RNC Wants First Amendment Defense Act Passed

So despite the appearance of protections for individuals and businesses, the RNC is openly endorsing discrimination against people who are LGBTQ. According to the text provide by The Daily Signal,the resolution claims it aims to "protect the rights of believers to equal treatment by the government of The United States of America":

Resolution in Support of The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Whereas, The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was written to prohibit the federal government from taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction; including that: (1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage;

Whereas, The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution should therefore protect Americans from the action of a narrow 5 to 4 majority of the Supreme Court who have upheld gay marriage without regard to the democratic rights of the people or the states, and without any religious liberty protections;

Whereas, The Chief Justice of the United States, John Roberts, has pointed to the serious religious liberty consequences that may stem from the decision: “Today’s decision … creates serious doubts about religious liberty . . . Indeed the Solicitor General candidly acknowledged that the tax exemptions of some religious organizations would be in question if they opposed gay marriage;”

Whereas, Many Americans, including Melissa Klein, Kelvin Cochran, Baronelle Stutzman, Angela McCaskill, Brendan Eich, Frank Turek, Scott McAdams, Tom Emmer, Jack Phillips, Elaine Huguenin, Betty and Richard Odgaard, Cynthia and Robert Gifford are losing their livelihoods or are being disciplined for courageously dissenting from gay marriage orthodoxy;

Whereas, Many on the Left exhibit an intensifying hatred and intolerance for gay marriage dissenters; and

Whereas, Religious schools, colleges and universities, and other charities, could lose their First Amendment rights and their right to equal access to government benefits, including 501(c)3 status, student aid, and government contracts; therefore be it

Resolved, The Republican National Committee urges Congress to pass and the President to sign The First Amendment Defense Act to protect the rights of believers to equal treatment by the government of The United States of America.

An issue, that ThinkProgress notes as well,

Ellen Barrosse, RNC chair of the Conservative Steering Committee, told The Daily Signal that neither the resolution nor the bill have anything to do with discrimination, but are instead “an attempt, for those of us who are people of faith, to protect religious organizations.” She offered the following example: “Does Catholic Charities have to place children with gay couples, or will they have to shut down? This is a free market, there are other agencies that will place children with them.”

Barrosse neglected to point out that every time Catholic Charities faced this conflict, it was because the organization believed it was entitled to continue receiving state funding while discriminating against couples the state recognized as married. In each case that Catholic Charities shut down adoption services, it was a voluntary decision made because it refused to operate without state funding.

The RNC resolution specifically references multiple cases when private business owners have faced legal consequences for refusing to serve to same-sex couples in violation of nondiscrimination laws. It also mentions several individuals who faced public scrutiny for their anti-gay views, suggesting that all of these people are victims of “intensifying hatred and intolerance”,,,

RNC Wants First Amendment Defense Act Passed

Two senators block Franken's mental health bill | Star Tribune

So let me get this straight. Since, Newtown, in order to deflect from discussing enhanced background checks, the gun lobby (for lack of better term) screamed about the laxity in measures that enabled mentally unstable persons to obtain firearms. Now when something is offered to help remedy that situation, they say NO!! Why would anyone block a mental health bill that has support from both parties and law enforcement?

Legislation that would strengthen mental health ­programs across the country is being blocked by two senators who believe that states should govern how mentally ill people are treated, said Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., a chief co-sponsor of the bill.

Franken, who has made mental health legislation a centerpiece of his Senate work, declined to identify the reluctant senators, saying that the lawmakers are being heavily lobbied behind the scenes to move aside so the bill with bipartisan support can get a floor vote.

“There is pressure from law enforcement groups and attorneys from within his state for him to not block the bill,” Franken said of one of the ­senators during an interview earlier this week. “I think we’ll get there, but right now there is a hold on the bill.”

The two lawmakers who oppose the legislation are Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, according to two sources who spoke to the Star Tribune on condition of anonymity. Coburn, a physician, is often referred to as “Dr. No” by observers in Washington because he frequently votes against bills he views as unconstitutional.

Two senators block Franken's mental health bill | Star Tribune

See also: Sen. Franken drops Justice and Mental Collaboration Act legislation

The Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Act would improve outcomes for the criminal justice system, the mental health system, and for those with mental health conditions by doing the following, among other things:

• extending the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act (MIOTCRA) for five years, thus continuing support for mental health courts and crisis intervention teams;
• authorizing investments in veterans treatment courts, which serve arrested veterans who suffer from PTSD, substance addiction, and other mental health conditions;
• increasing focus on corrections-based programs, such as transitional services that reduce recidivism rates and screening practices that identify inmates with mental health conditions; and
• supporting the development of curricula for police academies and orientations.

Million Vet March and Conservative Astroturfing | AllPolytics Now

It seems I am not the only one who thinks this so-called "co-opting" of the Million Vet March was a staged GOPT event to target the President. AllPolytics Now has gone a bit deeper into tracing SOS's agenda and some of the money better than I was able too,,,

When you go down the rabbit hole of SOS, you find out interesting things, like who they’re actually raising money for. The vast majority of the money SOS takes in goes to two groups: DB Capitol Strategies and Political Media, Inc.

DB Capitol Strategies’ lead attorney is Dan Backer. Backer is also the treasurer for a number of political organizations, such as National Defense PAC, One Nation PAC, Combat Veterans for Congress PAC, and TheTeaParty.net. Backer and DB Capitol Strategies were instrumental in the creation of Super PACs and they are pushing for the elimination of campaign contribution limits. Political Media, Inc is a Republican media firm. Its president is none other than Larry Ward.

Million Vet March and Conservative Astroturfing | AllPolytics Now

There are two sides to every story,,,

and no matter how the Reich wants to spin it, the co-opting of the Million Vet March by the likes of Palin, Cruz and Lee for political and personal gain was disgusting.

After promising she would attend the "Million Vet March," former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin went to the World War II Memorial in Washington, D.C. on Sunday—along with Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Ted Cruz (R-TX)—to support thousands of veterans demanding that President Barack Obama re-open the memorials that have been barricaded due to the government shutdown.

At the World War II Memorial, Palin said that Obama is showing a "shameful lack of respect" and a "lack of valor" by barricading the memorials to veterans from across the country that marched in Washington to demand that Congress pass a law making it illegal for the federal government to close the memorials in future government shutdowns. They reportedly chanted, "tear down these walls."

"We were proud to stand with thousands of America's vets and other patriotic Americans today in Washington, D.C. This morning, Todd and I met with Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, and they joined us and other Americans at the World War II Memorial and then at the Lincoln Memorial, where we were met by a SWAT team in full riot gear!" Palin wrote in a Facebook post. "Watching those who have fought to protect freedom prevented by barricades from visiting these memorials to freedom was truly heart wrenching." (Source)

What I find so appalling is that these three Teatards ignored the guidelines of the organizers of this event proving that their ideology is/was more important than the stated purpose of the group.

We are a group of 5 military brats that decided to take action. We have been close friends for over a quarter of a century. We are Democrats, Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans and Libertarians. We support and love our Veterans. We all had someone that was a Veteran in our family. Some of our families Veterans paid the ultimate sacrifice for the freedom of others.

To deny access to Veterans or ANY American the freedom of access to the memorials so diligently earned is not only distasteful but a slap to every Veteran around the world of any country that fought for their cause of freedom. These are solemn places of gathering for those who have lived to remember those that paid the ultimate sacrifice. This is in no way different than denying a family access to their child’s grave. The actions by the U.S. government last week were despicable. The actions cast Veterans as simple pawns in a game of political chess. We will not stand for it. This is why we march on Washington DC, across the United States and online on Sunday October 13th; to bring awareness to the plight of every American that wishes to remember the sacrifices so gallantly paid, unrestricted by the games that our government wishes to play.

[,,,] As far as the events, we ask that this not become a political protest. Whatever your feelings about Congress or the Administration; these events are not the place and time for that. It is to show up in support and show our government that the American people will not stand for the behavior shown to our American Veterans. We will have our say in Congress. We need your support to show our government that we, as Americans, support our Veterans and that we would like a bill introduced and a law passed so that this will never happen again. If you don’t agree with our positions, then we may not be the group for you.

Whether you agree or disagree with the groups stated purpose is moot, but turning this event into a "hatefest" against President Obama is just plain wrong.  I highly doubt it was the WWII vets who where vandalizing the memorials, piling high barricades and trampling on history.  As John Aravosis at AmericaBlog writes, some protestors called the Park Police “brownshirts,” and claimed they looked “like something out of Kenya."  Do you honestly think that was coming out of the mouths of the veterans this event was supposed to support?

Wow. I’ve been to many a protest at the White House, and I’ve never seen people belittle the police like the Sarah Palin / Ted Cruz Tea Party protesters did today. There’s video, and it’s awful.

Calling the police protecting the White House “brownshirts,” laughing at them, and then one guy says “looks like something out of Kenya.”

The fanciful notion that President Obama was born in Kenya – he was in fact born in Hawaii – is a common racist slur that Tea Party adherents and other conservative Republicans use against the President.

And can someone explain what possible purpose the Confederate flag serves if not to incite hatred?

(Photo taken from:  http://americablog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/palin-cruz-wwii-march-confed-flag.jpg)

What I find a bit ironic in all this, originally my sympathies were for the Vets and organizers of this event, BUT, in the course of pulling this post together I came across some interesting information.  Bare with me for a moment,,,

1]  Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee AND Larry Klayman of Freedoms Watch fame (you know the crazy dude who is going to try and force President Obama out of office on November 16th) all converge on this event.

2] Prior to October 3rd, Brats for Veterans Advocacy had no Facebook presence; their homepage was then added on October 5th.  So how does one organize such an event in 9 days time?  And what do they mean by "new site?"

3]  Who is Special Operations Speaks Political Director Larry Ward and why is he referred to and/or considered an organizer?

“We had to stare down the president,” Larry Ward told WND,,,

Santilli contacted Larry Ward, a former Special Forces member of the military, to pledge the trucker support for the veterans on the Million Veteran March to the war memorial. His group is called Special Operations Speaks

Special Operations Speaks is also lashing out at CNN for what it considers

4]  Why are/were numerous news sites and bloggers pointing to this site as an organizer and promoter of this event with attention paid to Special Operations Speaks as a sponsor?

This statement now is beginning to sound very hollow:

The political agenda put forth by a local organizer in Washington DC was not in alignment with our message. We feel disheartened that some would seek to hijack the narrative for political gain. The core principle is about all Americans honoring Veterans in a peaceful and apolitical manner.

5]  What then is SOS's schtick? Justice for Benghazi,,

6]  So far, we have four Reich Wing loons "co-opting" an event allegedly formulated by a group who didn't exist in the cyber-world prior to October 3rd.  Various news and bloggers sites then attribute the event to possibly another group (VetMarch.com) who is sponsored by a third group (SOS) that thinks the aftermath of Benghazi is being covered-up. (Wondering where Michele Bachmann was as this is right up her alley?).  The kicker up to this point, this Benghazi group is founded by Larry Bailey, a birther who believes that President Obama was not born in the United States:

"I have to admit that I'm a Birther," said SOS founder Larry Bailey, a retired 27-year veteran of the Navy SEALs, in an interview. "If there were a jury of 12 good men and women and the evidence were placed before them, there would be absolutely no question Barack Obama was not born where he said he was and is not who he says he is."

7]  Special Operations Speaks is a PAC created, in 2012.  It's "mission" do unto President Obama as we did unto John Kerry; Bailey was part of the Navy Swift Boat campaign in 2004.  Although they failed in getting Romney elected, they are still floating around exploiting other events they can latch on to.

8]  Way down on the bottom of SOS's welcome page is a tiny banner for Political Media, Inc..  I just had to check it out: Political Media, Inc. is a Republican New Media consulting firm,,,and look who the president of the company is, none other than Larry Ward

So we have a non-existent group,  Brats for Veterans Advocacy, that popped up from nowhere.  Only name attached to the group is Larry Ward who happens to be the Political Director of Special Operations Speaks and a Republican media consultant.  Ward then finds a right-wing issue and convinces a couple of other people to put their names to it and solicit donations from the public.  SOS then pays Political Media, Inc creating revenue for Ward.  Pretty slick if you think about it, only problem is Ward didn't figure in the four camera whores.

Or did he?

So no I have no sympathy left for the organizer(s) just the veterans that where taken advantage of.