Disqus - Latest Comments for bjohnm

Re: Bill Donohue: Catholic Church's gay lobby 'needs to be rooted out' - Good As You:: Gay and Lesbian Activism With a Sense of Humor

John Masters — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:18:31 -0000

Uh Jeremy, you're clearly not paying attention. Of course the gay lobby at the Vatican must be rooted out precisely because of their apparent success at convincing so many Catholic faithful it's OK. Duh.

I mean we can't have any of that "love thy neighbor" crap you know.

Re: Joe. My. God.: Glenn Beck: My Whistleblower Will Bring Down The Government Tomorrow

John Masters — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:35:28 -0000

I was sort of thinking the same thing. I don't remember the timing of the last one/s, but the timing of this big revelation is interesting, coming at a time when someone else is getting all the media attention.

Re: Photo: What is NOM's 'Supreme Court Plan'? - Good As You:: Gay and Lesbian Activism With a Sense of Humor

John Masters — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:30:12 -0000

I think, whether we win the narrowist of victories or the whole hog, NOM will simultaneously claim victory, and that they need more money for the battles to come, as this fight is not over.

The bigger our victory, the more money they will ask for, because at that point a federal marriage amendment is about all they would have going for them. (So Brian could be praying for a big win for gay rights when he's home in his closet.) If they have to "resort to" a supposed campaign for a federal marriage amendment, it really plays into a huge money beg for them. They'll have to raise money to advance it on a federal level, and then don't forget that would have to be voted on in every state...lots of fundraising would be required, and lots of frequent flier miles for Brian and Little Tommie Peters

Re: NC wrestler gets warning for prayer before match

John Masters — Fri, 15 Feb 2013 16:32:21 -0000

See, seriously, that's just stupid. The Ref is most likely Christian. First off, once you step on the mat, you're supposed to be ready to go. The Ref would not have even noticed a kid bowing his head for 2 seconds, so it wasn't a 2 second prayer. The kid new he had a match coming up. Pray if you want, but you do it prior to stepping on the mat for your scheduled match.

Re: Joe. My. God.: NOM Reacts To SCOTUS Loss

John Masters — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 16:38:08 -0000

I'm not sure...they may be deciding the costs are getting a bit high, and their supporters may already be running for the hills, cutting back on contributions until this is settled. So, maybe, just maybe they've decided they're going to have to abide by the law. I'm sure I'm being overly optimistic, but one can hope.

Re: Democrats call for review of Federal Reserve

John Masters — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:05:39 -0000

The minute the Fed started giving away taxpayer money they became a political entity, and as such, should operate in the open. An audit is completely appropriate and necessary.

And any person in government or the banking industry that fights against clearly has something to hide. If everything done by the Fed was appropriate, why would they not INVITE an audit.

Any other position by them should be regarded as extremely suspicious.

Re: DNC Treasurer blames Aravosis for gay community anger at DNC/Obama

John Masters — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 11:23:27 -0000

Let me be clear about two things.

1. Of course John is contributing to a riff between Gays and Democrats. He happens to contribute to a widely read blog, and has frequently pointed out the "going ons" at the White House and in Congress. But if it weren't him, it would be someone else, because these things are going on...so Andy, "man-up" and fix the Democratic Party instead of running around and whining.

2. Aravosis and this blog are not my only sources of news and information. I appreciate the information they provide, but I don't base how I feel and who/what I support on just what I find here. Mr. Tobias, I am feeling sold-out by the Democrats, and it has nothing to do with John Aravosis, and everything to do with how they have been behaving over the past two years...and not just on the Gay issues either. Tell your buddies in the party to start acting on the progressive agenda we all voted in favor of...then you won't have a "gay problem."

Re: Barney Frank says votes yes on gay rights is a bad thing if you want to get re-elected

John Masters — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:22:41 -0000

I don't like the stuff Frank is pulling, but the unfortunate reality is that there is some truth to what he says. You see, most of the people on this forum understand things like "facts." We are smart enough to know that repeal of DOMA will not "export" gay marriage. But the ugly truth is that the left-wing hate machine will be able to spin up their side with claims that it will...and those folks are certainly not known for holding facts and the truth in very high regard, and their followers are just to lazy to bother with the truth. It's too easy to hear what they want to hear, especially when it gives them someone to blame all their troubles on. (Oh for the days of dirty commie Russians, when Jessie Helms had them to blame for all our ills.)

So, members who vote for DOMA will most likely lose some votes over it. Not pleasant but true.

Re: A reader writes about his health care experience with Blue Cross

John Masters — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 14:18:24 -0000

I guess one of the differences between liberals and the raving lunatics on the right is that most of us liberals are willing to listen. That said rayso, if that is what the coops that result from this bill look like, I would be OK with them. If they are going to be run by contracted insurance companies (which I have seen in some others), then I would be opposed. Of course, if the system were built such that I actually have a choice, I could opt away from the coops that are insurance company managed.

So don't take my comment to mean that I think coops are, by definition, bad (and I can see how you might think that from my comment). I can already see a bunch of insurance company executives getting market research briefings on how they can make money by contracting out their services to run these coops...and rubbing their greedy little hands together and chuckling about all the money can make off that scam.

But how about one big giant national coop (operating exactly as you describe above)? And then let the insurance companies compete against that. Now that I could definitely go for.

Re: A reader writes about his health care experience with Blue Cross

John Masters — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:03:53 -0000

There's a good message in here too for those that think these proposed co-ops will be a good compromise. Make no mistake that the co-ops will contract with the insurance companies for the "management/administration" of these plans. The insurance are fine with this, since they'll be taking admin fees off the top...without any risk whatsoever. And by supporting them, they look like maybe they are not such bad guys after all.

T'ain't so, and we'd better not let co-ops be the final compromise, as it's just more of the same.

Re: Mary Cheney gives $1,000 to anti-gay Senate candidate

John Masters — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:00:52 -0000

Fritzrth has it right...she knows that she has hers, so what does she care about the rest of us? The apple doesn't fall far.

Re: Debunking more FOX-fed lies about health care

John Masters — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:13:15 -0000

Oh, and some guy "uncovered it," but it's up on the VA's website, and given to 24 million veterans....but some guy "uncovered it."

Re: Debunking more FOX-fed lies about health care

John Masters — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:09:05 -0000

So, "it's given to all 24 million veterans," but it's something no one has ever heard of.

Re: New Obama legal brief changes tune on DOMA, kind of

John Masters — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:40:26 -0000

As bad as some of the arguments were in the previous brief, I continue to take greatest umbrage at, "a legitimate government interest in maintaining the status quo regarding the distribution of federal benefits."

To me, this makes the case precisely as to why the law must be overturned. The DOJ is clearly claiming that gay people don't deserve the same federal benefits as straight people. In my mind (and I'm no Constitutional Scholar), that is the very definition of unconstitutional, but hey, what do I know, I'm not a mormon working at DOJ...you know, the people that experts on equal rights and marriage. I guess when one can have as many marriages as one wants, it does qualify you as an expert.

Re: White House willing to drop public option, say Sebelius and Gibbs

John Masters — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:01:34 -0000

Actually Chris from Maine, the problem is that Democrats have been playing Chess, trying to explain the intricacies of the reform, while the republicans have just been jumping pieces on the checker board. The problem is, more Americans understand checkers than chess, and the republicans have learned how to capitalize on that.

And the Democrats have no spine.

Re: Bill O'Reilly says he has "a measure of respect" for Obama

John Masters — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 10:56:33 -0000

Make no mistake. Bill O'Reilly is in it for the money. He sees which way the wind is blowing, and doesn't want to be totally discredited once the election is over.

Re: McCain rally: Liberals hate America

John Masters — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:49:35 -0000

My letter to Robin Hayes

Representative Robin Hayes
United States House of Representatives
130 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Congressman Hayes:

While I no longer live in North Carolina I was born and raised there, and am proud of that heritage. My mother and siblings still live there, and I love returning home. However, the hatred I have heard you spew recently at a political rally has tarnished my home state, and is an insult to Tarheels everywhere.

You stated, “Folks, there’s a real America. Liberals hate real Americans that work and achieve and believe in God.” And then you made it all the worse by lying about making the comment. Do you not know that most political rallies get recorded?

Let me be clear about this. I am not ashamed to wear the designation of “liberal.” Quite frankly, most of the best things America has accomplished have been “liberal” programs. As a member of the Republican Party, you sir have no moral authority to question the patriotism, hard work and beliefs of any other American.

I have worked hard and accomplished much. While in North Carolina I served on two legislatively mandated committees and provided testimony on the public records law to the North Carolina Legislature. I have volunteered extensively for several AIDS support groups in North Carolina, and volunteered regularly at the homeless shelter in Winston-Salem. I have received the highest awards of my industry. I have a home, a job, friends and family. I am a life-long active Methodist who believes in God, and I believe in the New Testament message of loving all people…not spreading hate and fomenting divisiveness. I even teach Sunday School, but I’ll bet you rarely even attend church.

Mr. Hayes, you are in no position make a judgment about my character, and I resent the aspersions you have cast on over half the people in this country. I for one have had enough, and I demand that you issue a public apology and resign immediately from the United States House of Representatives. This great country can no longer survive if it continues to aid and abet people such as you.

If you so love God, then I call to your attention his words in Micah 6:8, “He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.” I call on you to live by these words. You, Mr. Hayes, have disparaged people you do not know, and then lied about it. You no longer have the moral authority to be a leader in this Country.

Re: Bush approves tranistion planning. It's almost over.

John Masters — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:52:25 -0000

Polly, I have the same fear you have. There are a lot of skeletons in the cloests at the White House now, and they may not want someone else sniffing around. Dick Cheney just scares the bejesus out of me, and I just can't see him going quietly.

Someone once postulated that Bush may already have signed pardons for all the neocons, Cheney, and even himself. They'll just meet the night before the innaguration, smoke a cigar and have a brandy and pass them out.

If they don't do that, while I hate appearing to have on the tinfoil hat, I think anything is possible from this bunch.

Re: Palin’s Fake Quote

John Masters — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:10:02 -0000

James Madison, “The father of the Constitution,” opposed all use of “religion as an engine of civil policy.” He even opposed the appointment of Chaplains for the Congress. In 1789, as Chairman of the House Conference Committee on the Bill of Rights, he offered his own wording for the First Amendment:

“The civil right of none shall be infringed on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal right of conscience be in any manner , or on any pretext, infringed.”

I can go on and on about the dangers of mixing government and religion, but as is often the case, Jefferson himself sums it up best when he writes, In 1814 to Horatio Spafford, “In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own.”

Re: Palin’s Fake Quote

John Masters — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:07:34 -0000

Thomas Jefferson wrote to Dr. Thomas Cooper in 1814, “Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of common law.”

It also important to point out the language of “The Treaty of Tripoli, initiated by George Washington during his Presidency and later signed into law by John Adams in May of 1797.

The Treaty reads (complete with eighteenth-century spellings of the words Muslims and Mohammedan):

Article 11.

As the government of the United States of American is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, as it has in itself not character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Messelmen, and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Thomas Jefferson worked vigorously to oppose efforts by Patrick Henry to establish a theocratic government in Virginia. In “Notes on The State of Virginia,” Jefferson writes: “It does me no injury for my neighbors to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” Jefferson often issued stern warnings about the intertwining of government and religion. He writes in 1813, “History I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.”

Re: Legal ≠ Ethical: Lessons about Church Behavior from the Civil Rights Movement

John Masters — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:18:50 -0000

I don't want to over-simplify, but I was once told that ethics are what pass the front page test. It may be legal, it may not even violate a rule or regulation, but would you want your mother to see it on the front page of the newspaper. If not, it's most likely not ethical.

Also Bill, I think that unfortunately many people have become intellectually lazy. It's why politicians can get away with such superficial and dishonest campaigns, so long as they feed people the correct sound bites. It's true in religion as well. We want our religion and theology spoon fed to us by the preacher/pastor/rabbi. We don't want to have to think about it, just tell us what we're supposed to think...not how to think.

That's what worries me. We've become segmented in almost every aspect of our lives, and we just want to find the right collection of talking heads (which also includes clergy) who feed us what we want to hear.

I approached one minister (a friend at a church not my own) about using a study I'd prepared on the Social Principles of the Methodist Church. Now mind you, it's my belief that it is the Social Principles which make Methodists Methodist. Our theology is not so greatly different from a number of other protestant religions, but certainly those Social Principles set us apart. Yet he was concerned about having this study because a discussion of the Social Principles can get controversial...and we certainly can't have an open discussion on some things...can we? We can't challenge parishoners in the pews. They'll go somewhere else, "Where the living is easy."

Re: The Emperor's Stunning Clothes: Free Speech as Lifeblood of Democracy

John Masters — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:05:10 -0000

And let us not forget that George Bush has actually stated that he believed he was ordained by God to be President. He's made the statement publicaly. You certainly, as you often do Bill, hit the nail on the head.

Re: McCain stages photo op with pregnant teen's unwed boyfriend

John Masters — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 18:03:24 -0000

fredndallas, you are correct in your assessment of how the evangelicals will take this. Also, I believe the McCain camp is keeping this alive. Let me try to explain. The conversation goes on and on in the media. It doesn't matter if the Obama campaign and the other Dems are discussing it or not. The extreme right, remember, believes that all MSM is just a mouthpiece of the democratic party. (We may know better, but they are convinced of it.) So, the more the MSM talks about it, the more it looks as if the Dems are attacking this simple small town family who had something unfortunate happen (like any family might), and "isn't it just disgusting the way the MSM and the Dems won't let go of this, and leave these children alone." Don't think for a minute that some of the krazy kristian kooks aren't following that line of thought, and the Repubs are experts at controlling the message in that way.

So, I believe the McCain people are making a big thing of it in fact, while saying it's a topic that's off limits. Others on here also note that it is a distraction from the real issues of Palin's qualifications, and McCain's idiocy. This helps with that...right now, the Repubs are running two lines of talking points to quash any opposition to Palin:

1. Since she's a woman, anything negative you might say about her is an insult to all women.

2. Anyone who makes any critical comment has the Repub on the panel immediately bring up the preganancy issue (whether that was the topic or not), in such as a way as to say..."why do you keep bringing that up. What a great thing that the family is stickng together through all this, and Bristol is doing the right thing by keeping the baby, and I just don't understand why you keep criticising this family."

My recommendation is that not one single Democratic operative should even participate in a discussion that involves teen pregnancy right now. We all need to completely shut up so that the MSM runs out of foils to run the story against. Then it will die slowly...but the Repubs will try to keep it going for a while. It's a great tool for them. (A tool for the tools.)

Re: Steny Hoyer cut a bad FISA deal with immunity for telecoms on FISA and expects House Dems. to support it. They should oppose it.

John Masters — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:27:15 -0000

I hate to pull out my tin foil hat this late in the day, but this just seems strange to me. The Republicans couldn't get an immunity bill to pass, and all of a sudden the Democrats are passing it. Makes me wonder...is it at all possible that maybe the Administration was listening in on some Democratic Congressional conversations, and got some dirt? Just wondering....

Re: Clinton spokesman outright lies about Hillary telling O'Reilly "Rich people...God bless us." It's bizarre.

John Masters — Fri, 02 May 2008 10:07:42 -0000

Once again, much ado about nothing. We try to take every single phrase every candidates utters, and analyze it to death. I've decided to support Obama, but give it a rest. She was simply making the point that wealthy people were very lucky. To me, it came across as clearly acknowledging that she realizes she's been lucky/blessed to get where she is.

This forum frequently attacks the MSM for focusing on BS that has little to with the substance of running a country, and now we're falling into the trap. For crying out loud, raise the level of debate here from something below the sub-basement. What did she say about actual issues? Did anyone bother to make note of that...or are we just gonna be an echo chamber for Faux News glomming onto this one little phrase?