In case you missed it, Republican leadership has completely gone off the deep end. I mean, completely.
From Texas's Congressmen Lou Gohmert (whose insanity brought us "terror babies." I swear they are real. There was one at brunch on Sunday who wouldn't stop screaming. No, I don't have evidence. Stop badgering me!) to Newt Gingrich's attack on the First Amendment. Gingrich has led some low IQ Americans into a frothy idiotic mess over a mosque in Manhattan that happens to be near the 9/11 wound on New York. Manhattan is a small Island. Everything on Manhattan is near the 9/11 memorial. (Even this NSFW link.)
President Obama, wisely and accurately, made a statement on Friday defending the First Amendment and the right for every American to practice the religion of his or her choosing.
What did Newt Gingrich do? He poured gasoline and lit a match.
Joe Scarborough was not pleased.
From Raw Story:
"Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington," Gingrich said on Fox News. "We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There is no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center," he said.
Reflecting on Gingrich's comments, Scarborough didn't know where to begin. "To suggest that someone trying to build a -- a tolerant center for moderate Muslims in New York is the equivalent of killing six million Jews is stunning to me," he said.
"It's stunning and it is so contrary to our country's principle and the Republican party," McKinnon agreed, then added, "I'm glad to see we're together on this and unfortunately I think we may get our membership revoked at the Pachyderm Club."
"Screw 'em," interrupted Scarborough.
"I agree," said McKinnon.
White House spokesman Bill Burton said:
"The President thinks that it's his obligation to speak out when ... issues of the Constitution arise. And so, in this case, he decided to state clearly how he feels about making sure that people are treated equally, that there is a fairness and that our bedrock principles are upheld."
I applaud the President for wanting to speak out on matters of the Constitution and am glad he hopes people are treated equally under the law. I assume that means he is abandoning his position that marriage is only between one man and one woman then. Right? I assume that he is willing to step up, even in the most politically divisive climate possible, and say without equivocation that gays and lesbians should have the right to marry.
Because, honestly, how are these two issues that different? The Muslims absolutely have the right to practice their religion. It is their fundamental right. And as Judge Walker concluded in Perry v Schwarzenegger, gays and lesbians have a fundamental right to marry the adult of their choice.
So, Mr. President, I like this version of you who is willing to weigh in on important debates to protect fundamental liberty. You are acting like the President I voted for. Now, could you please weight in on an issue that begs for your guidance? Please announce your support for marriage equality. An "issue of the Constitution" has arose.