Joe of Morming Joe asked "why Indiana ...

[1StrongBlackMan]

when 20 other states have similar laws?"

I ask: "Why Selma? When the entire south had jim crow, and the rest of America had de facto jim crow?"

And who is the republican woman that, in her babbling apologia of the "why Indiana?" question, said, "this law isn't about anti-discrimination, it's about religious freedom!"

[octoberlib]

1. I saw that and wanted to throw something at the screen.

They were all deliberately obtuse, even when one guy pointed out the differences.

[RKP5637]

3. Yeah, I saw that this moning, was a total WTF. These people are stupid, ignorant and DUH *or* they

just want to discriminate and try to cover it with endless BS. And IMO it's the latter, they want discrimination. Anyone with any ability to think can see what's going on with them.

[CTyankee]

61. Once you see Nicole Wallace sitting there withher stupid grin you know that

Joe needed reinforcements and got her on the set in a hurry. But hers and Joes argument were more than fully pushed back on by Dan Malloy. And by the facts...

[olegramps]

21. I am surprised that anyone on this forum would watch the asshole.

It has amassed me that he was given a forum to spew his bullshit. He is lying hypocrite.

[AlbertCat]

24. all deliberately obtuse

all disingenuous beyond belief.

[Scuba]

2. You watch that crap?

[TheCowsCameHome]

6. You deserve what you get if you do.

[1StrongBlackMan]

36. Yes ...

I'm always interested in hearing the latest republican talking points ... it helps me recognize them when I see them in other forums and other spaces.

[CTyankee]

59. exactly! It was great when Malloy gave him "what for"...

[DefenseLawyer]

4. It's the only talking point they have

"It's the same law Bill Clinton signed!" Even if that is obviously false and it is not "the same as 19 other states and the federal government" it's still an easy thing to say, easy to repeat if you are a Fox News watcher that is used to simplified, sound-bite debate and you don't particularly care if what you are told is true. I expect them to keep saying it louder and louder.

[LynneSin]

18. The Faux News talking point. They know their viewers are too stupid to google

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. And I ask

Why does anyone - anyone at all - watch Morning Joe?

That is a serious question.

[octoberlib]

8. I watch it if they have somebody on I want to see.

Today it's Connecticut Governor Dan Malloy.

[1StrongBlackMan]

37. I watch it most mornings, as I drink my coffee and take care of my dogs ...

I'm always interested in hearing the latest republican talking points ... it helps me recognize them when I see them in other forums and other spaces.

[TheCowsCameHome]

38. I admire your fortitude.

No way could I watch that type of programming without either 1. throwing up what I just ate, or 2. breaking something.

[CTyankee]

58. Yeah, well, there's the benefit of having a good yell at the TV set and calling

Joe Scar every name in the book. Very cathartic...that and coffee get me going every week day. My gov Dan Malloy gave him a lecture, too. Poor Joe was unable to respond to Dan and just started mumbling about when spring would come to CT...it kills me that Joe resides in CT now...I keep yelling at him "Get out of my state...go cozy up to Chris Christie's ample butt in NJ!!!"

[yodermon]

55. opposition research. you do have to be in the right mindset

To prevent brain implosion though.

[One of the 99]

56. Opposition research nt

[Bluenorthwest]

7. What Makes Indiana's Religious-Freedom Law Different?-from The Atlantic

The new statute's defenders claim it simply mirrors existing federal rules, but it contains two provisions that put new obstacles in the path of equality.
"There’s a factual dispute about the new Indiana law. It is called a “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” like the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, passed in 1993.* Thus a number of its defenders have claimed it is really the same law. Here, for example, is the Weekly Standard’s John McCormack: “Is there any difference between Indiana's law and the federal law? Nothing significant.” I am not sure what McCormack was thinking; but even my old employer, The Washington Post, seems to believe that if a law has a similar title as another law, they must be identical. “Indiana is actually soon to be just one of 20 states with a version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA,” the Post’s Hunter Schwarz wrote, linking to this map created by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The problem with this statement is that, well, it’s false. That becomes clear when you read and compare those tedious state statutes. If you do that, you will find that the Indiana statute has two features the federal RFRA—and most state RFRAs—do not. First, the Indiana law explicitly allows any for-profit business to assert a right to “the free exercise of religion.” The federal RFRA doesn’t contain such language, and neither does any of the state RFRAs except South Carolina’s; in fact, Louisiana and Pennsylvania, explicitly exclude for-profit businesses from the protection of their RFRAs."
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/what-makes-indianas-religious-freedom-law-different/388997/

[KingCharlemagne]

15. The second feature is even more damning than the first, imo:

Second, the Indiana statute explicitly makes a business’s “free exercise” right a defense against a private lawsuit by another person, rather than simply against actions brought by government. Why does this matter? Well, there’s a lot of evidence that the new wave of “religious freedom” legislation was impelled, at least in part, by a panic over a New Mexico state-court decision, Elane Photography v. Willock. In that case, a same-sex couple sued a professional photography studio that refused to photograph the couple’s wedding. New Mexico law bars discrimination in “public accommodations” on the basis of sexual orientation. The studio said that New Mexico’s RFRA nonetheless barred the suit; but the state’s Supreme Court held that the RFRA did not apply “because the government is not a party.”

Remarkably enough, soon after, language found its way into the Indiana statute to make sure that no Indiana court could ever make a similar decision. Democrats also offered the Republican legislative majority a chance to amend the new act to say that it did not permit businesses to discriminate; they voted that amendment down.

Thanks for posting this clearly explained analysis and take-down of homophobic bigotry.

[mountain grammy]

22. +1000 for the Atlantic

And their excellent writers who take the time and effort to write so eloquently about current events.

[gollygee]

27. +1

And they know perfectly well that it's different.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

9. The governor of Maryland sure set Joe and the bunch straight later on.

All Joe could do to defend himself was get hung up on Malloy's (sp?) calling the lies 'conservative.'
Up to then I agree, all those at the table seemed to be being working hard as they could to stick with the lie. The reporter at the remote location did some clarification that went largely unrecognized.

[Orsino]

10. Why Indiana WHAT, Joe?

Why would people dare to discriminate against a state whose government just greenlit discrimination? What a stupid talking point.

You are a lazy, entitled ass, Joe, who didn't do enough homework to know how particularly evil Indiana's statute is.

[City Lights]

11. The goal of Morning Joe is to peddle misinformation and provide

cover for conservatives. Seems that most mornings they meet their goal.

[Myrina]

12. ... because Indiana's law written almost immediately after the Feds made same-sex marriage legal, &

.... because Indiana's law eerily mirrors the Hobby Lobby law, much more than it mirrors "the other 20 states".

Is it 20 today? Yesterday's number was 30. Or in some places 35. And I've heard 10 as well. These clowns don't even know what they're referring to, do they?

[appalachiablue]

64. It's more like Hobby Lobby and the TV talkers also aren't bring up the roomful of goons who

Pence asked to attend the signing- ie faith healers wanting to treat & cure gays and religious leaders resorting to old biblical text. Hey, we shouldn't be eating Shellfish or mixing two textiles in clothing if we followed the OT writings literally.

[KingCharlemagne]

13. Suggestion for talking point(s) in response to anyone parroting 'Why Indiana?" - something along

the lines of "Why do you support discrimination?" or, more bluntly, "Why are you opposed to love and its expression?" or, even more blunt, "Why are you such a fucking bigot?"

[Bluenorthwest]

14. It's comforting to know that Joe is virtually unwatched. His show is getting about 330,000 total

viewers. For comparison, CBS This Morning, the lowest rated of the three network morning shows, was drawing about 3.25 million viewers. The worst of the networks has 10x the viewers Joe has.
So that's a comfort.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

31. The #1 show on TV as far as ratings is "Spongebob Squarepants".....

I find little comfort in that.

[Chakab]

16. After that SAE/Waka Flocka debacle, does anybody really think that any discussion on that show about

social issues or discrimination should be taken seriously?

[LynneSin]

17. Seriously, it took me about 5 minutes of googling to answer that question

Because I asked the same exact question too.

Then I googled.

Then I learned.

Then I was SHOCKED.

[world wide wally]

19. OK, I'll say it.

This country sucks when we allow ourselves to be barraged all day with bullshit fucking propaganda.
Can some asshole righty tell me exactly what the difference between this and 1930's Germany is?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

29. Their propaganda was more convincing.

[world wide wally]

32. Blah, blah, blah is still blah, blah, blah

[Spitfire of ATJ]

35. Maybe Joe should grow a mustache.

[SpankMe]

30. C'mon! There's a HUGE difference between this and 1930' Germany!

They spoke German in 1930's Germany!

[Fred Sanders]

48. Well, when the bullshit propaganda smells too much they can now deflect with plane crash coverage?

But...the arc of Justice is long....but when it comes....

[Not Me]

20. Because it is 2015

The arc of justice has turned and people are no longer willing to accept this. We got a taste of what was coming with Arizona and Jan Brewer had the sense to veto the bill there based on the outcry. Pence is clueless and has doubled-down. This response galvanizes the people and companies opposed to the law, and clearly lays out the case with other states and localities, not to go there.

[tomsaiditagain]

23. No watch Morning Right Wing talk show

Morning Joe makes me feel ill so I click. Any right wing crap on the tube I click away from it. YUK!!

I know, bla bla bla..........but but but........bla bla bla

aint happenin in my world

[mountain grammy]

25. The man is a hack.

[riderinthestorm]

26. I don't understand your post. You do know Indiana's law is different than the others right?

[1StrongBlackMan]

45. Yes, I know the laws are different ...

I, also, know that the intent of each of these laws (as practices) is to discriminate against the "others" ... and are all wrong.

[riderinthestorm]

47. The intent was to protect Native American use of peyote in their religious practices

exactly how is this law being used in other states to discriminate?

[1StrongBlackMan]

57. The intent of the FEDERAL law was to protect Native American religious practices ...

(which affected no one but those that practiced the tradition writs) ... the intent of the subsequent State laws was to discriminate.

[riderinthestorm]

65. No. You are so wrong and can't even produce evidence of that

I asked you for evidence. It's noted you haven't done so.

[1StrongBlackMan]

66. I don't understand what the beef is here ...

The Federal law was drafted to protect /allow the free exercise of the Native American religious practices, which included the use of peyote.

The subsequent State laws, we're drafted using the same legal reasoning, though with clear discriminatory intent.

The primary difference in the law is in their application ... the former was applied to preserve a tradition that affected no one but practicianers (i.e., expanding freedom); whereas, the latter, have been applied to restrict freedoms.

I do not understand what "evidence" you seek?

[riderinthestorm]

67. You've said all the other state laws are like Jim Crow

prove it.

.I'm looking for your examples of this law is being used specifically to discriminate as you've asserted.

You say it has. Prove it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

68. Do you doubt that States with similar "Religious Freedom Laws" ...

enacted them for discriminatory purposes ... whether they were to deny public accommodations to women (e.g., reproductive rights) or to the LGBT community (for just about everything, including the right to marry or eat cake)?

I can tell you that my home state, Arizona, has such a law ... and there is no question as to its intent.

[riderinthestorm]

69. Yup. I live in IL. You are so wrong. Get educated nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

70. Well then "educate" me. n/t

[Spitfire of ATJ]

28. They're in a bubble of their own talking points....

What they don't get is that they don't control the message anymore.

People have already gotten it from the Internet.

That's why they wanted to control the Internet.

[tridim]

33. Not shocked, Republicans don't get it.

Because they don't care at all, about anyone.

MoJoe gets no free pass. He is exactly like every other asshole Republican.

[stillwaiting]

43. Republicans care about wealthy people and white, Christian men. No one else really. nt

[tridim]

50. I don't know about that either. This bill is causing rich, white people to lose real money.

It's starting to feel like they don't care about any humans whatsoever.

[Fred Sanders]

34. Every average Joe knows "similar" is not the same as "same"! Words are important, Joe.

Put the two laws side by side...compare...not the same!! Similar? As similar as hate and love. Poison ivy and Ivy Leavue, salt and sugar...different things have different words...that is how words work.

This TV Joe is an embarrassment to logic and common sense...pandering to the stupid has it's limits, even for the Fox lovers of lies.

[world wide wally]

39. And people sit there soaking it all in from the lips of another fucking tool

[HassleCat]

40. Not the Image

I guess Indiana has an image as a more tolerant place. It's northern, industrialized, etc. People don't think of Indiana as one of those Bible belt states where people go to tent revivals and build mega-churches. But you could ask the same question of many other states where regressive legislation gets signed into law. Why Wisconsin? Why Iowa? It's not just anti-gay legislation. Right wingers are coming at us on all fronts - labor laws, consumer protection, civil rights, welfare, drugs, and anything else they can think of. It's almost like some kind of sport or hobby with them. They seem to think it's fun to throw this crap in our faces. It's like some ten year old bully who forces the other kids to eat dirt on the playground. They feel more free when others are not, strange as it seems. They equate freedom with intolerance: "I don't like your kind, and you can't make me like you, and here's a law that says I get to treat you badly!" We have about 30 state legislatures made up of old people screaming, "You kids get off my lawn!" Our whole damn country is going senile.

[Ed Suspicious]

44. +1. Welcome.

[stillwaiting]

46. White people (not all white people) in lots of states are electing crazy people to represent them.

I say that as a white person.

White people need to wake the fuck up and stand with their fellow working class, middle class, and poor fellow U.S. citizens (regardless of their color or sexual orientation).

To be more clear: People of ANY race are crazy to elect today's Republicans in to any power position, but in our country it is white people that are voting in enough numbers to put them in power.

[Liberalagogo]

41. What about that dead intern, Joe?

Explain that fully first, and then you may have a microscopic bit of credibility.

[Ed Suspicious]

42. We can't have a moment of national decency, can we. They immediately start setting up

teams, breaking down "both sides" of the issue, they quickly as they can turn it into a sporting event. Who the serious fuck cares why Indiana. What's right is right, man. What's right is right.

[cali]

49. If only people cared a tenth as much about discriminatory laws passed every single

fucking day against women.

[CTyankee]

53. I have wondered about that too. The answer I've heard back is that gay

marriage is different from abortion (interesting that it comes down to that one issue) in that it involves adults and cannot be interpreted as "killing" human beings (fetuses).

[1StrongBlackMan]

63. People do care ...

it's just income inequality was more important.

[Gothmog]

51. The Indiana law is very different from Federal or other state laws

Here is a decent article on the differences http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/03/30/3640374/big-lie-media-tells-indianas-new-religious-freedom-law/

[mmonk]

52. You ask the right question.

[Stellar]

54. I see some people are still watching 'morning Joke'.

He used to piss me off so my blood pressure stayed high, but not anymore. I don't watch anymore. I could be wrong but I believe that's why MSNBC is changing their format, and changing to more of a Republic0n thing. I think they want to compete with FOX. Just a thought.


But still your point about Joe's show is well taken.(I just can't take their b.s.)

[mstinamotorcity2]

60. I don't approve of the law.

But I am having a watching Gov. Mike Pence sweat. I hate its at the expense of my LGBT brother and sisters. But like the McDonalds song says " I'm Loving It". Repugs are freaking out.

[libdem4life]

62. Have an idea. Why not agree with him...and just go the hell after the other

20 bigoted states. You know there has to be some sweaty palms and queasy political stomachs in those states.