Hannah Hawkes, a Louisiana photographer, is in hot water for her Christmas photo depicting a family that has all of its female family members duct taped with their mouths, while the father of the family who had their photo taken by Hawkes holding a “Peace On Earth sign.” 

Vyckie Garrison at The Raw Story:

Hannah Hawkes, a Louisiana photographer, posted a family Christmas photo on her Facebook page which depicted a family of five celebrating “Peace on Earth” with Mom and two daughters with green duct tape over their mouths and their hands tied up with Christmas lights.

The Internet was not amused.

According to Inside Edition, the holiday photo, which was meant to be a joke, went viral and was quickly removed by Facebook after many expressed concerns that the image is not only not funny, but actually perpetuates a culture of violence and subjugation of women.

Jamie Peck at Death and Taxes Magazine:

It all started when Louisiana photographer Hannah Hawkes posted a recently shot Christmas card photo to her business’ Facebook page. In it, a man holds up a sign that says “Peace on Earth,” and his young son gives a big thumbs up while his wife and three daughters sit festively bound and gagged. Get it, because women and girls talk too much when actually, their opinions don’t matter at all? Take my wife, please!

It also looks a fair amount like the man and boy are holding their female family members hostage. “This time of year, it’s important to remember to take a moment to physically overpower and kidnap those you love most.”

Kristin Clifford at The Frisky:

It seems likely, or I very much hope it is, that this is an attempt at a “joke” gone awry. Certainly it’s in poor taste, but hopefully the little girls are not suffering from ripping off the painful duct tape, or the utterly bizarre experience of being tied up with Christmas lights, or from hearing the message: “Actually, the world is more pleasant when your voice isn’t in it.” Because that is the overall message and theme of this photo – women are better silent and unmoving than talking and taking action. That is what these girl are being told, even if you think this joke is “cute.”

[...]

I have to ask, why is this dog’s life worth more than the two little girls and their mother? Why is duct taping a dog abuse, but duct taping the mouth of a little girl while her father and brother grin in triumph is a hilarious joke?

It’s incredible to me that the lives and happiness of women can be viewed as so worthless, and so sad to me that some can’t even see that that’s precisely what this picture conveys. I’m surethese parents love their children. I hope they realize this little holiday portrait was a mistake and learn from the criticism. I hope those little girls – and their mother – don’t absorb the message that it’s better for them to be silent. I hope they grow up to be strong, carefree and always ready to share their thoughts, views – and truly hilarious jokes of their own.

Hannah Hawkes Photography’s Facebook Page defending their decision to shoot the sexist photo: 

We have more evidence where their worldview comes from: the likes page of Hannah and Austin Hawkes’ shared personal FB page.

This is sexism and misogyny, plain and simple.

Reminder: sexism is NOT cute, and most certainly NOT a laughing matter.

Prominent NRA spokeswoman and conservative hate-spewing phony “Christian” radio/TV host Dana Loesch had a screed that was full of hot air and lacking in facts and substance in the wake of the San Bernardino Shooting. She falsely blamed gun safety advocates as the “Godless Left” for demanding more than just thoughts and prayers, such as meaningful action on gun safety measures.

Rachel Ford at The Friendly Atheist:

In a video for NRA News, Conservative pundit Dana Loesch sneered her way through a pro-gun, pro-prayer, and anti-”Godless Left” rant (which, it should be noted, seems to encompass the entire left, godless and otherwise). It touched on everything from Benghazi to healthcare, and was really quite a hodgepodge of cherished right-wing talking points.

Loesch bravely, bravely takes on a whole host of favorite conservative straw men with the requisite contempt and anger she believes they merit. She is, after all, fighting for the right to survive. Somehow. She never quite gets to the hows, but, you know, FREEDOM!!!

Homebrewed Theology:

So, fuck you, Dana.

Fuck you and your self-righteous “my 2nd Amendment rights are more important than your dead kid” grandstanding bullshit.

Fuck you and your xenophobic “be afraid of the Muslims” bullshit.

Fuck you and your “it’s the liberal’s fault because they won’t spy on Muslim’s social media”.

Fuck you and your blaming liberals and the “godless left” for everything wrong in the world.

AMEN! Loesch and her acolytes can fuck off!

John Amato at Crooks and Liars:

Dana Loesch, a religious right, gun supporter extraordinaire, went on a crazed anti-left rant on The Blaze earlier today.

Apparently, she has a trademark on "God," owning the Almighty outright and blamed the "godless left," for everything wrong with the world under the sun.

Kyle Mantyla at RWW:

In fact, this claim formed the crux of an unhinged rant that The Blaze's Dana Loesch delivered on her television program last night in which she furiously attacked the "godless left" for "mocking people who were simply asking for prayers" in the wake of the attack and for blaming the attack on guns and the NRA.

"Here's an idea," she said, "how about you guys stop letting terrorists in ... because you all have blood on your hands right now."

[...]

"I also have a major problem with all these tragedy dry-humping whores," she ranted,"and I'm not watching my language because it’s about time somebody call you out for what you are. You sicken me.”

Speaking of tragedy dry-humping whores, it’s YOU, Mrs. Loesch, not the “Godless Left!” In fact, you are a dry-humper for various right-wing causes, such as opposition to unions, reproductive rights, LGBTQ rights, and supporting the NRA unconditionally.

Tim Peacock at Peacock Panache:

Arguing that calling for sensible gun regulations and not prayer “mocked the entire concept of religion,” Loesch called the cover a “coordinated assault” on “our right to believe.” Loesch went on to smugly mock the paper (and the so-called “the Godless Left”) for their apparent knowledge of “God’s will” before segueing into rhetorically abhorrent territory. 

[...]

And then Loesch (in true right-wing conspiracy theory spirit) brought in Benghazi. Because of course. Despite the fact that not one GOP-led Congressional committee could indict Hillary Clinton on a single charge of wrongdoing, dangerous ideologues like Loesch continue to capitalize on the fear mongering invoking the word “Benghazi” creates.

Thereafter, Loesch somehow even managed to shoehorn the so-called “War on Christmas” into the commentary for good measure.

The pièce de résistance arrived when Loesch discussed the San Bernardino shooting. Referring to the “Godless Left”, Loesch argued, “These saboteurs share the same fanatical fervor to tear apart the foundations of America as the terrorists who threaten our very survival. And together, they march hand-in-hand toward the possible, purposeful destruction of us all.”

Her latest rant sums up why Loesch (and her listeners) are a danger to American morals. 

Scott Eric Kaufman at Salon:

If you lack the stomach to watch Loesch connect-the-dots between Hillary Clinton, the mainstream media, Obamacare, the ostensible demonization of Christianity, the War on Christmas, the “weaponizing of the IRS,” the Fort Hood attacks, the Boston Marathon bombing and, of course, Benghazi, that’s most likely because you belong to the “the global alliance of elitists, media activists, Hollywood celebrities, campus radicals and political power-mongers who have openly attacked sacred American values and the people who cherish them with ruthlessness, contempt and downright hatred.”

You most likely, according to Loesch, share “the same fanatical fervor to tear apart the foundations of America as the terrorists who threaten our very survival.” That’s why you applauded as “the New York Daily News became the loudest, vilest, most condescending voice for what many people call the Godless Left.” 

[...]

“As a horrific act of terror unfolded in real time, the majority of Americans,” Loesch said, speaking for this imagined majority, “turned to earnest prayer for the dead, the wounded, their families and the world — while political and media elites joined forces to insult and mock and disparage them, and in so doing, laid bare the utter moral depravity of the Godless Left.”

Her “Godless Left” tirade is proof that right-wing hatemongering buttmunches like Loesch are actually driving more people away from Christianity.

Her NRA News commentary, called the “Godless Left”:

From the 12.15.2015 edition of TheBlazeTV’s Dana:

I hate to break it to you and your brainwashed fans, Dana, but a lot of the people on the political left in this country believe in God and/or own guns. 

Colorado GOP State Legislator and hatermongering Pray In Jesus Name Project (PIJNP) head Gordon Klingenschmitt is in some hot water after his vile comments on the judge’s ruling on Bundy-backed arsonists Steven and Dwight Hammond. 

Brian Tashman at RWW: 

It seems that at least one more GOP lawmaker has come out in favor of the seizure of a federal building by Ammon Bundy’s makeshift militia in protest of the resentencing of Steven and Dwight Hammond for arson on federal property.

And of course it’s Gordon Klingenschmitt.

Klingenschmitt, the Colorado state representative/televangelist/demon-hunter/exorcist/conspiracy theorist, shared a post on his Facebook page suggesting that the judge presiding over the Hammons’ case is guilty of treason and should therefore be hanged.

Klingenschmitt excuses the behavior of the domestic terrorists: 

Your comments, Mr. Klingenshit, are an incitement of murder, and you should hauled off to jail for it! 

The offensive Facebook post in question:

In the wake of President Obama’s executive actions on gun safety measures, Mississippi Congressman Steven Palazzo (R-MS04) introduces a resolution to censure the President over such commonsense measures (which are NOT a “plot to take away everybody’s guns” as the President correctly described).

Harper Neidig at The Hill:

Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-Miss.) is introducing a resolution to censure President Obama for his “unconstitutional executive actions” on guns.

"For seven years, the President has gradually expanded his powers through executive overreach,” Palazzo said in a statement. “His actions this week to take away the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens is just the latest, if not most egregious, violation of the separation of powers found in the United States Constitution.”

Allegra Kirkland at TPM: 

As the National Constitution Center notes on its blog, censuring a government official amounts to little more than a "public shaming." But as TPM previously reported, when Republicans in Congress were considering censuring Obama in late 2014 over his executive actions on immigration, censuring a President actually may run afoul of the Constitution.

Adam Edelman at NYDN:

Censure is a formal congressional measure of disapproval that serves a type of public reprimand or rebuke, although there is no real consequence other than the announcement of the measure itself.

Obama’s actions included new mandatory background checks for guns bought from dealers online and at gun shows, as well as a mandate for extra staffing and funding for the several government agencies involved in monitoring the purchase of firearms.

While gun-control advocates have lauded the measures, Obama has faced a storm of blistering criticism from the pro-gun lobby and its supporters.

The final answer: Rep. Steven Palazzo is a disgrace to America for introducing a resolution to censure President Obama for his executive actions on gun safety.

CSPAN’s Twitter:

As Cliff Schecter wrote in The Daily Beast, President Obama’s actions on gun safety is a commonsense measure, and not a “tyrannical one”, in contrast to what Palazzo and his NRA buddies want to believe is true on this issue:

Obama has done what any human president would do, upon watching the slaughter of his country’s civilians in the real world, while Y’all Qaeda and Yokel Haram stockpile guns for the coming episode of The Running Man because they’ve run low on Olanzapine. These are background checks, plain and simple, and they still won’t go as far as needed without Congress.

Tyranny would be letting terrorists, criminals, cowardly domestic abusers, and the dangerously mentally ill continue murdering and maiming scores of people every day because the most puerile, thick-skulled 10 percent of our society can’t understand statistics and fear the monsters on Maple Street.

This evening, the NFL owners have decided to vote 30-2 in favor of relocating the St. Louis Rams back to Los Angeles (Inglewood to be more precise), possibly to share with the Dean Spanos-owned San Diego Chargers. The Mark Davis-owned Oakland Raiders are expected to stay in Oakland. 

This means that the conferences and division stay the same. Had it been Oakland and San Diego that relocated to LA, then it would have necessitated moving one of the two teams to the NFC West (most likely Chargers) and consequently forcing a team to move to the AFC West (most likely Seahawks).   

Salvador Hernández at BuzzFeed News:

The NFL’s 32 team owners on Tuesday voted to approve the relocation of the St. Louis Rams, and possibly a second team, to Los Angeles, bringing the city one step closer to hosting professional football for the first time since 1994.

“We have the return of the Los Angeles Rams to their home,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said during a press conference Tuesday.

The team will play in a new stadium in Inglewood, and the Chargers will reportedly have an option to share the venue.

Kevin S. Held at Fox2Now.com: 

The move, by a 30-2 vote seemingly brings an end to a St. Louis bid to keep the Rams in Missouri with a new downtown riverfront stadium that Rams owner Stan Kroenke didn't support, and that league officials said as recently as this weekend did not meet the requirements necessary for NFL to oppose the relocation of the Rams.

[...]

City leaders have long held the belief that Kroenke was never interested in keeping the team in St. Louis. He would not meet with local and state officials, St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay said exactly one year ago. To this day, Kroenke and Slay have yet to meet.

[...]

The impasse between Kroenke and the city led to plans for a new NFL stadium along the St. Louis riverfront, just north of downtown. In December 2015, the St. Louis Board of Aldermen approved a financing package for a $1.1 billion stadium by a 17-10 vote. But on Monday, January 4, the Rams, Chargers, and Raiders all filed relocation paperwork with the NFL.

Sam Farmer and Nathan Fenno at LA Times:

A 21-year odyssey came to an end Tuesday when National Football League owners voted to allow the St. Louis Rams to move to Los Angeles for the 2016 season and gave the San Diego Chargers an option to join the Rams in Inglewood.

Their home will ultimately be on the site of the old Hollywood Park racetrack in Inglewood in what will be the league’s biggest stadium, a low-slung, glass-roofed football palace with a projected opening in 2019 and a price tag that could approach $3 billion.

At an unremarkable suburban hotel, NFL owners found a way to return professional football to Los Angeles, something a succession of billionaires, political heavyweights and Hollywood power brokers couldn’t do for decades.

Matthew Artz at Oakland Tribune: 

HOUSTON -- In a decision that Raiders fans cheered and team owner Mark Davis lamented, NFL owners on Tuesday dashed the team's hopes of moving to Los Angeles next season, voting instead to send the St. Louis Rams back to their former home and help fund a stadium project in Oakland.

The vote appears to keep the Raiders in Oakland for at least another year, although Davis, uncertain whether the NFL's $100 million Oakland stadium subsidy will help, refused to say where his team will play next season. He also wouldn't rule out eventually joining the Rams in Los Angeles if the Chargers stay in San Diego.

KUSI: 

SAN DIEGO (KUSI) - It was NFL decision day, except for San Diego Chargers fans.

We know the Rams are going to Inglewood, but the other team owners left the future of the Chargers and Raiders up in the air.

When Dean Spanos woke up Tuesday morning in his Houston hotel room, he fully expected to have his path to the city of Carson paved with all lights showing green.

However, the NFL's were more impressed with Stan Kroenke's vision in Inglewood than with Dean's plan to build a stadium with Carson refineries on the horizon.

Some reactions to the Rams relocation back to LA (and the Chargers possibly moving up I-5 and Raiders staying put in Oakland):

My take: I am stunned, heartbroken, and upset that the Rams are moving back to Los Angeles (although those who live in the LA area and/or remembered them as the LA Rams are happy with this news). This is a team that I rooted for since I was 5, when they came to St. Louis. I supported them through the thick and thin during the good seasons and the bad ones. I will remember the times (good and bad), such as Dick Vermeil guiding them to a Super bowl victory over the Titans (who were coached by the current Rams HC) in 2000, lost to the Cheatriots in 2002 in their bid to have their 2nd Super Bowl win in 3 years, The Greatest Show On Turf led by Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk, Torry Holt, Isaac Bruce, Ricky Proehl, and Orlando Pace during the late 1990s-early 2000s, the introduction of the Arizona (formerly St. Louis) Cardinals and Seattle Seachickens into the NFC West due to the 2002 realignment, the 5 Rams players who did the #HandsUpDontShoot pose during team intros a few days after the Wilson non-indictment occurred, Marc Bulger trying to succeed Warner, Rush Limbaugh nearly owning the team (thank God he was rejected, otherwise I would’ve boycotted them for that), constant O-Line injuries, boneheaded penalties (esp. by the O-line and special teams), Michael Sam being drafted (even though he never played an NFL snap) in 2014, the Sam Bradford era at QB, Todd Gurley’s rookie year, the emergence of Chris Long, E.J. Gaines, Janoris Jenkins, James Laurinaitis, Aaron Donald, Robert Quinn, and Alec Ogletree as playmakers on defense, Steven Jackson carrying the club during several awful seasons, Mike Martz’s aggressiveness on timeout calls, Lovie Smith coaching the defense during the peak years, and where Jerome Bettis had started his NFL career at. 

But tonight, on 01.12.2016, with Stan Kroenke (who also owns my favorite Premier League club Arsenal) and the Rams snubbing the die-hard fans of the team who stood by them through several awful losing seasons and a few winning ones since the move to the Gateway City in 1995, and St. Louis by relocating back to Los Angeles in a deceitful manner, I will no longer support the Rams unless they are playing Seattle or New England (Gunners will be my EPL team till I die though).

The team I’m choosing to replace them with— at least until another NFL team comes to St. Louis (if ever)—  is the Pittsburgh Steelers (already my 2nd favorite team, now bumped to my first favorite). The battle for my 2nd and 3rd favorite team will come down to the Buffalo Bills, Kansas City Chiefs, Chicago Bears, and Minnesota Vikings. As for now, welcome to Steeler Nation, yinz!  

Exactly 6 months after the first of several heavily edited tapes were released, Planned Parenthood has filed a lawsuit this afternoon against David Daleiden and his band of distortion artists known as the Center For Medical Progress.  Daleiden and 5 other people broke multiple state and federal laws while filming several distorted and edited undercover videos maligning the organization. 

Nina Liss-Schultz at Mother Jones:

The series of videos, released this summer by the secretive group the Center for Medical Progress, purported to show Planned Parenthood staff and other abortion care professionals discussing how to traffic fetal tissue for profit. Donating fetal tissue for medical research is legal in the United States, as is receiving reimbursement for the costs associated with that donation. Only two states have fetal tissue donation programs and Planned Parenthood has categorically denied that it has profited from it. Both state and federal investigations into the group's donation programs have found no evidence of wrongdoing. In the fall, Planned Parenthood announced that they would no longer be accepting reimbursement for donations but will pay for it.

[...]

The federal lawsuit accuses CMP of racketeering, illegally creating and using fake driver's licenses, invading the privacy of and illegally recording Planned Parenthood officials and staff. The suit describes CMP as a "complex criminal enterprise conceived and executed by anti-abortion extremists," and says that "the aim of the fake enterprise—which stretched over years and involved fake companies, fake identifications, and large-scale illegal taping, was to demonize Planned Parenthood."

Harassment, threats, and attacks against abortion providers surged nine-fold after the release of the first video in July. And Congressional and state lawmakers have used the debunked videos as reasons to defund or restrict the activities of Planned Parenthood. Ten states have introduced legislation restricting either the process of fetal tissue donation or its use in biomedical research. The House and Senate both approved measures to defund the group, which is the nation's largest provider of women's health, serving nearly 3 million Americans every year. States have also moved to cut off Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood affiliates, though those attempts have largely been blocked.

Sally Kohn at The Daily Beast: 

What Planned Parenthood does is legal. What was done to Planned Parenthood by the Center for Medical Progress its co-conspirators was not.  

And so today, Planned Parenthood announced that it is filing a civil lawsuit and seeking damages for the illegal act that led to a series of fraudulent videos misrepresenting fetal tissue donations.

After a lengthy and scrupulous private investigation to determine those involved in making the videos and the extent and nature of their conspiracy and illegal acts, Planned Parenthood filed a civil lawsuit in California state court. The lawsuit names the Center for Medical Progress, Biomax Procurement Services, and several individuals including David Daleiden, Troy Newman, Albin Rhomberg, Phillip S. Cronin, Gerardo Adrian Lopez, and Sandra Susan Merritt.

According to Planned Parenthood, the involvement and/or names of some of those being sued—who either directly illegally recording the secret videos or were leaders in the conspiracy to do so—were not publicly known until now. 

Rebecca Ruiz at Mashable:

Planned Parenthood filed a federal civil suit on Thursday against several individuals representing the Center for Medical Progress, the anti-abortion group that secretly recorded Planned Parenthood staff and executives discussing the donation of fetal tissue.

The suit alleges that CMP project lead David Daleiden and five other people broke state and federal law by creating false identities, engaging in mail and wire fraud, breaking confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements, and violating privacy by illegally recording conversations. It also names CMP and BioMax, a fake medical firm, as defendants.

Irin Carmon at MSNBC:

Exactly six months after the anti-abortion group Center for Medical Progress released its first secretly recorded video accusing Planned Parenthood of trafficking in fetal tissue, the women’s health provider has filed suit in a San Francisco federal district court.

The suit alleges that the Center for Medical Progress and its contributors and advisers, who are individually named, broke federal and state laws, including the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, known as RICO, as well as invasion of privacy and recording laws. It asks for extensive monetary damages, saying Planned Parenthood providers have faced death threats, been forced to move or go into hiding and been picketed at their homes. 

Via The Progressive Pulse: The 65-page document on Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against Daleiden/CfMP and the defendants:

Named as defendants are the Center for Medical Progress,  Biomax Procurement Services LLC, David Daleiden (aka Robert Sarkis), Troy Newman, Albin Rhomberg, Phillip S. Cronin, Sandra Susan Merritt (aka Susan Tennebaum) and Gerardo Adrian Lopez.

Planned Parenthood Action’s Twitter on the lawsuit: 

I hope they’re taken down hard for their actions!  

Rock musician turned NRA board member and far-right conservative hate spewing extremist Ted Nugent is in massive hot water, as he endorses the insane idea to hang President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for treason over their roles in the Benghazi attacks on 09.11.2012 in Libya, which is on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 in the USA. Nearly four years ago, at an NRA meeting in St. Louis, Nugent (in)famously declared that he would “either be dead or in jail by this time next year.” And shouldn’t your hind end be in prison right now, Mr. Nuge?! 

Timothy Johnson at MMFA:

In a January 20 post published on his Facebook page, Nugent wrote that Clinton and Obama "should be tried for treason & hung" while pushing the conservative media myth that Obama or Clinton issued a "stand down" order during the September 11, 2012, attack.

The picture of Nugent’s screed advocating the hanging of Obama and HRC: 

This afternoon, a Houston grand jury has indicted the notorious anti-Planned Parenthood smear merchant David Daleiden and his henchwoman Sandra Merritt for tampering with a governmental record, while Daleiden was also charged with violating the prohibition of purchasing and selling of human organs. Of course, the anti-choice nutbars are livid at this news.

Brian Rodgers at Houston Chronicle:

A Harris County grand jury probe into Planned Parenthood of the Gulf Coast ended Monday with the indictments of two anti-abortion activists.

David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt were both indicted for tampering with a governmental record. An additional indictment for prohibition of the purchase and sale of human organs was issued for Daleiden, according to a release from the Harris County District Attorneys Office.

Karoli Kuns at Crooks and Liars:

David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt have both been indicted by the grand jury for Tampering with a Governmental Record, a 2nd degree felony. Daleiden was also indicted for Prohibition of the Purchase and Sale of Human Organs, a misdemeanor.

Nicolás Medina Mora at BuzzFeed News: 

The grand jury, based in Houston, originally convened to investigate allegations of wrongdoing against the reproductive health clinic — but found no evidence that Planned Parenthood or its staff members had broken the law.

Instead, the jury decided to charge David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt — both affiliated with the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress — with tampering with a government record. Daleiden has also been charged with purchase and sale of human organs.

[...]

Planned Parenthood immediately claimed the videos were misleading and eventually filed a lawsuit against the Center for Medical Progress. But the videos unleashed a wave of outrage. In November, there was a shooting at an abortion clinic in Colorado Springs.

If convicted of the top charge, Daleiden and Merritt could face up to 20 years behind bars. It was not immediately clear if either of them had retained an attorney.

Looks like Daleiden and Merritt could be facing some time in the pokey for their deviously criminal antics.

MSNBC host and Wake Forest University professor Melissa Harris-Perry recounts a story on why she survived an attempted attack from a White Nationalist at a hotel in Des Moines, Iowa last night. 

Her take on last night’s near-brush with possible death: 

I don’t know if he was there to kill me.

Monday night I was sitting in a hotel lobby in downtown Des Moines with my back to a wall of windows, my eyes fixed on the TV, my attention wholly focused on early caucus results. I didn’t notice until he was standing right next to me, much closer than is ordinary or comfortable. When he started he speaking it was like he was picking up in the middle of sentence, finishing a conversation we had begun earlier, but I couldn’t remember ever meeting him.

“…So what is it that you teach?”

“I am a professor of political science.”

“My wife is a professor of communications.”

“Does she teach here in Iowa?”

“What I want to know is how you got credentialed to be on MSNBC.”

I am not sure if it is how he spat the word credentialed, or if it is how he took another half step toward me, or if it is how he didn’t respond to my question, but the hairs on my arm stood on end. I ignored it. Told myself everything was ok.

“Well. It is not exactly a credential…” I began.

“But why you? Why would they pick you?”

Now I know something is wrong. Now his voice is angry. Now a few other people have stopped talking and started staring. Now he is so close I can feel his breath. Before I can answer his unanswerable question of why they picked me, he begins to tell me why he has picked me.

“I just want you to know why I am doing this.”

Oh – there is a this. He is going to do a this. To me. And he is going to tell me why.

I freeze. Not even me – the girl in me. The one who was held down by an adult neighbor and as he raped her. The one who listened as he explained why he was doing this. She freezes.

I freeze. He speaks. And moves closer. Is there a knife under the coat? A gun? Worse? And I can’t hear all the words. But I catch“Nazi Germany”and I catch “rise to power.” 

[...]

Instead of sitting still as he tells me what he is going to do and why, I jump up. I move. I put space – a table – between him and me. My friend jumps too. It is breathtaking how fearlessly – almost recklessly – she throws herself between he and I. Together we raise our voices and make a fuss. He turns. He runs out. He jumps in a car. He drives off. We try to explain to hotel security what has happened and how I receive hate mail and even death threats, how I have had people show up at my workplace, how this might be serious. They listen politely, but this is the Iowa caucus, and I am not a candidate, so they go back to their evening. And we go back to ours.

Her students that she took to Iowa to experience the caucuses are the brave heroes that helped save her life. Hopefully Harris-Perry is alright and able to continue her duties as professor at Wake Forest and as host on MSNBC. 

Missouri is getting ready to consider the heinously dangerous and bigoted anti-LGBTQ religious exemptions bill similar to Indiana SB101 (and other copycats) called SJR39 in the Senate and the House, and could very well make its way to Show-Me State voters this year (likely in November, coinciding with the general election featuring the Presidency, Senate, and the Governorship, among other offices). 

Colin Murphy at Boom Magazine, via TNCRM:

SJR 39, introduced by State Sen. Bob Onder (R-St. Charles), would ask voters to prohibit the state from imposing a penalty on a religious organization or individual who acts in accordance with a sincere religious belief concerning same-sex marriage, which includes the refusal to perform a same-sex marriage ceremony or allow a same-sex wedding ceremony to be performed on the religious organization's property. 

The bill further says the state shall not impose a penalty on an individual who declines either to be a participant in a marriage or wedding ceremony or to provide goods or services of expressional or artistic creation for such a marriage or ceremony or an ensuing celebration thereof, because of a sincere religious belief concerning marriage between two persons of the same sex.

Human Rights Campaign: 

Extreme legislators in the Missouri General Assembly have introduced a series of anti-LGBT joint resolutions in both the House and Senate. If passed, these three bills, particularly SJR 39, would put dangerous religious refusals on the ballot in Missouri.

Kevin at Progress Missouri:

Let’s be clear: the First Amendment already defends a person’s religious freedom, and no one is forcing business owners to change their views on same-sex marriage. However, denying services to certain people based on their gender, religion, nationality or skin color remains discriminatory and illegal.

And on top of all that, it’s bad for business.

Tim Peacock at Peacock Panache:

Following the lead of several other states the Missouri Republican Party just introduced legislation last week that would amend the state constitution to allow discrimination against the gay community in areas of public accommodation so long as it’s based in religious belief. Specifically, SJR39 – introduced by state Senator Bob Onder (R-St. Charles) – targets businesses and organizations who refuse to serve LGBT customers.

[...]

Essentially, SJR39 would give businesses and organizations carte blanche to discriminate against LGBT people so long as they claim they did it because they hold religious beliefs that direct them to treat LGBT people differently than they treat all other customers or clients.

ACLU Missouri’s Sarah Rossi on SJR39’s ramifications if ratified by voters:

Contact your legislators in Missouri so that they can VOTE NO on SJR39: act.myngp.com/...

This morning, we have yet another story of police brutality in America making the news— this time  at REACH! Partnership school in Baltimore, Maryland, as a Black cop slaps and kicks around a student repeatedly in somewhat of a Ben Fields-esque manner without any provocation whatsoever. 

Arturo Garcia at The Raw Story:

According to WBAL-TV, the incident shown in the footage took place on Tuesday morning at the REACH! Partnership school, where the officer is assigned. The student who filmed the encounter said that the officer was striking a classmate.

“I was totally appalled at what I saw today,” said the district’s chief school supports officer, Karl Perry. “I am a parent and I am totally appalled by what I saw in that video. No matter what the circumstances are, I am totally appalled.”

The officer and a colleague seen witnessing the incident but not intervening were placed on administrative leave, as was school Police Chief Marshall Goodwin, while it is under investigation.

Tim Prudente at Baltimore Sun:

Foster said school officials were made aware of the video late Tuesday afternoon. The video is four seconds, and circumstances before the filming remain unknown.

An officer in uniform is shown slapping a young man three times and kicking him once.

[...]

Identities of the officer and young man remain unknown. The video was filmed by another young man, who is not identified.

WMAR:

A video sent to ABC2 shows an officer hitting and kicking a student at REACH! Partnership School in Baltimore City. 

A Baltimore City Schools official confirmed that the incident occurred at a Baltimore City school. Edie House-Foster said that the incident is "appalling and unacceptable." The incident will be under "vigorous investigation."

Video of incident in question:

Evidence shows at no point the student was the instigator or retaliated back during the approximately 5 second video, thus ruling that the officer’s actions are NOT justified at all.

Watch the #BlueLivesMatter/police apologist/#TCOT crowd likely attempt to justify the police officer’s ignorant actions. 

Last night, the Missouri State Senate passed SJR39 23-7 (which was filibustered earlier in the week by 8 heroic Democrats for nearly 39.5 hours until Ron Richard pulled out the PQ Wednesday morning just after 7AM CST to end the filibuster in a 21-11 vote).  The bill will now head to the House. If it passes the House, it is headed to the ballot in either August or November for voters to accept or reject the bigoted discrimination enshrinement bill disguised as a “religious liberty” bill.

Dominic Holden at BuzzFeed News:

After breaking a Democratic attempt to block the legislation earlier this week, Republicans who dominate the Missouri State Senate led a 23-7 vote on Thursday to pass a bill that would protect religious people, religious organizations, and certain businesses opposed to same-sex marriage.

The bill goes next to the state house, where Democrats are outnumbered more than two to one.

Democrats were also outnumbered for the senate vote — by a three to one margin. But they attracted national attention with a record-breaking, 39-hour filibuster that started Monday — a procedural effort to stop legislation they said would “enshrine discrimination into the constitution.”

Human Rights Campaign:

Today, HRC denounced a vote of 23 to 7 by the Missouri Senate advancing Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 39 to the House of Representatives. Gaining national attention after a historic filibuster by Democrats earlier this week, the outrageous measure proposes to allow individuals, organizations, and businesses to use religion as a valid excuse to discriminate against LGBT people.

Similar to so-called “First Amendment Defense Act” legislation introduced in other states, this extreme resolution would lead to a ballot measure that, if approved by voters, would enshrine discrimination against LGBT people and their families into the state constitution. If the House of Representatives passes the resolution, it would go directly to the ballot and the governor would have no opportunity to veto it.

[...]

Earlier this week, the Senate Democrats vigorously fought to stop the anti-equality majority with a historic 39-hour filibuster effort that drew national attention and praise. The discriminatory proposal has received widespread condemnation from fair-minded Missourians and businesses throughout the state, including Governor Jay Nixon, the St. Louis Post Dispatch, the St. Louis Regional Chamber, Dow Chemical Company, and Monsanto. The St. Louis Regional Chamber on Twitter said the proposal is “counter to MO values & will have negative economic consequences.” Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders also spoke out against the bill.

SJR 39 goes far beyond protecting the right of free exercise of one’s religion. While shrouded in language framed as prohibiting the state government from making funding or tax status decisions based on an organization’s views on marriage that are driven by religious belief, in reality it opens the door to discrimination against same-sex couples, their families, and those who love them.

Tony Messenger at STLToday.com:

When they came for the gays, did you speak up?

For nearly 40 hours this week, the eight Democrats in the Missouri Senate did.

Republicans were pushing one of their misplaced priorities, a constitutional amendment that if passed by voters would enshrine discrimination against gays and lesbians into the very document that exists to protect those rights. One by one, and two by two, the outnumbered members of the minority party took their turns holding the floor for nearly two full days.

Then the hammer was brought down by the president pro tem of the Senate, Ron Richard, R-Joplin, and the sponsor of Senate Joint Resolution No. 39, Sen. Bob Onder, R-Lake Saint Louis. They broke their own rules to cut off debate and pass their resolution of hate.

[...]

So, should SJR 39 become law, Missouri will be a place that not only refuses to protect gays from discrimination but also creates a specific protected class for bakers, photographers and florists who refuse to provide their business services to gay people. The party of so-called “tort reform” creates a special path to court for those who choose to discriminate.

Get ready for the fallout, Missouri. If SJR 39 becomes law, the economic consequences could be devastating. That’s what Indiana civic and corporate leaders found out last year when the legislature there passed a similar proposal. The calls for boycott came quickly. Conventions were canceled. The NCAA threatened to leave. Indiana lost millions of dollars of economic activity, and then corporate leaders belatedly spoke up and convinced the legislature to backtrack, at least somewhat.

Roll Call of SJR39 vote, via KMOX:

Voting Results: Voting “yes” were 23 Republicans.

Voting “no” were seven Democrats.

Two senators were absent.

REPUBLICANS VOTING YES

Dan Brown, Rolla Mike Cunningham, Rogersville
Bob Dixon, Springfield
Ed Emery, Lamar
Dan Hegeman, Cosby
Mike Kehoe, Jefferson City
Will Kraus, Lee’s Summit
Doug Libla, Poplar Bluff
Brian Munzlinger, Williamstown
Bob Onder, Lake St. Louis
Mike Parson, Bolivar
David Pearce, Warrensburg
Ron Richard, Joplin
Jeanie Riddle, Mokane
Gary Romine, Farmington
David Sater, Cassville
Kurt Schaefer, Columbia
Dave Schatz, Sullivan
Eric Schmitt, Glendale
Ryan Silvey, Kansas City
Wayne Wallingford, Cape Girardeau
Jay Wasson, Nixa Paul Wieland, Imperial

DEMOCRATS VOTING NO Kiki Curls, Kansas City
Jason Holsman, Kansas City
Joe Keaveny, St. Louis
Jamilah Nasheed, St. Louis
Jill Schupp, Creve Coeur
Scott Sifton, St. Louis Gina Walsh, St. Louis

ABSENT DEMOCRATS Maria Chappelle-Nadal, St. Louis

ABSENT REPUBLICANS Rob Schaaf, St. Joseph

On the absent Senators: Chappelle-Nadal would likely have voted NO, while Schaaf would have likely voted YES. 

I live in Illinois, just outside of St. Louis and do have familial ties to the Show-Me State, so it is time to work to defeat the hateful, bigoted, and mean-spirited ‪#‎SJR39‬ and keep it from becoming the law of Missouri!  

Hashtags: #SJR39, #StopSJR39, #SJR39Hurts, #NoHateInMyState, #NotInMyState, #MOLeg

Both Illinois and Missouri will have Presidential Primaries this Tuesday, on March 15. Illinois will also have downballot primaries this day, whereas Missouri will hold their downballot primaries on August 2nd (which will be in a separate post when it comes that time). Remember to go vote out to your polling place to vote on Tuesday if you have not already done so. Polls open at 6AM CDT and close at 7PM CDT. You are allowed to vote after 7PM, as long as you are in the line waiting to vote prior to the 7PM cutoff.

President (IL, MO):

Democratic:  Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are the two major candidates left in the Democratic Party’s race for the nomination. Dropout Martin O’Malley is on the ballot, as are 2015 Chicago Mayoral candidate Willie Wilson, 2008 and 2012 protest vote candidate Keith Russell Judd, businessman Rocky de la Fuente, and 2012 protest vote candidate John Wolfe, Jr.  Hillary is the narrow favorite in both Illinois and Missouri, but Bernie could pull off the upset. My endorsement goes to Bernie Sanders. 

GOP:  Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, John Kasich, and Marco Rubio are the last four of the major candidates left. At least a few other dropouts in Carly Fiorina, Mike Huckabee, Chris Christie, Rand Paul, Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, and Rick Santorum will also be listed on the ballot. Trump is presumed to be still favorite in Illinois, especially after his Chicago Rally shutdown. In Missouri, Both Cruz and Trump should be favorites to win this state. No endorsement, but Trump MUST BE STOPPED!

Libertarian: 2012 GOP Presidential candidate and former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson, businessman John McAfee, and Stonegait, LLC founder Austin Petersen are the three representing the Libertarian Party for the bid to be their nominee. No endorsement.

US Senate:

Democratic:  Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, former President and CEO of Chicago Urban League Andrea Zopp, and State Senator and former NFL DE Napoleon Harris are running for the right to challenge incumbent Mark Kirk. Duckworth is heavily favored to face Kirk in November. My endorsement goes to Tammy Duckworth.

GOP: Incumbent Mark Kirk and businessman James Marter are the two running for Senate. Kirk is the heavy favorite. No endorsement.

US House:

IL-01:

Democratic: Incumbent Bobby Rush and Chicago Alderman Howard Brookins, Jr. are running for the right to represent this district. Rush is heavily favored.  My endorsement goes to the incumbent Rush.

IL-08: 

Democratic: Villa Park Mayor Deb Bullwinkel, State Senator Mike Noland, and 2012 IL-08 candidate Raja Krishnamoorthi are vying for the right to succeed Tammy Duckworth. Krishnamoorthi is the favorite to win this primary. My endorsement goes to Krishnamoorthi.  

IL-12: C.J. Baricevic and Mike Bost are the nominees for their respective parties. 

IL-15:

GOP: Incumbent John Shimkus and State Senator James McCarter are fighting for the right to represent this district. Shimkus should be the mild favorite, but McCarter could pull off the upset. No endorsement.

IL-Comptroller:  Susana Mendoza and incumbent Leslie Munger are the candidates their respective parties. Mendoza should be the favorite this Fall. My endorsement goes to Mendoza.

IL-HD05: 

Democratic: Incumbent Ken Dunkin faces off against Juliana Stratton. This is a toss-up. My endorsement goes to Stratton.

IL-HD95:

GOP:  Incumbent Avery Bourne, Dennis Scobbie, and Christopher Hicks are running for the GOP nomination to face off against Mike Mathis (D) in November. Bourne should be the favorite.  No endorsement.

IL-112:  Katie Stuart and Dwight Kay are the nominees for their respective parties. Kay is the narrow favorite in November, but Stuart can pull off the upset. My endorsement goes to Stuart.

IL-HD114:  LaToya Greenwood and radio host Bob Romanik are the nominees for their respective parties. Greenwood is the heavy favorite. My endorsement goes to Greenwood.

IL-SD50: 

GOP: Incumbent Sam McCann and challenger Bryce Benton are fighting to for the right to be the State Senator from this district. My endorsement goes to Sam McCann.

IL-SD58: 

GOP: 2014 Attorney General nominee Paul Schimpf and Sharee Langenstein are the nominees for the right to replace Dave Luechtefeld and face Democrat Sheila Simon in November. My endorsement goes to Simon.  

Cook County:

State’s Attorney:

Democratic: Incumbent Anita Alvarez, former Assistant State Attorney Kim Foxx, and former prosecutor Donna More are running to be the State’s Attorney for Cook County, Illinois. Pre-Laquan McDonald videotape, Alvarez was the favorite; however, with the McDonald shooting videotape revealed and subsequent protests as a result, Foxx is the likely favorite. My endorsement goes to Foxx.

Madison County: 

Recorder: 

Democratic: Incumbent Amy Meyer and challenger Shannon Bradford are the candidates. My endorsement goes to Bradford.

Ballot Proposals: 

Illinois: Illinois Independent Map Amendment (2016)  

Missouri: SJR39 will likely be on the ballot either in August or November. My endorsement is to vote NO on SJR39 if it makes it to the ballot.

Hashtags: #ILPrimary, #MOPrimary, #twmp, #twill

Today, the Missouri State Senate passed Senate Resolution 1793 (SR1793) which summons Planned Parenthood of St. Louis and Southwest Missouri head Mary Kogut to comply with a politically-motivated witchhunt subpoena, on a 24-8 party-line vote. The architect of this travesty of a resolution is none other than State Sen. Kurt Schaefer (R), who is running for Attorney General this fall. This, coming from the man who once said ”the issue of abortion has been settled in the state... I support the status quo.”  

Kurt Erickson at STLToday.com:

On a 24-8 vote, senators agreed to move forward with contempt proceedings against Mary Kogut, the CEO of Planned Parenthood of St. Louis and Southwest Missouri and Dr. James Miller of Pathology Services Inc. The vote was along party lines, with Republicans in support and Democrats opposed.

Under the legislation, the two are required under Senate rules to appear in Jefferson City on April 25. Depending on what happens that day, the Senate could choose to pursue charges against the duo carrying possible penalties of $300 in fines and up to 10 days in jail.

The vote marked the latest chapter in an ongoing tussle between Republicans who control the Senate and the abortion provider over documents outlining how fetal tissue is disposed.

Jason Hancock at The Kansas City Star:

According to the Associated Press, the last time the Missouri Senate held someone in contempt was 1899, when they voted to hold a man named Harry Nuttall in contempt for his “conduct, bearing, demeanor and profanity” during a corruption investigation.

In 1903, the House voted to jail two men in for refusing to tell a committee investigating bribery why they were changing a $1,000 bill and two $500 bills into smaller denominations.

Possible contempt charges are just one way Missouri Republicans are targeting Planned Parenthood this year.

Sen. Kurt Schaefer, chairman of the Senate committee investigating the group and a Republican candidate for attorney general, has said lawmakers cannot be sure Planned Parenthood has not broken the law without the records the Senate subpoenaed. Those documents include all of Planned Parenthood's policies and written communication on disposing fetal tissue, as well as information on ambulance visits and all documents mentioning two doctors featured in the undercover videos.

Senate President Pro Tem Ron Richard, a Republican from Joplin, has said it's important to show there are consequences to defying a legislative subpoena.

Sen. Jason Holsman, a Kansas City Democrat, said he recognizes the chamber's power to subpoena, but that does not mean every subpoena is justified. The Senate's investigation is "political theater" based on a "false premise," he said, because the undercover videos were misleadingly edited and other investigations have already exonerated Planned Parenthood.

Chuck Hatfield, an attorney representing Planned Parenthood, has said the organization is open to releasing some of the records lawmakers subpoenaed. But he said many of the documents have nothing to do with the Senate's investigation, and he wants lawmakers to address those objections before turning over any records.

Planned Parenthood Action on Schaefer’s contemptible actions:

That’s exactly what could happen to Mary Kogut, CEO of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri. The ideologues in control of the Missouri State Senate have threatened her with contempt and jail time for refusing to share the private, personal medical information of patients at Planned Parenthood health centers.

Mary is fulfilling a promise to Planned Parenthood patients, to protect their health and privacy, no matter what. And they are saying they are going to punish her for it. They want to punish her for daring to stand up against petty politics and intimidation – for standing up for women.

The threats against Mary Kogut are part of a coordinated attack by ultraconservative lawmakers who want to block thousands of people in Missouri from accessing critical health care and Planned Parenthood services – especially low-income women, who often have nowhere else to turn for safe, quality care they can afford. 

 Kurt Schaefer and the Missouri GOP should be ashamed of themselves with this partisan gotcha garbage to defame Kogut, Planned Parenthood, reproductive rights, and women in general. 

Hashtags: #ShameOnSchaefer, #StandWithPP, #SR1793

ESPN commentator, former MLB pitcher, and right-wing bigot extraordinaire Curt Schilling once again uses his Facebook page to spew out insults, this time directed at the trans community to support North Carolina’s odious HB2 and other similar bills coming through the pipelines with a highly offensive transphobic meme. 

Boston Globe:

The former Red Sox righthander, who was suspended by ESPN last summer after he tweeted a meme comparing Muslims to Nazis, posted — and then apparently deleted — a meme on Facebook Tuesday that assailed the transgender community’s opposition to a controversial North Carolina law mandating that people in public buildings use the bathroom that matches the sex listed on their birth certificates.

Schilling’s post, which has since been scrubbed from Facebook, showed a heavy-set man wearing a garter belt and stockings, with the caption: “LET HIM IN! To the restroom with your daughter or else you’re a narrow minded, judgmental, unloving, racist bigot who needs to DIE!!!” Below, Schilling added a comment of his own: “A man is a man no matter what they call themselves. I don’t care what they are, who they sleep with, men’s room was designed for the penis, women’s not so much. Now you need laws telling us differently? Pathetic.”

Cyd Zeigler at Outsports:

Maybe making the matter even worse, one of ESPN's MLB editors is a trans woman: Christina Kahrl. How does the company tell Kahrl anything but, "We reject this message and this man"?

Schilling has become known for acting like a total jerk on social media, trolling Muslims on a regular basis.

ESPN has been very out-front on LGBT issues and incredibly supportive over the years. While there can certainly be some respectful disagreement on issues, Schilling leaves no room for that here. I cannot imagine a firing (or at least a very lengthy suspension) by ESPN isn't in Schilling's very near future.

Craig Calcaterra at MLB.NBCSports.com:

This has got to be the final straw, right? Curt Schilling, ESPN’s baseball analyst who has been in trouble multiple times for his social media posts and comments, has once again stepped in it. Indeed, this may be his worst one yet.

It was a meme he shared on Facebook and under which he commented dealing with the issue of access to public facilities for transgender people and it contains a disgusting caricature of what, apparently, Schilling believes to be a transgender person.

While many may feel that way, such sentiments are wholly ignorant of transgender people and their nature (note: they are people who just have to go to the bathroom sometimes like everyone else) and perpetuates stereotypes of a much-maligned class of people. There is an entire b.s. perpetuation machine backing these sorts of sentiments, by the way, smearing transgender people as deviants or threats when, in fact, there are no documented cases of people exploiting transgender non-discrimination laws to commit crimes. Of course, given Schilling’s track record, it is not necessarily surprising that he’s willing to buy into false claims and hyperbole which support his general disposition.

Ted Berg at USA Today’s For The Win:

With debate raging over a controversial and sweeping anti-LGBT law in North Carolina, who would have guessed that MLB pitcher turned ESPN personality Curt Schilling would weigh in? You? Well, you’re right.

Schilling got suspended by ESPN in August for tweeting — then swiftly deleting — an image that vaguely compared Muslims to Nazis, then kept at it during his suspension. 

MLBDailyDish.com makes the case for Schilling: ESPN should fire him ASAP!

This is it.

It's been a long time coming, but Curt Schilling has finally accomplished his goal. For months, maybe years, Curt Schilling has been looking for a way to get ESPN to fire him and allow himself to play the victim. He's finally done it.

[...]

Now, I don't expect Schilling to be out of work for long. For one thing, he will almost certainly quickly become a commentator on Fox News and Fox Sports One. He will go on Fox and Friends and talk about how he was wronged, and how his first amendment rights were being trampled. He'll be the darling of Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter and Sarah Palin. He'll still have his supporters, and may even someday run for office (good luck with that; maybe move to Arizona). But even if he does struggle, doesn't he deserve to?

[...]

Oh sure, he's lost money. But he's still on TV. He hasn't lost his home. Curt Schilling has received second chance after second chance. It's long past time for him to suffer some actual consequences. And those consequences should start with ESPN throwing this sentient pussbag who has never had to learn to respect people who are different from him as human beings out on his fat, bigoted ass. He is quite literally begging to be fired. Grant his wish, ESPN. Even if it doesn't change him, your broadcasts and our lives will all be better for it.

If he is fired, expect him to run to every right-wing media outfit to claim that “I am being persecuted for being a conservative” or something similar along those lines, and very likely get hired to be a commentator at Faux Noise/FS1 (home to concern troll DINO Clay Travis) or at TheBlaze or some other conservative outlet.

Screenshot of Curt Schilling’s vile transphobic post (now removed as of 3:30PM CDT):

Yet another of Schilling’s anti-trans ignorance and hatefulness:

And still more transphobia:

Yet still more of the same shit:

Although not related to trans rights, Schilling defends criminal David Daleiden: 

This is even more proof that ESPN needs to fire Schilling from its airwaves ASAP. #FireCurtSchilling

ESPN has decided to use common sense by finally firing right-wing bigot Curt Schilling this evening over his transphobic meme that he posted onto his Facebook profile page, among other offenses in the past. Cue the outrage from right-wing transphobic bigots that will claim “his 1st Amendment rights are being taken away in the name of political correctness” or some variation of that phrase to defend their anti-trans hogwash. 

Andrew Joseph at USA Today’s For The Win:

The only question: Why did it take this long?

Schilling’s behavior on social media has been disgusting for years. He’s posted memes that drew comparisons between Muslims, Hitler and Nazi Germany. He was suspended for that and subsequently continued sharing ignorant Facebook posts, daring ESPN to take action.

[...]

But the fact is that Schilling was given more chances than anyone deserved, and he essentially laughed in his superiors’ faces.

ESPN employs many talented baseball analysts. Wednesday, it finally realized Schilling wasn’t worth the trouble, and it will be better off for that.

Lindsay Adler at BuzzFeed News:

ESPN analyst and former MLB pitcher Curt Schilling was fired from the sports network Wednesday over an image he shared on Facebook.

[...]

In a statement released late Wednesday, ESPN said: “ESPN is an inclusive company. Curt Schilling has been advised that his conduct was unacceptable and his employment with ESPN has been terminated.”

[...]

This isn’t the first time that Schilling has caused a social media stir, last summer he was suspended from ESPN for tweeting a meme comparing Islamic extremists to Nazis. He wound up getting pulled from ESPN baseball broadcasts for the remainder of the 2015 season for the offense.

Andrew Bucholtz at Awful Announcing:

Curt Schilling’s most recent controversy over his repost of a Facebook meme mocking trans people and his added “the men’s room was designed for the penis” commentary has finally led to his termination from ESPN, which the company announced Wednesday night. 

[...]

While it’s interesting to see Schilling fired over this and not the other controversies he’s caused, such as the 38 Studios saga, his August comparison of Muslims and Nazis, his angry e-mails to writers and his desire to see Hilary Clinton “buried under a jail,” there are a few likely reasons for that. For one, this was probably thanks to the accumulation of all the issues over the years. For another, in contrast to the other cases. Schilling was utterly unapologetic this time, blaming those who were “hunting to be offended” in a blog post and ardently defending his position on WEEI Wednesday.

NY Daily News:

ESPN is finally finished with Curt Schilling and his bigoted views.

Cyd Zeigler at Outsports:

This should not be a surprise to anyone. Schilling has dipped his toe in dangerous waters before, last year posting about comparisons between Muslims and Nazis. Schilling's latest post was seemingly daring ESPN to fire him. The post featured a large man in some kind of sex garb wearing a wig and high heels. While Schilling offered some bizarre explanation about not posting the post, and his wife and son yesterday made claims about the post being private and Schilling being a super nice guy at home, the evidence of Schilling's finger prints was overwhelming.

When I think about LGBT-inclusive entities in sports, ESPN is right there with Nike at the top of the list. The organization has worked with the community for over a decade, bringing sensitivity training to Bristol; hiring out LGBT public-facing personalities like LZ Granderson and Kate Fagan; supporting others who came out like Israel Gutierrez; building an inclusive space for trans employees like Christina Kahrl and Courtney Pollack; partnering with organizations like GLAAD to improve their messaging and inclusion; The list goes on and on.

[...]

While people are throwing "The First Amendment" as a defense for Schilling's actions, the First Amendment protects speakers from only the government. ESPN is free to exercise its First Amendment rights as well.

Part of the First Amendment is also the freedom of association. ESPN has decided to not associate with Schilling anymore.

ESPN came to their senses and fired this transphobic duncebucket from their airwaves. 

And like I mentioned in yesterday’s post on this: He will likely end up joining RNCTV (aka Faux “News”)/FS1 and be a speaker on the conservative movement circles playing up his “I’m being persecuted” schtick.  

This afternoon, good news came out of the Show-Me State for once, as the Missouri House Emerging Issues Committee sensibly killed SJR39’s chances of reaching the ballot box this year with a 6-6 deadlocked vote. A 6-6 tie means that the measure does NOT move on (for now).

Yezmin Villarreal at Advocate.com:

Missouri's house committee voted down a controversial anti-LGBT "religious freedom" bill on Wednesday with a tie 6-6 vote. That effectively kills the bill for this legislative session, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. 

The bill, known as Senate Joint Resolution 39, would have gone on the ballot in November, asking Missouri voters to amend the state constitution to protect “certain religious organizations and individuals from being penalized by the state because of their sincere religious beliefs or practices concerning marriage between two persons of the same sex,” according to the measure’s text. Essentially, the resolution asked voters to approve a broad "right to discriminate" against married same-sex couples and other people who somehow offend an individual's religious sensibilities. 

David Badash at The New Civil Rights Movement:

Highly Controversial Bill to 'Protect' People of Faith From Interacting With Same-Sex Couples and LGBT People Is Dead – for Now

A Missouri bill designed to offer protection to Christians and other people of faith from interacting, serving, or doing business with same-sex couples has just died in committee. SJR 39 was so contentious Senate Democrats broke a filibuster record, trying to stop the bill from passage for 39 hours straight. 

Sarah Fenske at Riverfront Times:

According to PROMO Missouri, Hansen was joined in opposition by Rep. Jeremy LaFaver, Rep. Mike Colona, Rep. Sharon Pace, Rep. Caleb Rowden and Rep. Anne Zerr. Zerr, of St. Charles, and Rowden, of Columbia, are also Republicans, and both currently running for the Missouri Senate.

 The tie vote means the constitutional amendment will not go to a full vote of the House of the Representatives, barring another attempt on the part of its sponsors. (It's already passed the Missouri Senate, though getting it through that chamber required extraordinary measures to end an epic Democrat-led filibuster.)

Jason Hancock at KC Star:

A “religious freedom” amendment to Missouri’s constitution was defeated Wednesday in a House committee, dealing a likely deadly blow to one of the most controversial bills of the 2016 legislative session.

After a half hour of emotional testimony that left many in the room in tears, the House Emerging Issues Committee deadlocked 6-6 onSenate Joint Resolution 39, or SJR39. A tie vote means the bill is defeated.

[...]

While the bill is on life support, it’s not dead yet. Fifty-five members of the Missouri House could sign on to a discharge petition that would bypass the committee process and bring the bill up for a vote before the full House.

Proponents say they are mulling this option.

Tim Peacock at Peacock Panache:

Thanks to a 6-6 vote in the Missouri House Emerging Issues Committee, SJR39 will not be put to a vote this fall. The narrowly tailored state constitutional amendment would have allowed targeted discrimination against same-sex couples in places of public accommodation across Missouri by creating a new ‘protected’ class of persons: those who may use religious beliefs to refuse service to same-sex persons in places of public accommodation so long as the refusal is based in sincerely-held religious belief.

However, there could still be a chance that SJR39 could be resurrected, if 55+ House Reps sign a petition to bypass committee and bring it to the full House:

In any case, this is a victory for fairness and decency in Missouri. 

-

The New York Times broke the story this evening that President Obama plans to issue a guidance directive allowing trans students to use facilities matching the gender they identify as in all public schools across the nation.

Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Mark Apuzzo at NYT:

WASHINGTON — In the middle of a legal fight with North Carolina over transgender rights, the Obama administration is planning to issue a sweeping decree telling every public school district in the country to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity.

The letter to school districts that will go out Friday describing what they should do to ensure that none of their students are discriminated against, signed by officials of the Justice Department and Department of Education, does not have the force of law. But it contains an implicit threat: Schools that do not abide by the Obama administration’s interpretation of the law could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid.

The move is certain to draw fresh criticism, particularly from Republicans, that the federal government is wading into local matters and imposing its own values on communities across the country that may not agree. It represents the latest example of the Obama administration using a combination of policies, lawsuits and public statements to change the civil rights landscape for gays, lesbians, bisexual and transgender people.

After supporting the rights of gay people to marry, allowing them to serve openly in the military and prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating against them, the administration has made bathrooms its latest battleground.

Jessie Hellmann at The Hill:

The Obama administration will issue a decree Friday to all public school districts in the U.S. telling them to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity, according to the New York Times.

While the decree doesn't have the force of law, it does carry a threat: Schools that don’t comply could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid.

It is signed by officials at the Justice Department and Department of Education.

Windy City Times:

Tomorrow, May 13, the U.S. Department of Education is set to release a historic letter to the nation's school districts confirming that discriminating against transgender students is illegal under Title IX.

This comprehensive letter is expected to explain that schools and colleges have to make sure that transgender students are treated according to their gender identity in every aspect of school life, including by having full and equal access to restrooms and other facilities that match their gender.

Schools that discriminate against trans students—including schools that exclude transgender students from restrooms consistent with their gender—are violating federal law, putting their federal funding at risk. The Department of Education's interpretation of Title IX overrides state laws like North Carolina's HB 2, which require schools to force transgender students into bathrooms that don't match their gender.

Dominic Holden at BuzzFeed News:

The rules apply to restrooms, locker rooms, sports teams, fraternities, sororities, housing, and more.

It isn’t the first time the Obama administration has asserted Title IX of the Education Act of 1972, which bans discrimination on the basis of sex, bans transgender discrimination as a form of sex discrimination.

However, the guidance issued Friday by the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Justice Justice is the strongest, most direct set of instructions to date that spells out the settings schools should implement those standards across the country.

The guidance is not legally binding, but it put reinforces the administration’s position that it will take legal action against violators.

Federal guidelines in education apply to public districts serving K-12 students, public universities, and other education facilities receiving federal money.

David Badash at The New Civil Rights Movement:

In a sweeping decree the Obama administration on Friday will instruct all public schools across the nation that transgender students must be allowed to use restrooms and locker rooms that correspond with their gender identity. The instruction will come as a letter signed by officials in the Dept. of Eduction and the Dept. of Justice.

The New York Times, first reporting the policy, notes the directive will not carry the full weight of law, but schools that discriminate against transgender students will face possible withholding of federal funds.

“A school may not require transgender students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity or to use individual-user facilities when other students are not required to do so,” the letter will state, according to the Times. 

Of course, the reactions to this news being announced is that the side of decency (the pro-LGBTQ side) will celebrate, while the side of bigotry (the anti-LGBTQ side) will be whining and storming a fit over this news. 

The eleven states (Texas [the originating state], Alabama, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Arizona, Maine, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Utah, Georgia, and West Virginia) that are filing a lawsuit against President Barack Obama over his administration’s transgender facilities usage guidance directive are doing it for pure transphobic animus reasons. 

German Lopez at Vox: 

In the latest phase of the nation's mounting political war over transgender people in bathrooms, 11 states are reportedly suing the Obama administration over trans bathroom policies.

Specifically, the lawsuit is a challenge to a federal guidance telling public schools to let trans students, who identify with a gender different than the one assigned to them at birth, use the bathroom or locker room for their gender identity.

The lawsuit was filed earlier in the day at a federal court in Texas, the Mark Berman reported for the Washington Post. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is expected to announce the lawsuit at a press conference on Wednesday

Jessie Hellmann at The Hill:

Eleven states have sued the Obama administration over the president's transgender bathroom directive, Reuters reports. 

The lawsuit, obtained by Reuters, says the directive has turned workplaces and schools into "laboratories for a massive social experiment." 

Obama’s directive, sent out earlier this month, tells public schools they should allow transgender students to use bathrooms that match their gender identities or face losing federal aid for breaching Title IX requirements. 

CNBC Now’s Twitter (@CNBCNow):

Dominic Holden at BuzzFeed News: 

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and officials in 10 other states on Wednesday filed a lawsuit in federal court resisting the Obama administration’s guidance that instructs schools to let transgender students use bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.

Among the defendants in the case, filed in federal district court in Northern Texas, are the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S Department of Education.

The guidance issued to public schools on May 13 instructs publicly funded education institutions to allow transgender students use facilities consistent with their gender identity in a wide range of setting — from restrooms and dorms, to sports teams.

These officials in the 11 states that decided to sue the President over transgender rights in schools should be ashamed of themselves!!! 

Document: www.documentcloud.org/...

This afternoon at a press conference in Bismarck, North Dakota after officially clinching the GOP Presidential nomination, Donald Trump defamed Senator and VP shortlist contender Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas”. 

A reporter by the name of Nicole Robertson correctly took offense to that, only for Lyin’ Donald to repeat the word when confronted by the reporter. 

Alan Smith at Business Insider:

Donald Trump again attacked Elizabeth Warren on Thursday, calling her "Pocahontas" during a press conference in North Dakota and prompting pushback from a person identified as a reporter.

"That's very offensive," the person shouted.

"Oh, I'm sorry about that," Trump said.

"Pocahontas? Is that what you said? Elizabeth Warren?" he said.

He said he hits back at the Massachusetts senator because "she tweets a lot about" him.

Emily Cahn at Mic News on Trump’s offensive “Pocahontas” remark made against Sen. Warren:

When asked a question about Sen. Elizabeth Warren's Twitter rants against Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee went on to call her "Pocahontas," a reference to her disputed claims of Native American ancestry.

"Pocahontas? Elizabeth Warren? She tweets a lot about me,"Trump said, before adding that, "She is a Senator that is highly overrated, she's passed very little legislation, she's been a real disaster about a lot of people, including the Democrats, who frankly really can't stand her."

The Guardian’s Ben Jacobs notes that Robertson, the reporter who correctly called Trump’s “Pocahontas” remark offensive, is a member of the Cree Nation. 

Emily Crockett at Vox explains why Drumpf’s usage of “Pocahontas” is insulting: 

While Warren was listed as a minority in the Association of American Law Schools Directory of Faculty, she had declined to apply as a minority to Rutgers Law School, and had listed herself as "white" while teaching at the University of Texas. The head of the committee that recruited Warren to Harvard also said he had no memory of her Native American heritage ever coming up, and the 1995 Harvard Crimson article reporting on her tenure made no mention of it.

It's true, Franke-Ruta learned, that Warren wouldn't meet the criteria to officially qualify as Cherokee. She only claimed to be 1/32 Cherokee, which is too little to qualify for citizenship in two of the three major Cherokee tribes. She also doesn't have a known direct ancestor listed on the Dawes Rolls, which is a strict requirement for membership in the Cherokee Nation, or on the Baker Rolls, a requirement of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.

But just because Warren can't find hard evidence of Native American heritage doesn't mean she doesn't have any, Franke-Ruta said.

And even if she doesn't, that wouldn't make her a liar. Hazy oral histories about Native heritage are especially common in Oklahoma, where Warren grew up, and she would have no particular reason to disbelieve the stories she was told growing up.

His insensitive and bigoted comments against Native Americans (along with Hispanics [Mexicans in particular], Muslims, people with disabilities, and the African-American community, to name a few) are further proof that he is NOT fit to be our next President.