Seven Republicans Tell Furloughed Workers To F**k Off

Our new Democratic-controlled House of Representatives recently passed a bill to make sure the approximately 800,000 federal employees out of work because the President is a narcissistic infant will get back pay for the shutdown.

In fact, 411 House members voted for the bill, passing it with overwhelming bipartisan support. Well, except for seven House Republicans  disagreed. And heeeeere they are ….

Justin Amash of Michigan

Andy Biggs of Arizona

Paul Gosar, also of Arizona

Glenn Grothman of Wisconsin

Thomas Massie of Kentucky

Chip Roy of Texas

Ted Yoho of Florida.

The only ones to vote No, while they sit back and collect their annual salary of at least $174,000. And Glenn Grothmanexplains it like this:

“We can work out something, for some sort of compensation, but to get paid full pay for maybe three or four months when you’re not working? That’s why we’re $22 trillion in debt. These people around here can’t say no to anything.”

Um, except, asshat, they aren’t asking for time off; they were forced to either leave their jobs, or stay and work their jobs without pay, because of your President; and yet you want to punish them?

Let’s look at the numbers … all  federal employee compensation, including money for pensions and healthcare packages, is around $200 billion. Whoosh, that sounds like a lot, but when you compare it to the GOP Tax Scam, which are racking up costs of about $150 billion a year , or the $21 trillion the Pentagon lost track of between 1998 and 2015, $200 billion in federal employee compensation is just pennies.

But, hey, who cares that those federal air traffic controllers received checks for $0.00 while they are still working; and who cares if there is no back pay guaranteed for the thousands of federal contractors who are not on a W-2 arrangement with the federal government. And who cares that forcing people to work without pay is basically slavery. And who cares that members of Congress members have these perks allotted to them, year-round, government shutdown or not:

Congress members get annual allowances averaging $1.27 to staff and manage their offices almost entirely as they see fit, as well as for travel and other expenses.

Congress members work as average of 138 legislative days each year—roughly four-and-a-half months.

Congress members are required to purchase health insurance via an Affordable Care Act exchange, but they receive a federal subsidy amounting to 72% of their premiums.

Congress members, depending on age and length of service, receive a lifelong pension of 80% of their salary.

Congress members who die in office have seen to it that their families receive a payout equal to a year's salary $174,000[ of note, there is a one-time $100,000 death gratuity for families of military personnel killed in action.

Congress members have access to free, reserved parking spots at DC-area airports, a dedicated congressional call desk with major airlines and the ability to reserve seats on multiple flights but only pay for the flight boarded.

Congress members, upon leaving office, receive lifetime benefits such as use of the taxpayer-funded gym at the Capitol, access to the House and Senate floors, parking in House lots, and the ability to dine in the House and Senate dining rooms.

So why should they care if government employees aren’t getting paid, and will receive no back pay?

GritPost

Axios

I Didn't Say It........

Justin Amash, the only Republican congressman to vote against yesterday's bill, which passed 396-9:
"The fear that unless 'In God We Trust' is displayed throughout the government, Americans will somehow lose their faith in God, is a dim view of the profound religious convictions many citizens have. The faith that inspired many of the Founders of this country—the faith I practice—is stronger than that. Trying to score political points with unnecessary resolutions should not be Congress's priority. I voted no."


Plus, um, why take so much time and effort in doing this like there aren't bigger problems facing us.
Unemployment.
Walll Street.
The economoy.
Idiotic GOP poresidential candidates.
Nope. In "god"we trust, and if that's the case, who needs politicians at all?

Rick Perry, on the "sanctity of marriage:
"As conservatives we believe in the sanctity of life. We believe in the sanctity of traditional marriage. And I applaud those legislators in New Hampshire who are working to defend marriage as an institution between one man and one woman, realizing that children need to be raised in a loving home by a mother and a father."


So, um, Rick? If a couple has children and they divorce, what should we do about those children since their "loving" home is no more?
And what about the case of families where one parent has died, leaving one parent to raise those children? I guess we should legislate against that, too.
Have another drink, asshat.

Peter Tatchell, gay activist, defends a Christian housing worker who was demoted over remarks about same-sex marriage: 
"In a democratic society, he has a right to express his point of view, even if it is misguided and wrong. Freedom of speech should only be limited or penalised in extreme circumstances, such as when a person incites violence against others. Mr Smith's words did not cross this threshold."


I agree that people should be allowed to speak their minds, even if what they believe is decidedly anti-gay.
What they cannot do, is use their own "Christian" beliefs as part of their job requirements.
If this Christian housing worker was just speaking his mid, good for him. if he was acting on his beliefs, then bad for him.

Shirley Maclaine offers a WTF explanation for homosexuality: 
"One of the explanations for homosexuality and transgenderism could, I believe, be a profound identification with a recent incarnation as a member of the opposite sex. I believe each one of us has had both male and female lifetimes."


So, um, I was a woman in a former life and that's why I'm gay now?
But, Shirley, then everyone would be gay today is our lives now are based on our gender in previous existences. unless this is our first go-round at reincarnation.
Plus, for someone so enlightened to compare being gay to wanting to be, or having been, another gender, is kinda stupid.
I love that one of your books was called 'Out On a limb' because that's where you are right now.

Rick Mercer, Canadian TV personality, demanding that police be called in to deal with bullies, and that gay public figures take action:
"It’s no longer good enough for us to tell kids who are different that it's going to get better. We have to make it better now. So If you're gay and you're in public life, I’m sorry, you don't have to run around with a Pride flag and bore the hell out of everyone, but you can't be invisible. Not anymore."


Totally right.
We can make videos and tape messages and blog and Tweet about how it gets better, but are we really making it better?
That's where we need to focus.

David Barton, dominionist and "historian", who says the Bible should be the basis of all school courses:
"If you want education you better include the fear of God, if you want to be a good scientist you better include the fear of God, if you want to be a good musician—1962, ’63, the U.S. Supreme Court in three decisions said no more fear of God in education, we want education to be secular. All right, that’s a theological issue. How’s that working out? In 1962, ’63, America was number one in the world in literacy, we are now number sixty-five in the world in literacy. We don’t have the fear of the Lord, because guess what, we don’t have knowledge, it goes down."


Oh yes, no God in schools has caused a decline in education.
But, um, Dave? Asshat? What of religions that don't identify as Christian? Where do they go to school? What of people who are atheist or agnostic? Where can they get an education?
Taikng God out of the schools doesn't hurt anyone. If you want to study God we have things called churches. If you believe a faith-based education is best, send your child to a faith-based school.

Joel Osteen, megachurch "pastor", on how heterosexuals should "love" the gay away:
"Somebody that maybe had this certain difficulty now, maybe in five years they’re not if we will love them. You know, I think one of the messages I speak on sometimes is, you know, we can love people back into wholeness. But sometimes we want to beat them down — you got this addiction and you shouldn’t have that, or you did this — I just don’t think that’s the best way."


Or, Joel, you try and sound so inclusive, but your "loving the gay away" is the same as "praying the gay away".
It don't work.
But, and I'm just guessing here, you wouldn't mind loving a little gay yourself, would you?
This is just hate speech in a nice pretty bow.

Oliver Callan, an Irish satirist, responding to a newspaper columnist who accused him of being a homophobe:

"This column was intended to reveal to the world that I'm a hate-filled homophobe out to get the gays. Let's get one thing straight, I'm not homophobic, I'm gay....I've been called a fag, a daisy, a fairy, a pansy, a queer, all of that down through the years. I'm from a very small part of Co Monaghan and coming out probably made me literally the only gay in the village. Obviously everybody says you're born that way, but in all honesty when I was 11 or 12 I just knew I was different. I felt like a Protestant on the Falls and I knew I was different to my older brother who started driving the tractor when he was eight. I'm not singing I'm gay and proud. I'm saying I'm gay and I don't give a s**t and neither should anyone else."


As it should be.
Welcome out, Oliver, welcome out.

Maggie Gallagher, on Kim Kardashian's 72-day marriage:
"I'm reluctant to criticize any given individual who divorces because moral judgments are hard without more information that it is my business to know – and celebrity divorces are too common to warrant special notice. Hollywood in general and Kim Kardashian in particular support gay marriage. Perhaps that makes sense, if the speed of her divorce reflects a reduced commitment to the marriage."


Basically what this delusional wingnut is saying, is that if you're heterosexual, and a celebrity, you don't need to believe in, or stay true to, your commitment, or the sanctity of marriage.
You can get married, twice if you're Kim, and divorce your husband--after letting the internet tell him you want a divorce--after a matter of weeks, but gay folks--like Carlos and me, who have been together 56-times longer than Kim and her husband--are not allowed to marry.
This alone speaks volumes about NOM and how they aren't trying to "protect" marriage, they're simply trying to keep gay folks from doing it.