Connect with us

Duck Dynasty Dad Campaigning For Ted Cruz In Iowa: Same-Sex Marriage Is ‘Evil,’ ‘Wicked,’ ‘Sinful’

Published

on

Cruz Surrogate Phil Robertson Also Calls ‘To Rid The Earth Of’ The Nation’s Leaders

A reality TV star may be running for president, but another one is campaigning for his top rival, and making sure Iowa voters this weekend know where his boss stands on same-sex marriage.

“When a fellow like me looks at the landscape and sees the depravity, the perversion – redefining marriage and telling us that marriage is not between a man and a woman? Come on Iowa!” Phil Robertson pleaded as he warmed up the crowd waiting to hear Ted Cruz speak.

“It’s nonsense. It is evil. It’s wicked. It’s sinful,” the Duck Dynasty patriarch insisted, as the Iowa conservatives applauded. “They want us to swallow it, you say. We have to run this bunch out of Washington, D.C. We have to rid the earth of them. Get them out of there.”

No one seemed to take offense to Robertson’s claim that the marriages of their fellow Iowa citizens are evil, wicked, and sinful, nor did they push back on his call “to rid the earth of” – to murder – the nation’s leaders.

“Ted Cruz loves God, he loves James Madison and he’s a strict constitutionalist. You know what Ted Cruz understands,” Robertson said. “God raises these empires up. It is God who brings them down.”

CNN adds that “Cruz did not address Robertson’s remarks on gay marriage after taking the stage in Iowa City, but he praised Robertson and his ‘voice of truth.'”

“What a voice Phil has to speak out for the love of Jesus,” Cruz said. “What a joyful, cheerful, unapologetic voice of truth Phil Robertson is.”

 

Image: Screenshot via CNN

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

CORRUPTION

Man Sentenced to Die Over Discredited ‘Shaken Baby Syndrome’ Blocked From Testifying at Texas House

Published

on

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has blocked Robert Roberson, a man given a death sentence based on the discredited “shaken baby syndrome,” from testifying at the Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence.

Roberson’s execution date was set for October 17, but the Texas Supreme Court granted a stay of execution so he could testify, according to the Austin Chronicle. Roberson was scheduled to testify on December 20, but Paxton filed a motion on the 19th, telling prison officials to ignore a subpoena issued by the House committee, declaring it invalid.

Roberson was due to testify about the state’s “junk science law.” That law is supposed to provide new trials when a person is convicted based on flawed forensic evidence, according to the Texas Tribune. However, critics allege the law rarely actually allows new trials, the Chronicle reports. The committee was supposed to hear Roberson’s story to help determine if the law is ineffective.

READ MORE: Texas AG Ken Paxton Threatens Democrat-Leaning Counties Not To Mail Out Voter Registration Forms

Roberson was convicted in 2003 of capital murder following the death of his 2-year-old daughter, according to Newsweek. At the time, a doctor said the girl had died from “shaken baby syndrome,” defined as head trauma due to shaking. Shaken baby syndrome has been controversial since it was first coined. Biomechanics scientists say that shaking a baby can’t create a force strong enough to cause the type of trauma seen in these sorts of cases, according to the New Jersey Monitor. It’s often used as a catchall type diagnosis, when a baby dies but has no other signs of abuse.

In Roberson’s case, the child had been chronically ill, Newsweek reported. She had a fever and respiratory issues, which likely caused her death.

Other cases based on shaken baby syndrome have been overturned. This includes a 2000 case in Dallas, where Andrew Wayne Roark was initially sentenced to 35 years in prison in the death of his girlfriend’s 13-month-old. The Texas Supreme Court overturned Roark’s conviction this year about a week before Roberson was due to be executed, according to KERA-FM.

Despite this, Texas officials have declined to address Roberson’s case. Though Gov. Greg Abbott pardoned four people this week, Roberson was not one of them, according to the Houston Chronicle. In October, Paxton called attempts to delay Roberson’s execution “eleventh-hour, one-sided, extrajudicial stunts that attempt to obscure the facts and rewrite his past,” according to the Tribune. At the time, Abbott agreed, saying the House had “stepped out of line” in its attempts to delay execution so Roberson could testify.

Last year, Paxton was impeached by the state House on 20 separate articles of impeachment. The Texas Senate, which skews Republican 19 to 12, voted to acquit. The charges mostly centered around allegations Paxton used his position to help a campaign donor under investigation by the FBI for fraud.

A new date for Roberson’s execution has not been set.

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Outgoing Rep. Annie Kuster Says She Decided Not to Run Again After Seeing Biden’s Decline

Published

on

annie kuster

Outgoing Representative Annie Kuster (D-N.H.) said that she made the decision not to run for her seat again after meeting with President Joe Biden early in the campaign and seeing his decline.

Kuster, 68, said this March she would not run for re-election to the House seat she’s held for nearly 12 years. She told the Boston Globe on Thursday that she’d made the decision after flying with Biden on Air Force One. She says that though she felt he was capable of serving the rest of his term as president, she could see the signs of aging.

“Just in my heart, [I] reached the conclusion that this would be a very challenging campaign for him, and to put himself out there for another four-year term was was going to be a struggle,” she told the Globe.

READ MORE: Two-Thirds of Americans Want Age Limits for Politicians, Supreme Court

She also suggested that Biden’s advisers may have tried to hide the effect that the president’s age had on him, but wasn’t sure how much the party had. When the Democratic party first started floating the idea of replacing him on the ticket, she compared it to discussing end-of-life care for loved ones.

“It was painful. I haven’t had these kind of conversations since I talked to my own parents about, you know, their aging and their limitations,” she said.

Kuster hopes other senior citizen politicians follows her lead.

“I’m trying to set a better example,” she said. “I think there are colleagues — and some of whom are still very successful and very productive — but others who just stay forever.”

Kuster’s comments come in the way of debates over some elderly politicians’ abilities. Last week, it was revealed that Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas), 81, despite technically serving in Congress, has been living in a senior living facility for months and missing votes. Her son said Granger has been experiencing symptoms of dementia, according to the Washington Post.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who died last year at 90, served in the Senate until she died. But during the last years of her term, many people, including fellow senators, said that she was unfit to serve, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Some lawmakers reported having to reintroduce themselves to her several times during a conversation. She also repeated general questions, another symptom of someone experiencing dementia. At the time, her office defended Feinstein and said that she had no problem serving.
The question of age was a big factor in the last two presidential elections. Both in 2020 and the first part of 2024, the two candidates, Biden and President-Elect Donald Trump, were the two oldest nominees in U.S. history. Trump will be 78 when he is inaugurated again next month, the same age Biden was when he was inaugurated.

Image by Tim Pierce via Wikimedia Commons

Continue Reading

News

Most Republicans Think Trump Will Lower Grocery Costs, While He Says It’s ‘Very Hard’

Published

on

A large majority of Republicans think that President-elect Donald Trump will lower grocery costs, according to a new poll. Trump himself said that would be “very hard.”

Three-quarters of Republicans said grocery costs would go down under Trump, according to a new CBS News/YouGov poll. On the other hand, 68% of Democrats expected prices to rise. Independent voters were less sure, with 39% saying they expected an increase, 35% expecting a decrease, and 26% figuring the costs won’t change at all. The poll has a sample size of 2,244 American adults. The margin of error is 2.4%.

Despite campaigning on lowering the cost of groceries, Trump seemed to backtrack in his Time magazine Person of the Year interview.

READ MORE: The GOP Ran on Gas and Grocery Prices. Their Top Priority After Taking the House? Hunter Biden’s Laptop.

“It’s hard to bring things down once they’re up. You know, it’s very hard,” he said.

Trump is correct. There’s not a lot a president can do to directly affect grocery costs in the short term, according to Politico. The types of policies a president can enact are typically long-term solutions. One of Trump’s plans to lower costs across the board is specifically to work on the amount of fuel available, lowering energy costs. And while fuel is expensive, and the food industry requires lots of transportation, it’s just one factor, Politico reports.

But one of Trump’s favorite policies—increasing tariffs—is more likely to raise prices. Economist Wendy Edelberg, PhD, suggested that his proposed tariffs could boost food costs by 10-20%, according to Glamour. Tariffs also have historically cost people jobs. During Trump’s first term, his import tariffs cost 245,000 U.S. jobs, according to a 2021 study by the US-China Business Council.

Something that could help, however, is a regulation on price-fixing. In August, a lawsuit against data analytics and consulting firm Agri Stats alleged the company worked with meat processors to keep prices high, according to Food & Wine. The company is accused of sharing price and cost information among competitors so they can all agree on a higher-than-necessary price to keep profits high.

Like the meat industry, which is controlled by just four companies, according to Politico, the number of grocery chains is shrinking. A lack of competition can lead to situations like Kroger admitting to raising prices on dairy products further than necessary during the pandemic, according to Bloomberg. However, antitrust legislation and controls on prices are unpopular with lawmakers generally, especially with pro-business Republicans.

Daniel Scheitrum, a Cal Poly professor of agribusiness, told Politico that acting on this would be an effective way of lowering prices.

“This anti-competitive activity, it’s not just textbook discussion. This is actually happening and being litigated in our food system. If the federal government can rein in anti-competitive behavior, supply restrictions, price-fixing, that could bring down food prices in the U.S.,” he said.

But experts expect the new Trump administration to pull back on antitrust regulations outside of the tech industry, according to The Economist. And despite the effect lowering fuel costs could have on food prices, legal analysts at Stinson expect oil and gas industries to face less in the way of antitrust efforts.

Or, in other words, analysts across industries seem to think it’s unlikely the Trump administration will be able to lower grocery costs—directly or otherwise.

Image via Wikimedia Commons

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.