Sunday Funnies

"The poor be with ye always"

But that's only because the Xians are greedy, condescending, lacking empathy, and generally acting like massive assholes.

I have been hearing this bastardization of  Mark 14:7 (and Matthew 26:11 and John 12:8) for years as some kind of excuse for refusing to do the proper thing about the poverty-stricken.  Rick Perry recently trotted it out, and that was the straw that broke the camel's back.  For me and for Slacktivist.

The reference there is to a story in the Bible, one repeated in three of the Gospels. Matthew and Mark both tell us the story happened in the house of Simon the Leper. John’s Gospel says it happened in the home of Mary, Martha and Lazarus. But they all agree it happened in Bethany — in the house of the poor. 

[...]

The bit Rick Perry was attempting to quote is from verse 11 there: “For you always have the poor with you,” or, in the King James Version, “ye have the poor always with you,” or in the NIV, “The poor you will always have with you^a.”

People love to quote that bit. Christians especially love to quote that bit — Christians who claim to have read and understood their Bibles.

And, like Rick Perry, they all get it wrong.

Completely and utterly wrong. Backwards wrong. Perversely, cruelly, anti-biblically, priggishly, prickishly, sinfully, hellishly wrong.

Hearing someone say this has made me grit my teeth for years.  Literally.

Almost every time you see someone citing this passage, they’re invoking it the same way Gov. Perry is there — a shrugging acceptance that poverty is just the way it is and that there’s nothing we can do about it.

And that’s not what Jesus was saying at all.

You see that little superscripted “a” at the end of that phrase in the NIV translation? That’s a footnote. Scroll down to the bottom and you’ll see that footnote reads “See Deut. 15:11.”

That’s important. Jesus was quoting from the Torah. And you can’t understand what he said – or what his disciples heard him saying — unless you understand what it is he was quoting.

So let’s do that. Let’s “see Deut. 15:11.” Here it is:

Since there will never cease to be some in need on the earth, I therefore command you, “Open your hand to the poor and needy neighbor in your land.”

Already you can see that Jesus’ statement can’t be made to mean what Rick Perry et. al. are trying to twist it into meaning. The passage Jesus was quoting is not a complacent description, but an if … then statement. “Since … therefore …” Deuteronomy 15:11 says. Jesus only quotes the “since” part because he didn’t need to quote the “therefore” — he knew that his disciples knew the rest of that verse: “I therefore command you, ‘Open your hand to the poor and needy neighbor in your land.’”

That is what “The poor will always be with you” means in the Bible. In Deuteronomy and in Matthew, Mark and John. It means, therefore, we are commanded to open our hands to the poor and needy.

One of my New Year's resolutions is to cease quietly and nicely putting up with bullshit.  I'm getting an early start on keeping fast to that.

And that’s the same message Jesus is delivering to his disciples in all three versions of that Gospel story.

But that’s the exact opposite of what ignorant Christians misquoting Jesus are trying to say when they babble about “the poor will always be with you.” Those Christians are perverting that verse in order to deny all culpability and responsibility for or to the poor.

That’s wrong. That is, according to Moses and to Jesus, evil.

Maybe it's all the Christians who have gone Old Testament on torture lately.  Or who like to blame the unarmed young black victim for being gunned down by police, who consistently avoid being held to account for their crimes.  The Prince of Peace just doesn't seem to be having the greatest influence on his followers lately.

Whether he knows it or not (and he clearly doesn’t know it), this is what Rick Perry is accidentally affirming when he tries to quote that passage from the Gospels. All of this.

Whenever you say “the poor will always be with you,” you are also saying “At the end of every seven years you must cancel debts.”

Whenever you say “the poor will always be with you,” you are also saying “do not be hardhearted or tightfisted.”

Whenever you say “the poor will always be with you,” you are also saying “be careful not to harbor this wicked thought.”

Whenever you say “the poor will always be with you,” you are also saying “do not show ill will toward the needy.”

Whenever you say “the poor will always be with you,” you are also saying “give generously and do so without a grudging heart.”

Whenever you say “the poor will always be with you,” you are also saying “be openhanded toward the poor and needy.”

And if — like Rick Perry or countless other lapdogs for the rich and powerful — you try to say “the poor will always be with you” without also saying all of that, then be warned. Because the poor may then appeal to the Lord against you, and you will be found guilty of sin.

It sure is a fucked-up world we live in when the atheists have to remind the Christianists how they are supposed to fucking live their lives.

The architects of the US torture program

So here's the deal.

There are at least these five things Barack Obama can do to address the national disgrace that the Senate Intelligence Committee's executive summary of the CIA's torture program has revealed.

If he does only the first one -- appoint a special prosecutor -- then that will be a good start.




'With justice for all', it says somewhere.  No one is above the law.

Torture is a war crime under Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and there are no exceptions.  There are specific penalties for those who torture, and for those who conspire to commit torture.

There must be accountability, or else there will certainly be more protests -- and worse -- against those placed in authority for abusing their power, and for those who let the criminals walk free.

The rule of law, or the rule of the lawless.

How much angrier can pro-torture Republicans and conservatives get, after all?  Are they going to march in the streets and protest in favor of hypothermia and forcing people to stand on broken legs?  Carry signs that say "I support rectal feeding"?  Are they going to openly carry their guns to their protests while the police -- not dressed in riot gear, mind you -- look on and grin?

Are they actually going to do anything except what they already do -- screech loudly?

Honestly, maybe we should find out if they will or they won't.  Perhaps a special prosecutor appointed to investigate the allegations of war crimes by George W Bush and Dick Cheney is exactly the thing this country needs at this time.  And then let the chips fall where they may.

If torture has -- astoundingly, I might add -- now become a partisan issue, then take it out of the hands of the partisans and have a non-partisan special prosecutor decide whether crimes should be prosecuted.

Just like Watergate.  Just like Iran-Contra.  And just like the Clinton-Lewinsky matter.

Now would be a great time to clear up this issue once and for all.  Weigh the legal interpretations of John Yoo and David Addington against the international and US laws specifically written to address circumstances like these.  Do it, do it now, and then -- if necessary -- move on to the trial at The Hague, the verdict, and the punishment.

History is judging the United States of America either way.

Update: Juan Cole, and why the Founding Fathers thought that banning torture was fundamental to the US Constitution.  And Antonin Scalia, demonstrating that his "expertise" in interpreting the Constitution is a myth.

It's not Republicans vs. Democrats

Still trying my best to ignore jockeying for 2016, but a few items earned comment.

-- Elizabeth Warren says no, again, to White House draft petitions.  This is just MoveOn.org wasting their time and ours once more.  Their biggest 'get' looks like it's going to be Democracy for America hopping on their bandwagon.  I would simply note that you can find little to no mention of the progressive option who is more serious about (possibly) running, Bernie Sanders, by either MoveOn or DFA.  Obviously they don't think he has a chance, or else they don't like him because he's too old or too socialist.

Speaking of geriatrics, both of these organizations are too old, too tired, and not all that progressive enough any longer to be taken seriously.  Do yourself a favor and stop signing their petitions.  I have unsubscribed myself.

Update III: They are also much too white to be relevant.

-- Rick Perry, on the other hand, doesn't have tens of thousands of signatures beseeching him to run for president, but will of course do so anyway.  Because people expect him to.

"People think we're going to run, and that's not necessarily a bad thing," Perry said in an interview with The Associated Press...

-- Joe Biden "honestly doesn't know yet".

Vice President Biden said Tuesday he’ll make up his mind about whether to run for president “at the end of the spring or early summer.”

"I honest to God haven't made up my mind,” Biden said at a ‘Women Rule’ event hosted by Politico. “I'm confident I'd be in a position to be competitive."

"The one thing that moves me — I think that I have the ability to bring the sides together,” he added.

Biden’s daughter Ashley appeared on stage with him at the event, and called his potential presidential aspirations a “family decision.”

-- Update II: For all you pro-torture Republicans out there, Marco Rubio is your guy.

“We need to have the ability to interrogate people outside the realm of what you do in a criminal justice system,” he says.

Finally, your Oligarch Update from the NYT.

Dozens of the Republican Party’s leading presidential donors and fund-raisers have begun privately discussing how to clear the field for a single establishment candidate to carry the party’s banner in 2016, fearing that a prolonged primary would bolster Hillary Rodham Clinton, the likely Democratic candidate.

The conversations, described in interviews with a variety of the Republican Party’s most sought-after donors, are centered on the three potential candidates who have the largest existing base of major contributors and overlapping ties to the top tier of those who are uncommitted: Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida and Mitt Romney.

All three are believed to be capable of raising the roughly $80 million in candidate and “super PAC” money that many Republican strategists and donors now believe will be required to win their party’s nomination.

But the reality of all three candidates vying for support has dismayed the party’s top donors and “bundlers,” the volunteers who solicit checks from networks of friends and business associates. They fear being split into competing camps and raising hundreds of millions of dollars for a bloody primary that would injure the party’s eventual nominee — or pave the way for a second-tier candidate without enough mainstream appeal to win the general election.

What's wrong with this picture?  A lot, but it's really bad news for the way-too-early frontrunner, Ted Cruz, who already lost the Sheldon Primary.

Robert Reich has the last word.  If the ruling party and the minority party ever snap to being played for suckers, we might make some progress in this nation.  I'm not counting on it.

The biggest political divide in America now and in years to come isn't between the Republican and Democratic parties. It’s between the establishment and the anti-establishment -- between a rich minority of top corporate executives, denizens of Wall Street, and billionaire moguls, all of whom have been fixing the economic and political game for their own benefit, and the vast majority of Americans who, as a result, are in a fix.

Update: Chuck Todd via Egberto Willies explains this as well.

Just another word for nothing left to lose

I'd love to write about something else, like the early bills filed at the Lege or Houston city charter revisions or something similarly compelling, but no.

“What I keep hearing out there is they portray this as a rogue operation, and the agency was way out of bounds and then they lied about it,” (Dick) Cheney said in a telephone interview with the New York Times on Monday. “I think that’s all a bunch of hooey. The program was authorized. The agency did not want to proceed without authorization, and it was also reviewed legally by the Justice Department before they undertook the program.”

That's an admission of guilt to a war crime, as defined by the Geneva Convention accords.

Detainees who were tortured, in turn, provided interrogators with the information they wanted to hear, including fictitious connections between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, which the Bush administration later used to bolster its case for invading Iraq. Those connections proved to be false.

“It is also important to note that some detainees who were subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques attempted to provide false or misleading information,” former CIA Director Leon Panetta wrote in a letter to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in 2011, disputing Bush administration claims that torture helped capture bin Laden. “In the end, no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means.”

Torture did not work, the CIA lied about that, some in the CIA questioned the use of torture and the value of the intelligence it was (not) providing, and were told to shut up and keep doing it.  And the only person in jail at the moment is a former CIA agent who tipped off a reporter about the torturing.

Oh, and the executive director of the ACLU thinks the torturers should all be pardoned.  Which is just the latest, freshest steaming pile of shit for the rest of us to eat, served on a silver platter by the above-and-beyond authorities running things in this so-called free country.

This issue is not separate from the killings by police around the country.  It's just more evidence that America is stuck in a period of lawlessness and brutality that we seem unable to face.  It is endemic in federal agencies, in most if not all law enforcement at Ferguson level right up to 935 Pennsylvania Avenue, and in, of course, Congress -- in Cleveland, West Florissant Avenue, and Staten Island...

Lawlessness is rampant in every level of our justice system, from corrupt local prosecutors to the connection between big money and our highest court.  

Sooo... what do you think the rest of us should do about it?

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance stands with the Garner and Brown families in the quest for equal justice for all as it brings you this week's roundup.

Guest blogger Kris Banks at Off the Kuff provided a visual guide to turnout comparisons in Harris County.

Libby Shaw, writing at Texas Kaos and Daily Kos, believes Greg Abbott's recent lawsuit against the president's action on immigration is not only lame, it is yet one more example of conservative racist disrespect for the duly elected President. Ease up on the hate, please, Governor-elect.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme calls out Republicans for cutting public works while spending money on racist, empty gestures.

Texas atheists are blessed to be able to run for public office in Texas, reports PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.

Neil at All People Have Value said that he is very white, male, and European. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

Texpatriate had some insight into the police abuses in Ferguson, Staten Island, and Jasper, Texas.

Egberto Willies posted the blast NY mayor Bill DeBlasio leveled at Democrats for being spineless.

Texas Leftist had an update on the state's county clerks who are preparing for the eventual gay marriages to be performed in Texas.

======================

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

Grits for Breakfast celebrates a ruling from the Court of Criminal Appeals that allows for a wider use of Texas's so-called "junk science writ".

The Texas Election Law Blog pushes back on the argument that voter ID laws had little effect in 2014.

Socratic Gadfly sheds no tears for the demise of The New Republic.

The Lunch Tray offers thoughts on a national food policy.

Offcite analyzes the case for a swimming hole in Houston.

Texans Together will take a "Texas way" forward on Medicaid expansion if one is there to be taken.

Alan Bean asks what Jesus would do with the current immigration debate.

Raise Your Hand Texas released a report showing how Texas falls short of best practices with its pre-k program.

Texas Clean Air Matters explains the new ozone standard.

Gray Matters bids farewell to Houston Chronicle employees as they prepare to leave their downtown building for the old Houston Post location.

Sunday Funnies

Ra bless Texas!

I'd like to say 'Hail Satan!' just to piss off some Christians, but of course I don't believe he or Hell exists, either.

Texas atheists, breathe a sigh of relief. While it may not be easy for you to be elected to public office here if you fly the banner of secularism, the state Constitution won’t bar you from running.

The issue of religious preference and who is eligible to run for Texas political office was exhumed – again – this week after Austin City Council candidate Laura Pressley distributed a mailer claiming her opponent Gregorio “Greg” Casar was an atheist and therefore legally barred from holding public office in the Lone Star State.

“As someone who’s on record saying he doesn’t believe in God, Casar can’t legally represent North Austin’s District 4 on the City Council,” the Austin American Statesman reported Dec. 1.

Yep, that's what has always discouraged me from running, that's for sure.

Pressley referenced Article 1, Section 4 of the Texas Constitution, which states, “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.” (italics Lauren McGaughey's)

While the article indeed remains on the books in Texas – and several Southern states – it’s been proven time and time again to be in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

“There’s no question is that it is void and unenforceable,” said Keith Werhan, the Ashton Phelps Chair of Constitutional Law at the Tulane University School of Law in New Orleans. University of Houston Professor Brandon Rottinghaus said such provisions provided a “post-reconstruction approach to making sure religion still had a place” in former Confederate states.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution bars such religious litmus for those running for federal office, and the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated such provisions in state Constitutions in 1961. In Texas, the last time the article was discussed in the 1980s between Madalyn Murray O’Hair, a voter, and then-Attorney General Jim Maddox, according to Texas Monthly.

In a federal court agreement, Maddox said the article “is void and of no further effect in that it is in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

Nice to be reminded that if this blogging thing doesn't work out that I can always fall back on a career of public service.

Hail Satan anyway!

Eric Garner joins Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Oscar Grant...

So it seems that even when there is videotape evidence, and even when a large black man cannot be seen as a threat to a police officer because he is on the ground in a chokehold, the grand jury still isn't going to indict the police officer for killing him.

The decision in Staten Island not to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo threatened to add to the tensions that have simmered in the city since the July 17 death of Eric Garner -- a case that sparked outrage and drew comparisons to the fatal police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.

Jonathan Moore, an attorney for Garner's family, said he was told of the grand jury's decision.

"I am actually astonished based on the evidence of the video tape, and the medical examiner, that this grand jury at this time wouldn't indict for anything, is really just astonishing," Moore said.

'Astonishing' might not be the first word on the minds of many others this afternoon.

The grand jury could have considered a range of charges, from murder to a lesser offense such as reckless endangerment.

A video shot by an onlooker and widely viewed on the Internet showed the 43-year-old Garner telling a group of police officers to leave him alone as they tried to arrest him.

Pantaleo responded by wrapping his arm around Garner's neck in an apparent chokehold, which is banned under NYPD policy. The heavyset Garner, who had asthma, was heard repeatedly gasping, "I can't breathe!" A second video surfaced that showed police and paramedics appearing to make no effort to revive Garner while he lay motionless on the ground. He later died at a hospital.

The medical examiner ruled Garner's death a homicide and found that a chokehold contributed to it. A forensic pathologist hired by Garner's family, Dr. Michael Baden, agreed with those findings, saying there was hemorrhaging on Garner's neck indicative of neck compressions.

As usual, the cops are making excuses.

Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer have argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a chokehold, because he was resisting arrest and that Garner's poor health was the main reason he died.

While details on the grand jurors were not disclosed, Staten Island is the most politically conservative of the city's five boroughs and home to many police and firefighters. The panel began hearing evidence in late September, including the video, autopsy results and testimony by Pantaleo.

Same old story, same old result.  A black man is dead under questionable circumstances at the hands of a white cop, and the mostly white criminal justice system failed the black man's family once more.

One more straw on the camel's back.  How many more can it take?

Black lives matter. #EricGarner pic.twitter.com/daGipq6Pbl

— Race Forward (@RaceForward) December 3, 2014

Update: More reactions.

Conservatives ask Rick Perry to halt execution of Scott Panetti

He's running for president, so I kinda doubt he hears this plea.

A group of conservative leaders is mounting a last-minute effort to stop Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) from executing inmate Scott Panetti, arguing that killing "one of the most seriously mentally ill prisoners on death row in the United States" would "undermine the public's faith in a fair and moral justice system."

[...]

Twenty-one conservative leaders have joined with mental health and death penalty reformers in opposing the execution, asking Perry in a recent letter to commute Panetti's sentence to life in prison. Signatories included former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, conservative activist Brent Bozell and former presidential candidate Gary Bauer.

[...]

(Yesterday) the (Texas Pardons and Parole) board unanimously voted against delaying Panetti's execution for 180 days and recommending to Perry that his sentence be commuted.

Perry's office did not immediately return a request for comment on whether the governor agreed with the board's decision or on whether he was considering a 30-day stay.

More than 93,000 people have signed an online petition asking Perry to grant Panetti clemency. He also has the support of his ex-wife and former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

Abby Johnson, an anti-abortion activist, wrote in a recent Dallas Morning News op-ed that opposing Panetti's execution is a pro-life position.

"A fundamental tenet of the pro-life ethic is that all life has value and we are called to protect it, especially in its most vulnerable forms. A culture of life recognizes the value of those who are vulnerable and prioritizes safeguarding them," she wrote.

"By setting an execution date for Panetti, Texas is going entirely contrary to what we expect in a society that truly values life," Johnson added. "This proposed execution shows a troubling disregard toward the reality of mental illness and protecting those who suffer from it."

Mother Jones reporter Stephanie Mencimer noted that it's "unusual for conservative Christians to support a clemency petition like Panetti's."

If there was ever a time that the governor would be able to demonstrate some human qualities -- i.e., compassion, forgiveness, a conscience perhaps -- now is his chance.  But he's running for president, and Bill Clinton failed to take the right path at this crossroads in 1992, so I'm not expecting Rick Perry to do anything differently.

Update (12/3): Of course I wasn't expecting the Fifth Circuit to do anything at all, but they did. Here's Wonkette with the snark.

In a fit of temporary sanity, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a stay of execution for Scott Panetti... 

 

[...]

Now that the 5th Circuit has stepped in, Perry can continue to be silent on Panetti and keep hoping that taking a position one way or the other won’t hurt him with 2016 Republican primary voters. (We are joking, of course — Perry’s chances would only be hurt if he backed off from executing anyone, ever.)

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance has awakened from its Thanksgiving food coma long enough to bring you this week's roundup.  Now back to the turkey sandwiches, turkey casseroles, turkey enchiladas, etc.

Off the Kuff is cheering for the Texas same-sex marriage plaintiffs as they move for the stay of the ruling that threw out the ban on same-sex nuptials to be lifted.

Libby Shaw, of Texas Kaos and Daily Kos, is taking a few days off to spend quality time with family. I hope all of our readers had a wonderful Thanksgiving holiday.

Some helpful tips to avoid looking like a jackass with respect to the events in Ferguson, Missouri this past week were offered by PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme disagrees with the GOP view that only rich, white, old men should vote.

Neil at All People Have Value attended the Michael Brown protest march in Houston this past week. The work of freedom is always up to each of us. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

The controversial decision in Ferguson sent shockwaves across the country, with many communities immediately engaging in protests. But as Texas Leftist discovered, the Houston protests may yield some substantive progress in the quest to outfit officers with body cameras. Plus, a new video highlight's HPD's work to tackle homelessness.

Texpatriate runs down some of the propsed changes to Houston's city charter.

Bay Area Houston wonders (not really) why we have race problems in America.

Dos Centavos published the entire fact sheet on the president's immigration executive action.

Bluedaze aggregated several days' worth of fracking bad news.

===================

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

The Rivard Report, with a clear view of what "bipartisanship" means these days, reminds us that it only takes a few generations to go from immigrant to hypocrite.

Trail Blazers discovers a blast from the Tom DeLay past, John Colyandro, among the advisers to Greg Abbott.

Socratic Gadfly calls out NY Sen. Chuck Schumer for his backbiting on Obamacare.

The Texas Observer has the story of the Terrell State Hospital's terrible conditions, and the state's even worse response to them: privatize it, using a company with a bad reputation.

Lone Star Ma has had it with the textbook adoption process.

Grits for Breakfast questions Republican funny math on border security funding.

Texans Together discusses hardship exemptions for the Affordable Care Act.

LGBTQ Insider explains another acronym for the spectrum.

And Fascist Dyke Motors relates her personal Twitter troll horror story.

Sunday Funnies