Social Conservatives Go Batty In Buckeye-Land

Ohio's wingnuts are always coming up with some new way to roll back the clock.

A woman named Carla Hale was a teacher for Bishop Watterson High School for 19 years.  A couple weeks ago, the Columbus Doicese finally figured out that Ms. Hale is gay and fired her for violating a "morals" clause in her contract.  She has filed a grievance and is fighting to get her job back.

I'm not a member of that particular flock, but if I were, I think I'd have to return my Catholic membership card.

Here's a link to a Change.Org petition, if you're interested:
http://www.change.org./petitions/diocese-of-columbus-reinstate-faculty-member-carla-hale

Not to be outdone by antiquated religious doctrine, the Republicans in the Ohio legislature are going back to the 1950's to oppose sex education, of all things.  Led by Finance Committee Chairman Ron Amstutz, the state GOP still refuses to accept $13 billion in federal aid to expand Medicaid to an additional 275,000 uninsured Ohioans, but they slipped a provision into their budget bill to allow schools to be sued for teaching "gateway sexual activity", i.e. sex education.

The R's prefer our teenage children to be uninformed, uninsured, and parents.

A Reply From Portman; My Response Back At Him

Regular readers may recall my recent letter to my Senators ("To Portman & Brown, Re Background Checks", Buster's Blog 4/8/13).  Yesterday, Portman sent me an email reply.  It's a copy of what he called his "op-ed" piece Our Right To Bear Arms.  I doubt it appeared in any reputable newspaper.  It's essentially an ass-kissing term paper written for Professor Lapierre's course on constitutional law.

If you want to read it, it sucks, but here's the link:
http://www.portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/columns?ID=eacdd119-4bf6-48b8-a952-faec83cb9fd1


Since he sent me a term paper, I thought I'd respond in kind.  Sent it to him today:

Dear Senator,

Last week, I asked you to vote to allow the Senate to take up legislation to reduce gun violence.  You did not and instead have sent me a copy of your column Our Right To Bear Arms.  It’s a slippery, fact-twisted piece of one-sided writing.

You say we should reduce gun violence “through better enforcement of current laws.”  What a farce!  Nobody has done more to undermine current laws and make them harder to administer than the NRA and supporters like you.  The NRA’s dark money lobbying efforts on rider-receptive lawmakers such as you have crippled the ATF, the government’s chief enforcement agency:

·         The ATF may not centralize or computerize gun sales records.  It takes weeks to trace a gun.

·         Since the ATF is prohibited from requiring that gun dealers report their inventory, it’s impossible to tell which dealers may engage in unlawful sales.

·         The ATF may not transfer any part of its responsibility or authority to another agency, e.g. the FBI or DEA.

·         The NRA backed a law change requiring the ATF Director to have Senate Confirmation.  The ATF has been without a Director since 2006.  NRA-friendly Senators have blocked President Obama’s nominee since 2010.

So don’t talk about law enforcement.  You’ve done a fine job of weakening enforcement.

You say we need to “address the root causes of violence.”  Well, duh!  Apparently, though, you want to do absolutely nothing else until we identify those root causes.  While you search for the roots, the rest of us would like to do something about the results – people killed and wounded by guns.

And you could probably find the information you seek if the NRA hadn’t successfully lobbied in 1996 for a federal law prohibiting the funding of any gun violence research by the CDC.  At this point, the CDC has two types of gun-use data – old and none.

 

You say an assault weapons ban is based on “cosmetic characteristics” and that the ban in place from 1994 to 2004 had “no measurable impact on gun violence.”  1. The differences between a bolt-action .22 and a semi-automatic AR-15 with a 100-round magazine are more than cosmetic.  2. During the ban period, there was most certainly a measurable decrease in assault weapons sales.  Most Americans consider that to be a good thing.

You say universal background checks are “flawed” essentially because such a system would never be perfect and could never offer guarantees.  Granted, but that’s no reason to do nothing.  That’s a false choice.  They may not be perfect, but background checks will save lives.

You say that people who are caught lying on a background check are rarely prosecuted.  You say in 2010 the NICS denied 72,659 gun sales for false statements, and yet you complain of just 13 criminal convictions.  Rob, if you want 72,000 prosecutions, you'd better give the ATF and other law enforcement the resources, staff, and authority they need.  You can’t have it both ways.  As for me, I’m just glad that 72,000 lying-ass bad guys were unable to buy a lethal weapon.  Seems like a positive to me.

You say background checks wouldn’t work because some states don’t adequately report mental health records to the NICS, and some don’t report at all.  That’s because federal law doesn’t require that states report to the NICS.  Completely voluntary!  Who lobbied hard for that loophole?  Your buddies at the NRA.  These states are being intentionally uncooperative.  It’s their option and it’s crazy.  We can’t leave this sort of thing to the states.  Effective gun violence legislation must be federal.

You say that you “strongly oppose” a national gun registry and imply that the President has called for one.  He has not, nor has anyone else (other than me) in the current debate.  But why are you so opposed?  We’re almost all nationally registered, effectively, by our Social Security number, by our driver’s license, by the Selective Service, etc.  What’s the problem?

You say that an “assault weapons ban, limits on high-capacity magazines, and universal background checks would infringe on 2^nd Amendment rights.”  The 2^nd Amendment has become an NRA perversion.  It is a single sentence, poorly constructed, written 222 years ago by people who couldn’t possibly conceive of today’s military-grade weapons.  And if they could, they certainly would not have thought that equipping every farmer in 1791 with such weapons was a “right” or a good idea.

You end by stating that any such legislation would do “little or nothing to prevent gun violence.”  On that point, Senator, you are heartlessly, horribly and completely wrong.

Once, not so long ago, you were completely wrong on the issue of gay marriage, until your gay son led you to change your tune somewhat.  I was hoping you could do it again on gun violence legislation.  You’ve resisted so far, but go ahead – surprise me, make my day and change your gun law positions.

Sincerely,

Buster Gammons

 
P.S. While you’re surprising me, please introduce legislation to repeal gun makers’ immunity from product liability lawsuits.  What’s up with that?  There’s no such immunity for, say, tobacco.  It takes decades for cigarettes to kill you.  A gun does it in a split-second.

More About Boston

A faithful reader posted this on Faccebook:

About Boston

Patton Oswalt's excellent and quickly viral Facebook post:
________________________________________________

Boston.  Fucking horrible.

I remember when 9/11 went down, my reaction was, "Well, I've had it with humanity."

But I was wrong.  I don't know what's going to be revealed behind all this mayhem.  One human insect or a poisonous mass of broken sociopaths.

But here's what I DO know.  If it's one person or a HUNDRED people, that number is not even a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the population on this planet.  You watch the videos of the carnage and there are people running TOWARD the destruction to help out.  This is a giant planet and we're lucky to live on it, but there are prices and penalties incurred for the daily miracle of existence.  One of them is, every once in a while, the wiring of a tiny sliver of the species gets snarled and they're pointed to darkness.

But the vast majority stands against the darkness and, like white blood cells attacking a virus, they dilute and weaken and eventually wash away the evil-doers and, more importantly, the damage they wreak.  This is beyond religion or creed or nation.  We would not be here if humanity were inherently evil.  We'd have eaten ourselves alive long ago.

So when you spot violence, or bigotry, or intolerance or fear, or just garden-variety misogyny, hatred or ignorance, just look it in the eye and think, "The good outnumber you, and we always will."

Exxon Mobil Assures Oil Spill Will Actually Help Water, Fish and Birds

(Sent by a faithful reader.  Thank you, faithful reader!)

http://glossynews.com/top-stories/201304160200/exxonmobil-assures-oil-spill-will-actually-help-water-fish-and-birds/

Mario Batali's Answer To Tax Season

(The famous chef and restaurant owner writes a weekly short paragraph for "The One-Page Magazine" in the NY Times called "What I'm Drinking Now".  This one is from 4/7/13.)
_________________________________________________________

I never feel that good about paying the triple hit of New York city, state and federal taxes.  My accountant says these are great problems to have, but that is probably because he is going on vacation next week.  My answer is tequila.  Put a bottle of your favorite in the freezer and start writing checks.  But don't use lime, please.

The Late Jonathan Winters At His Best

Three minutes of manic improvisation with a pen and pencil set.

Action To End Gun Violence

This morning I attended a "Demand Action" event at the Dodge Rec Center in support of common-sense gun violence legislation.  Organized by Mayors Against Illegal Guns and the OFA, we heard inspiring messages and calls to action from Mayor Coleman, members of City Council, a preacher, and a mother whose son was murdered by a gunman.

The best line came from Mayor Mike.  In 2005, he signed a local law prohibiting the carrying of assault weapons in the City of Columbus.  That same year, the NRA was scheduled to have its annual convention in Columbus.  The NRA told Coleman if he signed the bill, they'd move their convention elsewhere. 

"I signed the bill," said Coleman, "and sure enough, they held their convention in another city.  Would've loved their tourism dollars, but good riddance!"

Got a good laugh and a lot of applause.  Amen, Mayor.  Amen.

Portman's Vote

(A re-post of Dave Girves blogpost of earlier today.  Well-said and to the point, as always.  Dave's thoughts can be found in Buster's Links.)
__________________________________________________

Portman's Vote

by Dave Girves

As an Ohioan I had to hang my head in shame while Rob Portman cast his vote against even having a debate in the Senate on the issues surrounding gun violence control.

I could only wonder “Why?”

After calling his Columbus and D.C. offices the best answer I could get from the staff person who answered was: “The Senator hasn’t made a statement about why he cast that vote and I can’t speculate about what he was thinking.”

Of course we know he opposes universal background checks, even though 90% of Americans are in favor of them, and most Republicans, gun owners, and NRA members favor them as well. But we also know the NRA opposes background checks and funds his campaign.

He has admitted that he opposes a ban on assault weapons and voted against the ban when he was a Representative citing concerns for the Second Amendment.

But why not debate these issues?

Certainly we can all agree that at the time our founding fathers wrote that citizens should have the right to bear arms, those arms consisted of single-shot muzzle-loaded muskets. And we can agree that no citizen has the right to own a thermonuclear bomb.

The job of the Senate is to draw the line between those extremes and say whether an assault weapon with a 30-round magazine is on the legal or illegal side of that line.

Now I can only wonder how he would have voted if his son had been killed at the age of 6, in elementary school, with an assault weapon.

Half-Assed "Heroes"

Because Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa) agreed to a "compromise" amendment on background checks, the Senate will at least take up a possible gun bill and will engage in "debate", a.k.a. posturing and sound-bite messaging.  Believe it or not, this is a good thing and another small step in the right direction.  Cautious optimism, anyone?

Some are even calling Toomey a "hero" for his "courageous" stand -- a Republican breaking from the NRA orthodoxy of complete opposition to any background checks.  Ooh, how ballsy!  I appreciate his help, but his heroism is half-assed:  the Toomey compromise still allows casual gun sales between family and friends to occur without any checks or restrictions.  (Yes, what could be more "casual" than selling a fucking gun to your neighbor?)  Toomey said extending background checks to such circumstances would be unnecessarily "inconvenient."  Inconvenient?  It's a lethal weapon, for chrissakes!  A tiny bit of inconvenience when obtaining one is not a bad thing.

It's like when some called Robbie Portman a hero for reversing his position on DOMA and gay marriage.  Good, but it took him two years after his gay son came out to change his mind, and he still says the issue of gay marriage should left to the states.  Totally half-assed! 

Of course just recently, Portman showed his true nature as a spineless worm by voting against allowing the gun debate to even make it to the Senate floor.  Pathetic.  The vast majority of Ohioans and Americans are strongly in favor of true universal background checks, but Robbie doesn't want to discuss it.

They don't make heroes the way the used to.

Rally For Medicaid At The Statehouse

Today I attended the rally at the Ohio Statehouse in support of expanded Medicaid eligibility.  People and media from around the state were there.  It's a good cause and we had a good crowd, despite the rainy, windy weather.  I'm glad I was able to be a part of it, and I hope Republicans in the state legislature get the message.

 

 

 

Speaker of the House Bill Batchelder said the other day that he'd rather shoot himself than expand Medicaid in Ohio.  The idea of Batchelder offing himself because more low-income people have health coverage is appealing on both counts.

 

Possible suicide candidate Bill Batchelder, a.k.a. "The Squirrel From Mars"



 

 

Will Ohio Really Imitate Texas And Refuse Billions In Federal Aid?

One of the many good things The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) does is expand Medicaid eligibility to cover many people without health insurance.  Each state must decide whether or not to participate in this expansion.  If a state opts in, this provision will take effect in 2014, with the federal government paying for 100% of the state's additional costs for the first three years, and 90% thereafter.  If a state opts out, its Medicaid eligibility is unchanged and the state receives no additional federal funding.

It's really kind of a no-brainer for most states:

• Covering more people is the ethically correct thing to do.
• Federal money to do so is already set aside, there for the taking.
• Most states' hospitals eat hundreds of millions of dollars a year in coverage for uninsured no-pay patients.  These costs are passed on to the rest of us in higher prices and premiums.  Expanded coverage would reduce these costs.
• Medicaid expansion would create more health care jobs.

Texas, of course, is not most states.  Rick "the Dick" Perry quickly and proudly refused to participate.  Well, that's Texas for ya.  But elsewhere, even batshit red state governors like Jan Brewer (AZ) and Rick Scott (FL) have recognized that this is, in fact, a good deal for their states.

So has Ohio's Gov. John Kasich.  He's for it.  Ohio would receive $13 billion in federal money, would cover an additional 275,000 people, and would achieve an estimated $400 million in health care savings. 

There's just one problem.  Our Wonder Guv is about to be shot down by his own party.  His gerrymandered state legislature is chock full of Tea Bag wingnuts who are adamant about stripping Medicaid expansion from the next Ohio budget.  Why?  The usual -- they hate Obama, they hate the federal government, they hate poor people.

Instead of $13 billion in federally funded Medicaid, they prefer the state pony up $50 million a year for mental health and addiction services.  Because you must be crazy or on drugs if you need Medicaid??????????  I just don't get it.

Thursday at noon there's a rally at the statehouse to show support for the ACA's expanded Medicaid provision and to urge Ohio lawmakers to take advantage of it.  I think I'll be there.

To: Senators Portman & Brown; Re: Background Checks, Etc.

Dear Senator,

I hope you watched 60 Minutes last night and listened to President Obama's speech today in Connecticut.  Four months have passed since the Sandy Hook slaughter.  The state of Connecticut acted quickly and wisely with sensible gun violence legislation.  So did the state of New York.

The time has come for the federal government to act with similar wisdom and sensibility.  Your president calls you to act.  So do your constituents.  At a bare minimum, you must make universal background checks the law of the land.  Background checks have wide public support.  At least, for now, do that.  And given the public support for restrictions on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and for a crackdown on illegal gun trafficking, you really should do those things as well.

But act you must.  Don't filibuster.  Vote!  And vote FOR all measures to lessen the terrible public health/public safety impacts of American gun violence.

This time, the gun issue will not just fade away, and we will be watching.  So please put aside the politics, forget the flippin' NRA, and just do the right thing.

Sincerely,
Buster Gammons


(Sent today to Rob Portman and Sherrod Brown. We shall see.)     

"Important" Issues For State-Level GOPers

On the national stage, Republicans claim to have learned lessons from the November elections.  Isn't that just ducky?  Doubtful too.

But on the state level, there's no doubt -- they've learned less than nothing.  Here's what the "party of small government" is all worked up about around the states:

North Carolina -- Republicans introduced a bill to allow North Carolina to establish its own state religion.  This is ridiculously unconstitutional.

North Carolina -- Do you want a divorce?  The same R's have a bill requiring you to attend 2 years of state-mandated counseling, aimed at "saving" your broken marriage.  Two years!

Arkansas -- GOP legislators introduced a resolution affirming the state's opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment.  The ERA was passed by both houses of Congress and signed by President Nixon in 1972.  But it failed to get ratification from enough states, and ERA officially died in 1982.  But Arkansas still says no!

Arkansas and Texas -- The R's in both states have put forth bills to ban the teaching of sex education, as well as anything about STD or AIDs prevention.

Texas -- Lone Star GOPers want to prevent any state funding of studies of gay, lesbian or women's issues at public universities.

North Dakota -- State R's have a bill to prohibit children in foster care from receiving any sex education in the public schools.

North Dakota -- The Republican governor signed into law a so-called "heartbeat" bill, which effectively bans abortion in the state.  It's also clearly unconstitutional and a violation of the Roe v. Wade ruling.  First, the geniuses in N.D. don't want you learn anything about sex, then after you discover your pregnancy, they want to force you to deliver an unwanted baby.  WTF?

Alabama and Mississippi -- Both states are working on N. Dakota-style heartbeat anti-abortion laws.  If enacted, both will be unconstitutional.

Ohio -- AG Mike DeWine says he doesn't care if Obamacare is the law of land.  His brilliant legal opinion is that only your employer can make the decision about whether your health insurance covers contraception.  Really, Mikey?  Really?

Virginia -- AG and gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli wants to reinstate the state's old (unconstitutional) anti-sodomy law.  Poor Virginia.  It must be like "Walking Dead" in the Commonwealth -- no matter what you do, the sodomites just keep coming!  Better pass a law!  And don't bend over.

And even Reince Priebus, Chairman of the Republican National Committee and chief apologist for the policies of the "stupid party", showed his true colors recently when, with a straight face, he compared support of Planned Parenthood to infanticide.


If you're one of Buster's few Republican readers -- and there are a couple -- you can rest easy knowing that your party's leaders are working hard to protect you from non-Evangelical religions, divorced people, sex education and buggery.

Reasonable People Agree . . . But These Aren't Reasonable People. Far From It.

This video -- "Gun Control Works" -- was sent to me for my amusement by an old and dear friend.  He's a great guy -- level-headed, moderate and reasonable in all ways.  He received the video from his older sister, who's apparently a lost ball in the tall weeds.

This is two minutes of Paranoia On Parade, fear-mongering to the max (and to the lowest).  It's for people who believe the 2nd Amendment instructs us to bear arms against our own government.  It's for those who think that "citizen disarmament" is actually underway in America (Really?  Who?  Where?) and our black Muslim Kenyan Socialist president intends to "kill us en masse".  It's for people who are afraid of everything!  Watch out!  Here comes a black helicopter!!

It's narrated by several ultra-serious right-wing talking heads, including "Worst Person In The World" Alex Jones (Buster's Blog, 1/9/13).  I don't recognize any of the the others.  So nice to see the token African American and the token woman.  Wonder how much they were paid to spew this shit.

Anyway, here it is, in black and white for fake gravitas.  Take a couple Tums, and enjoy.



Hilariously awful.  Spectacularly delusional.

"Mass murderers agree -- gun control works."  Yes, if only I'd still had my trusty six-shooter, I could've stopped Hitler in 1939.

National Day Of Action Ignored By Dispatch

Thursday March 28th was a "National Day of Action" for proponents of common-sense legislation to reduce gun violence.  President Obama spoke at the White House, surrounded by Newtown parents.  There were over 140 events in 29 states, co-sponsored by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Moms In Action, and Organizing For Action (the reconstituted Obama election group).

Two of those events were here in Columbus, and I attended one -- the press conference at the N. High St. fire station.  We heard from two doctors -- one on staff at OSU and the other the head of Columbus EMS -- on the need for universal background checks and other sensible measures.  Both of these professionals deal with the results of gun violence every day.  Both of them frame the issue not in terms of petty politics, but in terms of public health and safety.  The OSU doc mentioned the absurdity of our politicians producing reams of safety legislation about football helmets, but not a single page about safety from gun violence.





Speaking of absurd, that very morning the Columbus Dispatch had a big front page spread (and several inside pages) about arming our schoolteachers.  Mention the "Day of Action" or the two local events?  Are you kidding?  How about some follow-up coverage of our press conference the next day?  Nope.

But teachers being "trained" (for a solid 90 minutes) in the use of a lethal weapon against a school shooter?  Yessir!  That's news!  Headline:  "Teachers Pack Heat At Gun School!"

 

That's not news, it's horseshit.  Good grief!

Care To Think Twice About Keystone XL?

This is a snippet of video showing some of the impact of the broken Exxon pipeline in Arkansas.




The proposed Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to Texas would carry ten times the volume of this Arkansas line.

Stockman: Keynesian GOP For The Wealthy

David Stockman, one-time Wonder Boy federal budget director under Ronald Reagan and one of the architects of the failed trickle-down "supply side" theory of economics, wrote a long opinion column in Sunday's NY Times.  It's a gloomy indicment of U.S. economic policy over the past hundred years, filled with impenetrable numbers and nomenclature that put most people to sleep -- a good illustration of why economics is known as The Dismal Science.

Stockman, who's a less-than-credible prophet, believes we're doomed, and he's an equal-opportunity finger-pointer -- he blames everybody in both parties (everybody, that is, except himself).  If you want to read the full article, you're a glutton for punishment, and you can find it online.

I'll share just one little paragraph that made me chuckle:

"The 'deficits don't matter' destruction of fiscal rectitude under Ronald Reagan -- one reason I resigned as his budget chief in 1985 -- was the greatest of his many dramatic acts.  It created a template for the Republicans' utter abandonment of balanced-budget policies and allowed George W. Bush to dive into the deep end, bankrupting the nation through two misbegotten and unfinanced wars, a giant expansion of Medicare, and a tax-cutting spree for the wealthy that turned the K Street lobbyists into the de facto office of national tax policy.  In effect, the GOP embraced Keynesianism -- for the wealthy."

Stockman may still be a shady, self-serving little shit, but in those three sentences he told the truth.

"Thank You For Your Service To Our Country, Soldier. Now Pee In This Cup, You Bum!"

(The writer is a semi-regular reader of Buster's Blog who resides in the Lone Star State.  He forwarded his article, which appeared in the 3/29/13 edition of the Austin Statesman, thinking I may have some interest.  I do.  Thank you, dear reader!  I'm happy to share it.  O'Mahoney is lucky to live in Austin -- it's probably the only city in Texas with a paper that would dare to publish such a "radical, liberal" piece.)

________________________________________________________

 

It takes more than parades and flags to honor vets

By T.P. O'Mahoney

Special Contributor to the Austin Statesman 

I’m proud to be a Texan for many reasons, but at the top of the list is how we take care of our veterans in the Lone Star State. In the past several years, Gov. Rick Perry and the Legislature have greatly assisted Texas veterans by helping them receive their disability compensation, obtain their education benefits, and by lending them a helping hand when the transition to civilian life is difficult.

Having been a commissioner at two state agencies, I’m proud to have had a role in programs to raise millions of dollars to support veterans’ services and to help our veterans integrate back into the workforce. This isn’t just the right thing to do; it’s good for Texas business, and our veterans are a tremendous resource for our economy.

When it comes to honoring veterans’ sacrifice, Texas is No. 1.

Then why does a bill now being considered by the Texas Senate seek to treat our veterans less than honorably? Senate Bill 21 would require returning veterans who lose their job through no fault of their own to submit to a drug test to receive the unemployment benefits they deserve.

Let’s put ourselves in the boots of a recently separated service man or woman for a moment: They’ve willingly signed up to defend our nation and our way of life. They freely accept their responsibility — often at the risk of putting their careers on hold while straining relationships among friends and family. Leaving home for a faraway place, they place themselves in harm’s way, encounter extreme weather and unfamiliar culture during multiple rotations to war zones. Often under assault from all sides, our heroes lose brothers and sisters in the line of duty every day.

Coming back from war can be difficult.

It’s little wonder that in some categories the veterans’ unemployment rate can be alarmingly higher than the civilian unemployment rate.

Simply put: there’s no logical reason for this bill. Service members must already submit to random drug tests while on active duty. By law, upon being honorably released from active duty, these fine men and women become veterans and may be eligible to draw unemployment benefits.

SB 21 would require a drug test in order for these honorable men and women to receive their benefits.

Coming back from multiple deployments and struggling to adjust to civilian life, many veterans may also face economic challenges.

With this in mind, imagine forcing our returning heroes to undergo the indignity of being asked to subject to a urinalysis to determine if they “merit” the unemployment compensation they may need to feed their family.

How does the veteran deal with a false positive? Given many of our veterans’ personal struggles, having to take time from their job search to do battle again (this time with the State of Texas) to receive unemployment benefits may be a bridge too far for too many.

It is for these reasons that I make a plea to the Legislature on behalf of our proud warriors. Please do not subject Texas veterans to the unnecessary and humiliating rigors of drug testing for unemployment benefits as proposed in SB 21. Please treat our veterans honorably.
___________________________________________________________

Buster's comment:  Texas SB 21 is undoubtedly a GOP-sponsored bill.  Republicans across the country are genetically hard-wired to oppose every type of government aid, be it Medicaid, food stamps, or unemployment benefits.  They've convinced themselves that all recipients of social services are unworthy, lazy bums -- scammers, criminals, addicts and winos who avoid work while using food stamps to buy liquor and drugs.  (Never mind that food stamps don't work for that.)  The "pee in a cup" test is their brilliant plan to thin this herd of moochers.  Republicans in many states have tried to adopt it into law, usually without success.  It's a mean-spirited, stupid idea in general and when applied to our returning veterans, it's disgraceful.  SB 21 deserves to fail, and the people of Perry-Land should be embarassed if it doesn't.