Two Christian state senators debating Colorado’s civil union bill – Senate Bill 2 – yesterday decided to quote Bible passages and proselytize from the Senate floor, including telling gay people to choose Jesus over their same-sex partner.

“I truly believe Jesus is a better answer than Senate Bill 2,” Senator Scott Renfroe told his colleagues  – and every Colorado citizen. Choose Jesus over the person you want to spend the rest of your life with, Renfroe says. Because, apparently, Senator Renfroe is under the mistaken idea that Colorado citizens elected him to minister to their lives, to be a theocrat, to make his interpretation of the Bible the law of the land in Colorado.

“This bill tears at the very fabric of our morality and our society,” Renfroe added.

Really? Civil unions tear “at the very fabric of our morality and our society”? Your morality is rather weak, in that case, Senator. And it shows.

Renfroe’s colleague, Senator Kevin Lundberg joined him in quoting scripture, asking, “How do we deal with, or what is the attitude toward those who choose homosexuality over heterosexuality?”

How do you deal with those who “choose” homosexuality?

How about you make them equal citizens? How about you treat them the exact same way you treat every other person? How about you “deal” them a fair hand?

I’m more angry at the people of Colorado who elected these two wing nuts than I am at them. Theocrats are dangerous, un-American and anti-America.

Senator Scott Renfroe has claimed public schools are “feminizing” boys and compared homosexuality to murder.

And if you think these radical religious wing nuts are just in Colorado and don’t affect you, Senator Kevin Lundberg is trying to run against U.S. Rep. Jared Polis.

WICHITA, Kan. — The grandmother of a 4-year-old girl who became hysterical during a security screening at a Kansas airport said Wednesday that the child was forced to undergo a pat-down after hugging her, with security agents yelling and calling the crying girl an uncooperative suspect.

The incident has been garnering increasing media and online attention since the child’s mother, Michelle Brademeyer of Montana, detailed the ordeal in a public Facebook post last week. The Transportation Security Administration is defending its agents, despite new procedures aimed at reducing pat-downs of children.

The child’s grandmother, Lori Croft, told The Associated Press that Brademeyer and her daughter, Isabella, initially passed through security at the Wichita airport without incident. The girl then ran over to briefly hug Croft, who was awaiting a pat-down after tripping the alarm, and that’s when TSA agents insisted the girl undergo a physical pat-down.

Isabella had just learned about “stranger danger” at school, her grandmother said, adding that the girl was afraid and unsure about what was going on.

“She started to cry, saying `No I don’t want to,’ and when we tried talking to her she ran,” Croft said. “They yelled, `We are going to shut down the airport if you don’t grab her.’”

But she said the family’s main concern was the lack of understanding from TSA agents that they were dealing with a 4-year-old child, not a terror suspect.

“There was no common sense and there was no compassion,” Croft said. “That was our biggest fault with the whole thing – not that they are following security procedures, because I understand that they have to do that.”

Brademeyer, of Missoula, Mont., wrote a public Facebook post last week about the April 15 incident, claiming TSA treated her daughter “no better than if she had been a terrorist.” The posting was taken down Wednesday. Another post said the family had filed formal complaints with the TSA and the airport.

The TSA released a statement Tuesday saying it explained to the family why additional security procedures were necessary and that agents didn’t suspect or suggest the child was carrying a firearm.

“TSA has reviewed the incident and determined that our officers followed proper screening procedures in conducting a modified pat-down on the child,” the agency said.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., sent out an appeal that questions whether “right-wing reactionaries, through threats and acts of violence, intimidated people with different points of view from expressing their political positions.”

Sanders goes on to cite the death of U.S. District Judge John Roll in last weekend’s shooting spree, which left Giffords, D-Ariz., gravely wounded as examples of such violence. Sanders mentioned in the fundraising letter that his friend Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., had to shut down his congressional office last summer after someone shot a bullet through it.

All I can say is ” What A Douche”. This Loughner fellow was ticked off at Gifford since 2007, way before Palin came on the scene, let’s not shift blame and make crap up. The Targets on the map have been used over and over by both sides of the Aisle for years. But since the liberals felt it was a good reason to take a potshot at Palin they decided to make themselves look like morons.

Senator Sanders definitely takes the 1st Stupid Senator Award of 2011. Do Not Campaign on the misfortunes of others, let these people Mourn in peace. And do not try to use a tragedy like this and Beg for peoples money, and spew filth out of your mouth when in your Begging Letter you are doing the exact same thing that your supposedly so

An American contractor working for a Maryland-based economic development organization called Development Alternatives, Inc has been detained by Cuban Authorities.

Jim Boomgard, DAI’s president and chief executive, said the person arrested is part of a new USAID program intended to “strengthen civil society in support of just and democratic governance in Cuba.”

“Our prime concern is for the safety, well-being, and quick return to the United States of the detained individual,” Boomgard said in a statement. Boomgard said the company is working with the State Department to ensure this is a top priority.

It is not yet known why the contractor was detained. The name of the employee has not been released due to privacy laws.

Sen. Max Baucus, one of the most powerful members of Congress and a key figure in the health overhaul debate, recommended his girlfriend to serve as the U.S. attorney for his home state of Montana, a Baucus spokesman said Saturday.

The disclosure was first made late Friday by Sen. Baucus’s office and came as other media outlets prepared to publish stories on the issue.

Baucus spokesman Tyler Matsdorf said the senator and his girlfriend, Melodee Hanes, began their relationship in mid-2008 after the senator separated from his wife. At the time, Ms. Hanes was serving as the senator’s state office director.

Mr. Matsdorf said the relationship was “in no way” the cause of Sen. Baucus’s recent divorce.

Mr. Matsdorf said Ms. Hanes “began the process of resigning her Senate employment” after she and the senator “realized that their relationship was developing beyond a purely professional nature.” She left the Senate payroll early this year.

As part of the transition, Ms. Hanes, who has extensive experience as a prosecutor, applied for the U.S. attorney post. Ultimately, she was one of three finalists recommended for the job by a third party attorney who was given the job of reviewing candidates for the job. Sen. Baucus recommended her to the Obama administration, “with no ranking or preference,” for the post, along with two other individuals, the spokesman said.

She later withdrew, however. “While her personal relationship with Senator Baucus should in no way be either a qualifier or a disqualifier for the position, during the nomination process and after much reflection, both Senator Baucus and Ms. Hanes agreed that she should withdraw her name from consideration because they wanted to live together in Washington, D.C.,” Mr. Matsdorf said.

Ms. Hanes now works at the Justice Department, and “was awarded the position based solely on her merit,” the spokesman said.

The episode is sure to be an embarrassment for Democrats and will likely prove distracting for Mr. Baucus, as the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee tries to navigate the sweeping health bill through the Senate.

The disclosure is the latest example of a scandal in which a lawmaker’s personal life and public obligations have intersected, following on the heels of revelations involving South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford and Nevada’s Sen. John Ensign.

Wall Street Journal

Most constituents weren’t really concerned or even shocked about Senator John Ensign’s extra-marital affair with Doug Hampton’s wife, Cynthia Hampton. But they do feel there’s a lot more to this story and $96,000 check that was given to Ensign’s former mistress.

Chuck Muth, a Republican turned Independent, has be calling for Ensign’s resignation even prior to the scandal breaking out. He says Doug Hampton’s allegations about the senator helping him find employment raise red flags that could land ensign in hot water.

“It wasn’t whether ensign helped Doug find work. The real question is whether there were violations with his involvement with Hampton on the lobbying side,” Muth added.

Muth insists Ensign has too much baggage and should resign because he’s an added burden to an already fractured and ailing GOP. Political analyst Mike Sahara says Ensign’s career is not entirely over, since the radio interview on Newsradio 840 KXNT did some damage control. And as a political heavy weight his name and presence could still help in next years elections.

“He’s the most senior elected official in the party. No he cant put it behind but has to address it and move forward,” said Sahara. Ensign is not stepping down, but only time will tell if he will be in fact able to redeem himself and be forgiven by his party and the voters.

“One of the things that people forget is, if I resign, we have a second Senate race,” Ensign said Monday

KTNV

Tareq and Michaele Salahi

The Virginia socialites who apparently crashed the White House state dinner last week remained elusive Saturday, as reports surfaced that the aspiring reality-TV stars were trying to sell their story for hundreds of thousands of dollars and CNN said the couple’s upcoming appearance on “Larry King Live” had been cancelled.

The Associated Press reported that Tareq and Michaele Salahi were offering to talk to broadcast networks about their experience and were looking for a payment in the mid-six figures range. The news service attributed the information to a television executive it did not name. According to the report, representatives for the couple contacted networks to urge them to “get their bids in” for an interview.

The New York Times cited television executives making the same claim, also speaking on condition of anonymity. “They are asking for best offers from all the networks,” the newspaper quoted one as saying.

Network news divisions generally do not pay for interviews.

CNN said the couple’s appearance on Monday had been cancelled after producers were told that the Salahis were postponing.

The voicemail box for the couple’s publicist, Mahogany Jones, was full Saturday night, and she did not respond to an e-mail. Their attorney, Paul W. Gardner, did not respond to a phone message.

Meanwhile, no one answered the door Saturday at the couple’s house in Front Royal, Va., where reporters and photographers were staked out at the end of their gravel driveway. A CBS employee folded a handwritten note into the door, promising the couple that they would get a fair hearing of their side of the story if they talked with anchor Katie Couric.

A dog inside the house still barked loudly. A note taped to the front door read: “Hi Dana, Thanks for watching the dog. See you after weekend.”

The Secret Service apologized Friday for the security breach, saying protocols were not followed Tuesday night when the Salahis gained entry to President Obama’s first state dinner. A spokesman for the Secret Service said criminal charges had not been ruled out.

Washington Post

VALLEJO, CA (KGO) — The city of Vallejo may be best known for declaring bankruptcy but now it is in the headlines for comments the mayor made about gays.

“I apologize if my words were offensive, they were not intended to be offensive,” Vallejo Mayor Osby Davis said.

Davis finds himself in the middle of a controversy after an interview published this weekend in the New York Times. The article, titled “Faith and Tolerance Collide in Vallejo,” quotes Davis talking about gay people, saying, “They’re committing sin and that sin will keep them out of heaven.” He also calls Vallejo “a city of God.”

“I’m not going to discuss my faith with anybody anymore,” Davis said Wednesday.

Davis does not deny making the comments, but says they were taken out of context.

Gay Vallejo resident Charles Legalos wants the City Council to censure the mayor and says his apology is an excuse.

“I would like to hear him explain in what context those comments would be appropriate coming from an elected public official,” Legalos said.

Two years ago, Davis won a bitter mayoral race by just two votes in a recount over an openly gay candidate. Members of the gay community say there has been tension since then, but Davis says he has been a consensus builder.

“There’s nothing people can point to in the past two years of my election or course of my campaign that would suggest that I’ve been anything but fair,” Davis said.

Davis feels the controversy is the last thing his city needs. Vallejo is dealing with bankruptcy and tough financial decisions. Father Lou Bordisso, who is openly gay, is organizing a protest against the mayor, saying Davis has violated the separation of church and state.

“I think anyone in political office does not have the right to try to impose their beliefs on the population,” Bordisso said.

The mayor has asked extended an olive branch, asking for a meeting with Bordisso, but that has not yet happened.

“We need to pull in a common direction for the benefit of the city,” Davis said.

ABC LOCAL

Senator Judd Gregg

A U.S. senator said he would seek to block any legislation containing a measure to remove the Federal Reserve’s shield from congressional audits of the central bank’s interest-rate decisions.

The House Financial Services Committee yesterday advanced a proposal requiring audits of the Fed that was introduced by Representative Ron Paul, a Republican from Texas. Senator Judd Gregg, a New Hampshire Republican and Banking Committee member, said in an interview today that the measure “would do fundamental damage to the strength of our financial structure as a nation.”

“I would not vote for any bill and I would filibuster any bill that had this language in it,” Gregg said, referring to the legislative delaying tactic that requires 60 Senate votes to break.

Gregg’s comments indicate that legislation similar to Paul’s bill, which has more than 300 House co-sponsors, would face resistance in the Senate. That would help the Fed, which opposes the bill on the grounds that it could reduce the central bank’s independence in setting interest rates.

California Representative Brad Sherman, the highest ranking Democrat on the House panel to vote for the Paul amendment yesterday, said in an interview that he expected the provisions to be altered “to some degree” as legislation moves through the House and Senate.

‘Terribly Popular’

“If it’s changed a whole lot, could that imperil the bill’s ultimate passage? Yes,” Sherman said. The Paul audit bill won’t be “terribly popular” in the Senate, he said.

Paul, author of a book entitled “End the Fed” that was published this year, said yesterday that provisions in his amendment would limit interference in monetary policy. The measure, co-sponsored by Representative Alan Grayson, a Democrat from Florida, would exclude any unreleased transcripts or minutes of Fed policy meetings. It calls for an audit of the Fed and its 12 regional banks by the Government Accountability Office within a year after enactment.

The committee voted first, 43-26, to substitute Paul’s proposal for a Democratic measure to retain the ban on audits of monetary policy while requiring more limited audits. Fifteen of 42 Democrats joined the unanimous Republicans on the vote. Then, in a voice vote, the committee attached the Paul measure to the broader bill.

Failed to Sway

A call from Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke two days ago failed to sway Representative David Scott, a Democrat from Georgia, who voted in favor of Paul’s measure.

“I said to him that what we’re interested in doing is sending the right signals to Main Street,” Scott said. “The American people are totally dissatisfied with the way the Fed, this administration have so over-handed, disproportionately leaned toward helping the top of the economic stream.”

Representative Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the committee and opposed the Paul measure, said yesterday the issue “may be revisited” when the legislation reaches the House floor.

“It’s going to be seen as weakening the independence of monetary policy with consequent negative implications,” Frank told reporters after the vote. “People are going to be worried about the impact on the dollar, on the interest rate.”

Frank said he expects to finish the legislation in committee on Dec. 1, delaying a vote he had scheduled for yesterday until after lawmakers return from the Thanksgiving holiday. He supported a competing measure from Representative Mel Watt, a North Carolina Democrat, to retain the ban on auditing monetary policy.

Make the Case

“The Fed needs to make the case for policy independence,” said former St. Louis Fed President William Poole, now a senior fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. “The right place for the policy audit” is congressional hearings on monetary policy, not through the GAO, Poole said.

Gregg, 62, who was elected in 1992 and plans to retire from the Senate next year, attributed the Paul legislation’s success to “populist fervor” and lawmakers “pandering” to the public.

If the audit provisions become law, “you will fundamentally harm the stability of the dollar and our ability to fight inflation, because the Fed’s ability to deal with interest rates will be chilled by the fear of congressional oversight,” Gregg said.

BLOOMBERG

The segment clip is part of The Young Turks broadcast. It’s still interesting. Note that the people that say these things never take responsibility for what they say. They always claim, ‘It’s what the Bible or God wants!” Get the fuck out of here with this shit.