey Blues and The Big Guy

Though I now live in the foothills of the Smoky Mountains, I’m a native of the Great State of New Jersey.  With friends and family scattered across the Garden State [something of a misnomer], I still keep half an eye on NJ happenings.

As we all know, Chris Christie now fills the Governor’s seat [with abundance].  Yes, that was a cheap shot.  Christie has become a Republican darling for his blunt, shoot from the hip style.  In Tony Soprano fashion, Christie badmouths teachers, unions and anyone who gets in the way.  What a guy!

But the man is not without Sin.

Christie believes in limited gun control.  Eeek!  He has stated that in urban situations, limiting the number of guns makes sense.  The ‘makes sense’ is obviously a big issue with the current crop of Republicans.  Christie also expressed a belief in ‘Climate Change,” stating that human activity is undoubtedly involved and that he would defer to the experts.

OMG.  A science guy!  How did this man squeeze his considerable girth under the GOP tent?

The proposed mosque site in NYC?  Christie refused to take a stand.  He withheld comment, while the flames of controversy were fanned with heady delight by crank pundits, 24/7 shock jocks, faux celebrities and Fox News [ahem] reporters. [In full disclosure, I believed the mosque plans were unwise and badly timed—too soon, too close to the proximity of Ground Zero, which I’d visited two years before the story broke].

But worse, when appointing a judge to NJ’s Superior Court last year, Chris Christie appointed a . . . Muslim!  Can you believe it?  Shades of Sharia Law rained across Tea Party brows.  The horror!  The betrayal!

Christie’s response?  He was sick of dealing with the ‘crazies.’

But it’s clear now, indisputable, that Governor Chris Christie has learned nothing—nada, zip–from his past misdeeds.  The National Organization for Marriage [NOM] is up in arms over Christie’s appalling nomination of Bruce Harris for the State Supreme Court.

Why? you may ask.

According to NOM, Harris is an extremist of the worst kind.  He would be the first openly gay, third African American to serve the High Court and has publicly admitted support of and work in behalf of gay marriage legislation.  Though Harris has agreed to recuse himself on any legislation involving same sex marriage, he’d sent an unfortunate email [emails can get you in a whole lot of trouble] to State Senator Joseph Pennacchio.  NOM, in a mailing to supporters dated 30 January, with a header reading, Tell Christie to Withdraw Nomination of Pro-SSM Judge For Extremist Views Equating Christianity and Slavery, reproduced said email:

When I hear someone say that they believe marriage is only between a man and a woman because that’s the way it’s always been, I think of the many “traditions” that deprived people of their civil rights for centuries: prohibitions on interracial marriage, slavery, (which is even provided for in the Bible), segregation, the subservience of women, to name just a few of these “traditions.”

I hope that you consider my request that you re-evaluate your position and, if after viewing the videos, reading Governor Whitman’s letter and thinking again about this issue of civil rights you still oppose same-sex marriage on grounds other than religion I would appreciate it if you you’d explain your position to me. And, if the basis of your opposition is religious, then I suggest that you do what the US Constitution mandates—and that is to maintain a separation between the state and religion.

Here’s the rub, according to NOM and their screeching advocates:

. . . a man who cannot tell the difference between supporting our traditional understanding of marriage and wanting to enslave a people lacks common sense and judicial temperament.

And to suggest that legislators should ignore the views of religious constituents, that moral views grounded in the Bible are somehow illegitimate in the public square, seriously compounds the offense.

These are not the words of a judicial conservative, a man who believes in common sense, strict construction of the state constitution—the kind of judge Gov. Christie promised to appoint to the court.

Over the weekend, it was suggested I lacked a sense of humor when referring to NC Congressman Larry Pittman’s email, sent ‘inadvertently’ to the NC General Assembly, in which Pittman suggested ‘abortionists’ [they would be physicians who perform legal and safe abortions] should be first in line for a public hanging.  Public hangings, Congressman Pittman added, should be reintroduced to deter crime and set a firm, if not ghastly example.

He was making a funny, I was informed.

Those who would expect me to laugh off the Pittman email would no doubt expect me to consider the Harris email a source of outrage and NOM’s response as perfectly reasonable.

They would be wrong.

The Bible is illegitimate in the public square when it’s stuffed down out throats as a wearisome and pathetic excuse to continue spewing ancient, ugly bigotry and discrimination; control the reproductive lives of women; and persist in the ludicrous, absurd proposition that a fertilized egg is a ‘person.’

And sorry, Harris is absolutely correct—you cannot erase or rewrite Biblical history.  It is not pretty. It is not even civilized. It is also not relevant, beyond the Beatitudes, which are rarely quoted and sadly ignored.

To be clear, I am not a fan of Governor Christie; I do not support the majority of his economic principles.  But when it comes to taking a stand against the ‘crazies,’ I give the man major props.  He’s standing firm for Harris.  He’s doing the right thing.

The National Organization for Marriage claims that Bruce Harris is an extremist.  My suggestion?

Take a look in the mirror, folks.  Take a long, hard look.


Justice And A Call For Public Hangings

We’ve seen the Hollywood version:

The gallows is assembled.  The dust is high and a sense of anticipation ripples through the air.  There’s a hanging come tomorrow and it’s looking to be a good day.  The condemned man manages to hoist himself to the jail window.  He watches the ongoing construction.  He doesn’t say anything.  Fixing his jaw, he looks up at the sky and we know he’s silently wondering if he can keep it together, not cry out like a little girl.  Or soil himself.

The morning of?  Mothers pack a lunch because the hanging is midday and the children might get hungry.  The righteous men in town think a hanging is a good, fine thing.  God Almighty Hisself said it–An Eye for an Eye.  And their sons, these righteous men whisper, will see what hard justice looks like then buck up, choose the straight and narrow.

The whole town turns out.  Dogs bark, babies cry and the sun burns down.  The condemned man turns his eyes away when the black clad minister offers up a prayer.  He looks beyond the crowd as if he sees something way off, something no one else can see.  Or maybe his mouth is trembling and the sweat is running in his eyes but we don’t get to see much because the thin-lipped sheriff yanks a black hood over the man’s head.

A few heartbeats later, the sheriff nods to the executioner. The lever creaks, the hatch opens.  The man drops with a creaking whoosh. He drops like a stone, straight into eternity.  He twitches–once, twice.  But then all is still.

The crowd is quiet now.  Some people look away.  Some smirk. Others stare at the dead man, look right through him, only to turn with a quiet resignation and everyone, even the dogs and old timers, shuffle back to whatever they’ve left undone or are loathe to go back to.

Until the next time.

I’ve always watched these scenes and thought, Thank God, I wasn’t born back in the day when an execution was considered entertainment, a welcome respite from the hard-pressed, often dreary, short lives our ancestors lived.  Cultures and mindsets change, evolve.

But sometimes they don’t.

Republican Representative Larry Pittman, District 82 from the great State of North Carolina wants to bring back public hangings.  A deterrent to crime, he says, but noted abortion doctors first in line for the gallows.

I could brush this off as a joke, the product of a small, twisted mind but it turns out Representative Pittman expressed his view via a note, which he then emailed to every member of the North Carolina General Assembly.   Seems like a particular prisoner really ticked Representative Pittman off, yanked his chain good, when said prisoner wrote a letter to the local paper [published by a most discriminating editor] in which he bragged about his cushy prison life and how endless appeals would keep his hide from the executioner for years on end.

According to the email, Representative Pittman’s reaction was, in part, the following:

We need to make the death penalty a real deterrent again by actually carrying it out. Every appeal that can be made should have to be made at one time, not in a serial manner,” Pittman wrote in the email. “If murderers (and I would include abortionists, rapists, and kidnappers, as well) are actually executed, it will at least have the deterrent effect upon them. For my money, we should go back to public hangings, which would be more of a deterrent to others, as well.

To be fair to Representative Pittman, I do not know the details of this prisoner’s crime.  As far as I know, he may deserve to rot in prison forever. He may even deserve to swing from a rope.  Personally, I’m not a huge fan of the death penalty, particularly when I read stats like this:

Since 1973, at least 121 people have been released from death row after evidence of their innocence emerged. During the same period of time, over 982 people have been executed. Thus, for every eight people executed, we have found one person on death row who never should have been convicted. These statistics represent an intolerable risk of executing the innocent. If an automobile manufacturer operated with similar failure rates, it would be run out of business.

Our capital punishment system is unreliable. A recent study by Columbia University Law School found that two thirds of all capital trials contained serious errors. When the cases were retried, over 80% of the defendants were not sentenced to death and 7% were completely acquitted.

But that’s an argument for another day.

Representative Pittman did, in fact, back pedal on sending his ‘opinion’ to every member of the General Assembly, claiming it was intended for a single member.  He was fatigued, he said, hitting ‘Reply All’ in error.  He also said that perhaps he’d gotten carried away when he vented his disgust and agitation, but he was over-wrought by his concern for the victim of the letter-writing prisoner.  He was concerned about the family’s right to see justice done.

But I missed this part:

Oh, and you know the inclusion of abortion doctors, saying that they should be first in line for the gallows?  I apologize.  Because even I know that since abortion is still legal in this country, hanging a doctor who has performed a legal abortion would be  .  .  .  murder.  As a State Representative of the Great State of North Carolina I would not want to give the impression that murder is a good thing or understandable when committed against Pro-Choice Physicians, even those who perform abortions.  Because to do so would set a bad example to the very populace I’m pledged to represent.  Sending that email was a foolish, unseemly thing to do.

Sadly, he did not write or say that.

As for public hangings acting as a deterrent to crime?  Though Timothy McVeigh’s execution was viewed on closed circuit TV for family members of the deceased and rescue workers, the last public execution in the US, a hanging, occurred in 1936 in Owensboro, Kentucky.  It was that particular execution, the carnival nature of the hanging and the coverage received, that convinced public officials that going public was not a good idea. We can go back further to find ample examples of public hangings, death by firing squad, horse and quartering, beheadings, etc.

And lo and behold, we still had crime, oodles of it.  Frequently during those festive-like affairs, pickpockets flourished and prospered.

Executions were good for business.

I vaguely recall Phil Donahue calling for televised executions, back when the electric chair was still favored.  His reasoning was not a pretense that viewable executions would deter crime but that seeing a man or woman electrocuted, the true ugliness of  the act, would serve as a deterrent to the death penalty itself.

Was Donahue right?  I don’t know.  At the time, I thought the suggestion was crazy.

But calling for public hangings, including doctors who perform legal abortions, even from a fatigued state legislator is, in my opinion, a step too far.  Maybe we should thank Representative Pittman for offering a window into his mind’s secret workings.  We can theorize that since his opinion was ‘intended’ for a single legislator, Representative Pittman assumed his recipient was a kindred spirit, someone who shared his ‘frustrations.’

That makes at least one like-minded person serving in the NC General Assembly.  We can only guess how many others.

Oh, and there’s this–in addition to being a NC representative?  Mr. Pittman lists his occupation as: Pastor, Shipping Worker and Company Chaplain.

You cannot make this stuff up.


Are Mitt Romney’s Lies Supported by Mormon Church Leaders?

Mormon temple in Belmont, MA, completed in 2000

I realize that’s a provocative title, but please stay with me. I’ll get to the point after some background.

I’ve been reading the new biography of Mitt Romney, The Real Romney by Michael Kranish and Scott Helman. I bought the book after reading a lengthy excerpt published by Vanity Fair, which focused heavily on Romney’s treatment of women when he was a powerful leader in the Boston Mormon church. I wrote about this in a Morning news post at the time.

I was disappointed to discover that the book itself is somewhat of a fluff piece–Boston Globe reporters Kranish and Helman put as positive a spin as possible on Romney’s history and his activities as a church and business leader. However, by reading between the lines and googling names, places, and incidents from the book, I’m still getting some useful information about “the real Romney.”

One prominent Mormon woman quoted in the book is Judith Dushku, associate professor of government at Suffolk University in Boston, and incidentally the mother of actress Eliza Dushku, who played Faith in the TV shows Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel and has appeared in a number of popular Hollywood movies.

Judith Dushku with daughter Eliza

Judith Dushku is a self-described feminist and a long-time contributor to the Mormon feminist magazine Exponent II. It was in this magazine that an anonymous author published the story of the Bishop Romney’s cruel treatment of her over a life-saving abortion. From the Vanity Fair article:

In the fall of 1990, Exponent II published in its journal an unsigned essay by a married woman who, having already borne five children, had found herself some years earlier [the late 1970s] facing an unplanned sixth pregnancy. She couldn’t bear the thought of another child and was contemplating abortion. But the Mormon Church makes few exceptions to permit women to end a pregnancy. Church leaders have said that abortion can be justified in cases of rape or incest, when the health of the mother is seriously threatened, or when the fetus will surely not survive beyond birth. And even those circumstances “do not automatically justify an abortion,” according to church policy.

Then the woman’s doctors discovered she had a serious blood clot in her pelvis. She thought initially that would be her way out—of course she would have to get an abortion. But the doctors, she said, ultimately told her that, with some risk to her life, she might be able to deliver a full-term baby, whose chance of survival they put at 50 percent. One day in the hospital, her bishop—later identified as Romney, though she did not name him in the piece—paid her a visit. He told her about his nephew who had Down syndrome and what a blessing it had turned out to be for their family. “As your bishop,” she said he told her, “my concern is with the child.” The woman wrote, “Here I—a baptized, endowed, dedicated worker, and tithe-payer in the church—lay helpless, hurt, and frightened, trying to maintain my psychological equilibrium, and his concern was for the eight-week possibility in my uterus—not for me!”

Romney would later contend that he couldn’t recall the incident, saying, “I don’t have any memory of what she is referring to, although I certainly can’t say it could not have been me.” Romney acknowledged having counseled Mormon women not to have abortions except in exceptional cases, in accordance with church rules. The woman told Romney, she wrote, that her stake president, a doctor, had already told her, “Of course, you should have this abortion and then recover from the blood clot and take care of the healthy children you already have.” Romney, she said, fired back, “I don’t believe you. He wouldn’t say that. I’m going to call him.” And then he left. The woman said that she went on to have the abortion and never regretted it. “What I do feel bad about,” she wrote, “is that at a time when I would have appreciated nurturing and support from spiritual leaders and friends, I got judgment, criticism, prejudicial advice, and rejection.”

Judith Dushku had a number of run-ins with Mitt Romney during his years as Stake President and Bishop in the Boston Mormon community. In fact, Dushku confronted Romney over the incident described above, after which he “broke off their friendship.”

Read the rest of this entry »


Soylent Green Revisited? Nah, Just the Crazy Season in High Gear

There is no end to the terror and frantic posturing when it comes to the Republicans’ fetus fetish.  I thought I had heard it all but a Oklahoma legislator, specifically Republican State Senator Ralph Shortey, has introduced a state Senate Bill 1418 prohibiting the use of human fetuses in  . . . our food.  No that is not a typo.  The proposed legislation reads as follows:

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

2nd Session of the 53rd Legislature (2012)

SENATE BILL 1418 By: Ralph Shortey

AS INTRODUCED

An Act relating to food; prohibiting the manufacture or sale of food or products which use aborted human fetuses; providing for codification; and providing an effective date.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:
SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-1150 of Title 63, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
No person or entity shall manufacture or knowingly sell food or any other product intended for human consumption which contains aborted human fetuses in the ingredients or which used aborted human fetuses in the research or development of any of the ingredients.
SECTION 2. This act shall become effective November 1, 2012″

Why? you may ask incredulously.

Well, because a Christian anti-abortion group [reportedly, The Children of God] has made ‘allegations’ that a bio-tech firm and several food companies used embryonic stem cells to test the flavor of food and even more egregiously used stem cells to enhance the flavor of specific food products.  The companies cited included Pepsi Co., Kraft, and Nestle.  The accused bio-tech firm, Semomyx, was also connected to Campbell Soup Co. After the original accusations were made, Campbell cut its tie with the bio-tech program.

Bad PR is bad PR.  And this, of course, is stomach churning.

But an accusation is easy to make.

The original allegations made last year went nowhere and the accused companies have flatly denied all charges.  In addition, it’s absolutely illegal [not to mention unethical] under US law to use stem cells in the alleged manner.

That’s the true beauty of a witch hunt.

All one need do is scream, WITCH!  Public passion is enflamed, fears are stirred and we’re off to the races [or the stake, as the case may be].  You can even get a state senator to introduce a bill that has absolutely no bearing to reality.  Hell, it might be worth a vote or two.

Of all the idiotic fears I’ve read, this takes the cake.  Not only is it disgusting fear-mongering, something the Republicans have turned into an art form, but it distracts from and delays any real effort in solving our economic issues.

Which are very real. And for which Republicans have few solutions.

But wait, let’s think about it as Stephan D. Foster, Jr. suggests at Addicting Info. [Addicting Info cites its mission as debunking Right-Wing propaganda.] If you were hell bent on forbidding any and all stem cell research and/or products for medicinal purposes, the sort that have been proposed for the cure of Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s or used to generate cell growth in brain or spinal-cord damaged patients, what better way to covertly outlaw scientific research than slide through a seemingly pointless bill outlawing fetuses entering our food chain.  As Foster states:

Depending on the source, stem cell treatments could fall under a ‘product that contains aborted human fetuses.’ You “consume” medicine in the same sense that you “consume” food; it enters the body and is processed in some fashion. Whether it is used for energy or to heal a damaged brain is irrelevant to this law.

Convoluted?  Crazy?

Certainly no crazier than Senator Shortey, originally unavailable for comment, who told Nicole Burgin, KRMG Talk Radio the following :

I don’t know if it is happening in Oklahoma, it may be, it may not be. What I am saying is that if it does happen then we are not going to allow it to manufacture here.

Oh, good Lord!  Is this a disciple of Rick Perry?  Senator Shortey claims he went ahead with the legislation because his research led him to believe a law was necessary.

Splendid!

Okay, I want a law of my own.  I propose the following: If aliens land on the earth, toting a cookbook? And if they ask for ‘volunteers’ to visit their fine planet? I want Senator Shortey and all like-minded legislators to be the first to board said aliens’ spacecraft.  Maybe they can convert a few Outworlders before the Barbeque gets going.

Pass the salt, please! 


Rick Santorum: Pregnant Rape Victims should “Make the Best out of a Bad Situation”

Rick and Karen Santorum were on CNN’s Piers Morgan show on Friday night. I saw a little of it, but I missed this part. Via Think Progress, Morgan asked Santorum about his extreme anti-choice opinions–his goal of criminalizing all abortions, (and prosecuting doctors who perform the procedure) even in cases of rape or incest. Morgan also asked Santorum how he would respond if his own daughter were raped and became pregnant.

SANTORUM: Well, you can make the argument that if she doesn’t have this baby, if she kills her child, that that, too, could ruin her life. And this is not an easy choice. I understand that. As horrible as the way that that son or daughter and son was created, it still is her child. And whether she has that child or doesn’t, it will always be her child. And she will always know that. And so to embrace her and to love her and to support her and get her through this very difficult time, I’ve always, you know, I believe and I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you. As you know, we have to, in lots of different aspects of our life. We have horrible things happen. I can’t think of anything more horrible. But, nevertheless, we have to make the best out of a bad situation.

Morgan didn’t ask Santorum about incest victims. What if an 11-year-old girl is impregnated by her own father? Should her father then tell her she has to “make the best of a bad situation” because the embryo or fetus is a “person?”

What about the girls and women who have been brutalized by rape and incest? Santorum seems unconcerned. Not only should they suck it up and take care of the “life” that has been forced upon them, they should also have to follow laws based on Santorum’s personal religious beliefs.

Santorum even had the nerve to claim that references to persons and life in the Constitution were “intended” to include fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses. Yet at the time of the writing of the Constitution, abortion was not even illegal.

This man is dangerous to all girls and women.