Surprise!!!!! Kim Davis Becomes A Republican AND Gets a High-Five From the Pope!

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/kim-davis-finds-new-home-the-gop?cid=sm_fb_maddow

By Steve Benen

It was never altogether clear why the detail was important, but as Kim Davis gained national notoriety, her far-right backers emphasized her official Democratic Party affiliation. No one had accused conservative activists of partisanship, so Davis’ party ties were largely irrelevant, but the fact that the anti-gay clerk was affiliated with Dems became a part of the story.

At least, that was the case. As MSNBC’s Emma Margolin noted the other day, the nation’s highest-profile county clerk has switched parties.
The Kentucky clerk jailed for bucking a federal court order that requires her to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples said Friday that she and her family had switched to the Republican Party, many of its members having rallied behind her in recent weeks.

“My husband and I had talked about it for quite a while and we came to the conclusion that the Democratic Party left us a long time ago, so why were we hanging on?” Davis told Reuters in an interview at a hotel in Washington, where she is being honored Friday by the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian group. Davis said she switched political parties last week.
A spokesperson for the right-wing legal group representing Davis confirmed to theWashington Post that she’d officially made the change.

And all things considered, this was probably the most sensible professional move Davis has made in quite a while. She believes Democrats left her “a long time ago,” and she’s entirely correct – Davis and the party have effectively nothing in common. A wide variety of high-profile Republicans have embraced her campaign, and even endorsed her willingness to defy court orders she doesn’t like, so it stands to reason the clerk would align with the GOP.

Even John McCain is kinda sorta offering Davis his support. TPM reported over the weekend:
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said he thought Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who was jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples, was right to “exercise the dictates of her conscience.”

Reporters spoke to McCain, previously the Republican presidential nomination, at the Values Voter Summit, an annual conference for Christian leaders.
The Arizona Republican told reporters, “I do not believe that therefore she should violate the law. She should have just said, ‘I refuse to do it.’”

A reporter, unsure what that meant, asked, “You think that Kim Davis could say, ‘I don’t want to perform this’?” McCain replied, “Yes.”

So, the GOP senator doesn’t believe Davis should violate the law, so much as he believes Davis should refuse to follow the law. How creative.

As for why McCain would say any of this, note that the incumbent Republican is up for re-election next year and it’s no secret that McCain is worried about the prospect of a primary opponent from the far-right.

not only that, but her lawyer is saying that she secretly met with the Pope before he left, and he basically gave her a "good job! attaboy!'.

uh huh

drummerboy said:
not only that, but her lawyer is saying that she secretly met with the Pope before he left, and he basically gave her a "good job! attaboy!'.


uh huh

I just heard that this morning on the news. I'm hoping it's not true, or else I'll have to unfriend the Pope....

drummerboy said:
not only that, but her lawyer is saying that she secretly met with the Pope before he left, and he basically gave her a "good job! attaboy!'.


uh huh

This woman got her first taste of attention and decided she loved it so much she had to have more.

For the first time, I almost feel sorry for her.

the vatican confirmed that there was a meeting. She even changed her hairstyle so she wouldn't be recognized on the way to the meeting!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/pope-secretly-met-kentucky-clerk-in-gay-marriage-row/ar-AAeXqHb?li=AAa0dzB&ocid=mailsignout

Never has someone fallen so quickly and so far in my regard for them as Pope Francis, right now.

mjh said:

drummerboy said:
not only that, but her lawyer is saying that she secretly met with the Pope before he left, and he basically gave her a "good job! attaboy!'.


uh huh

This woman got her first taste of attention and decided she loved it so much she had to have more.
For the first time, I almost feel sorry for her.

No way I could feel sorry for her. When you act like an ass, you get the life you deserve.

Can we say next GOP candidate for president?

drummerboy said:
Never has someone fallen so quickly and so far in my regard for them as Pope Francis, right now.

+10000

How do we let the Vatican know how we feel without resorting to Twitter? I wonder if they have a Facebook page (joke)!

I understand that the church has a lengthy history of opposing gay marriage, but affiliation with someone as crazy as Davis has got to make them uncomfortable, even if the association was accidental.

BTW, who decides who gets to meet with the Pope? How does that work? There must have been some seriously weird maneuvering going on in the Davis camp when they decided to try to meet him. A recent convert to a Pentecostal sect wants to meet with the Pope???? WTF... There has to be some bizarre ulterior motive there.

@finnegan posted this link in a parallel thread. It's probably worth adding (and reading) here, too; for instance, it includes an answer to PeggyC's question:

http://papalvisit.americamedia.org/2015/09/30/the-pope-and-kim-davis-seven-points-to-keep-in-mind/

DaveSchmidt said:
@finnegan posted this link in a parallel thread. It's probably worth adding (and reading) here, too; for instance, it includes an answer to PeggyC's question:
http://papalvisit.americamedia.org/2015/09/30/the-pope-and-kim-davis-seven-points-to-keep-in-mind/

Good article.

Keep in mind that the Pope met with many people during his recent trip.

What did the Pope say to the inmates he met in the prison outside Philadelphia?

I'm sure it was neither a "high five" or "good job". I'm also pretty sure he didn't proclaim them a sinner and call for them to repent. Instead I suspect he gave them words of encouragement.

I can't imagine that his conversation with Kim Davis was much different from his conversations with the inmates.

No High Five.

That article supports what I guessed about who might have arranged the meeting. I also suspect that since there are many, many conservative leaders in the US Catholic church that it is possible that arranging the meeting related to a political maneuver internal to the church and had nothing to do, in particular, with Kim Davis, the fallen Catholic.

drummerboy said:
Never has someone fallen so quickly and so far in my regard for them as Pope Francis, right now.

Agree.

We have this pope who seems decent and inclusive in public. Now we find out about backroom meetings where this pope enables and encourages bigots.

DaveSchmidt said:
@finnegan posted this link in a parallel thread. It's probably worth adding (and reading) here, too; for instance, it includes an answer to PeggyC's question:
http://papalvisit.americamedia.org/2015/09/30/the-pope-and-kim-davis-seven-points-to-keep-in-mind/

Very helpful. Thanks for posting that. It is sad that idiots in this country will turn this to the advantage of Kim Davis and her ilk, and that this is probably exactly why the meeting was arranged. Disgusting.

If the Pope is to be truly inclusive, then he must be inclusive of bigots. That is what inclusive means. It was a great political coup for the right. He does not want to appear right or left. Kim Davis is a sinner too (though I doubt she and her supporters believe that).

Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

Amen, Brother Lanky.

In case you missed this Crux article I posted in two other threads...

By John L. Allen Jr.
Associate editor September 30, 2015

ROME – If anyone suspected that Pope Francis didn’t really mean the strong words he spoke on religious freedom last week in the United States – that he was phoning it in, while his real concerns were elsewhere – claims that he held a private meeting with Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis certainly should lay that suspicion to rest.
The meeting was first reported by Robert Moynihan of Inside the Vatican magazine. A Vatican spokesman said Wednesday, “I do not deny that the meeting took place, but I have no comments to add,” which, in effect, is a way of allowing the report to stand.
Taken together with his unscheduled stop to see the Little Sisters of the Poor, the Davis encounter means Francis has expressed personal support to leading symbols of the two most contentious fronts in America’s religious freedom debates – the contraception mandates imposed by the Obama administration, and conscientious objection on gay marriage.
Before unpacking what it means, let’s roll out the necessary caveats.
First of all, the fact that someone arranged a brief encounter between Francis and Davis does not necessarily mean that Francis initiated the contact, or even that he necessarily grasps all the dimensions of her case. By her own account it was an extremely brief greeting, just long enough for the pope to tell Davis to “stay strong” and to give her a rosary. Asking for prayers and offering a blessed rosary to individuals following a meeting is a customary gesture for Pope Francis.
It would be over-interpreting things to read the meeting as a blanket endorsement of everything Davis has said or done.

In addition, we don’t yet know how Francis sees the balance between honoring one’s conscience and upholding one’s responsibilities as a public official, because he hasn’t addressed that question at any length.
The fact that the Vatican has chosen not to comment probably means, at least in part, that they don’t want to be dragged into a detailed discussion of Davis’ situation.
That said, there’s no way to view the encounter other than as a broad gesture of support by the pope for conscientious objection from gay marriage laws, especially taken in tandem with his statement aboard the papal plane that following one’s conscience in such a situation is a “human right” – one, he insisted, that also belongs to government officials.

So what does it mean?

First, it means that Francis has significantly strengthened the hand of the US bishops and other voices in American debates defending religious freedom.
In the wake of a massively successful trip in which Francis was lauded for his stands on issues ranging from climate change to immigration to fighting poverty, it will be more difficult for anyone to wrap themselves in the papal mantle without at least acknowledging his concerns vis-à-vis religious freedom.

Second, Francis may also have smoothed the waters in advance for round two of the Synod of Bishops on the family, which opens on Sunday.
Last time around, the question of how welcoming the Church ought to be to gays and lesbians was a major flashpoint, in part because conservatives worried it might lessen the Church’s resolve to resist a “redefinition” of marriage. By holding the Davis meeting, Francis has probably reassured conservatives that he’s not priming the pump for going soft on same-sex marriage.

Ironically, the Davis meeting may actually increase the odds of the synod recommending a more pastoral approach to same-sex relationships, since there won’t be the same fear about where such an opening might lead.

Third, Francis has also debunked impressions of a rift with the American bishops when it comes to the “wars of culture.”
Yes, Francis called the bishops to spurn “harsh and divisive” rhetoric and to embrace dialogue as a method. That does not imply, however, that he believes the substance of their concerns is mistaken, and by meeting both the Little Sisters of the Poor and Davis he drove that point home.
Fourth and finally, the Davis meeting confirms that the US trip amounted to the public debut of “Francis 2.0,” meaning a pope more clearly perceived as standing in continuity with Catholic teaching and tradition, as well as in solidarity both with previous popes and with the bishops.
To put the point in crudely political terms, Francis is a figure who utterly defies the usual left/right divides, equally capable of meeting Kim Davis and embracing poor immigrant children at a Harlem school – seeing both as part of a continuum of concern for human dignity.
That will be a source of consolation to some and consternation to others, but in any event it’s now officially part of the Francis story

In any case, Pope Francis damaged his image badly in the United States by meeting with Kim Davis. Many of us were inclined to like Pope Francis before this revelation.

What exactly would you expect him to say? You are an evil horrible woman and you are going to hell? Even though he's asked for people to be tolerant, gay marriage is against Catholic dogma. Not only that, she is standing up for her "Christian" beliefs.

I find it more surprising that she met with him... She's not Catholic.

marylago said:
What exactly would you expect him to say? You are an evil horrible woman and you are going to hell? Even though he's asked for people to be tolerant, gay marriage is against Catholic dogma. Not only that, she is standing up for her "Christian" beliefs.
I find it more surprising that she met with him... She's not Catholic.

I wouldn't have expected him to meet with her period. Now it seems the meeting was arranged 2 weeks ago with the right wing bishop in Washington. Now I don't give the Pope a pass on this, that he was duped into meeting with her as some say. He's a savvy guy, makes his own decisions.

For a little levity, here's what Andy Borowitz has to say:

Everyone, just chill about Syria - I heard Kim Davis's meeting with Putin went really well.

marylago said:
What exactly would you expect him to say? You are an evil horrible woman and you are going to hell? Even though he's asked for people to be tolerant, gay marriage is against Catholic dogma. Not only that, she is standing up for her "Christian" beliefs.
I find it more surprising that she met with him... She's not Catholic.

I wouldn't have expected him to meet with her period. Now it seems the meeting was arranged 2 weeks ago with the right wing bishop in Washington. Now I don't give the Pope a pass on this, that he was duped into meeting with her as some say. He's a savvy guy, makes his own decisions.

For a little levity, here's what Andy Borowitz has to say:

Everyone, just chill about Syria - I heard Kim Davis's meeting with Putin went really well.

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

mrincredible said:

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

Amen, Brother Lanky.

Because many people, like me, have "All Politics" blocked. What difference does it make what category it's in, unless you just want to just be obtuse?

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

mrincredible said:

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

Amen, Brother Lanky.

Because many people, like me, have "All Politics" blocked. What difference does it make what category it's in, unless you just want to just be obtuse?

mumstheword said:I wouldn't have expected him to meet with her period. Now it seems the meeting was arranged 2 weeks ago with the right wing bishop in Washington. Now I don't give the Pope a pass on this, that he was duped into meeting with her as some say. He's a savvy guy, makes his own decisions.

The Vatican is not a banana republic. Their diplomatic/political service is considered to be the best in the world, the par excellence of diplomatic/political services.

A primary job of the service is to vet and look at the political risks when the pope meets with someone. I'm very surprised that the service failed to inform the papacy of the baggage Davis carries.

Their diplomatic service is not known for failure. Its likely be the papacy is very aware and wanted to send a message. Same sex marriage is anathema to their religious dogma. Its their religion, their rules, so its OK if that is what they want to believe. Not that anyone ever heard Jesus talk about gays.

Its not OK to enforce the belief on the whole public by supporting those who use governmental intervention to deny equal marriage.

marylago said:
What exactly would you expect him to say? You are an evil horrible woman and you are going to hell? Even though he's asked for people to be tolerant, gay marriage is against Catholic dogma. Not only that, she is standing up for her "Christian" beliefs.
I find it more surprising that she met with him... She's not Catholic.

Well, he might have said that those without sin may cast the first stone and last he checked children out of wedlock is a sin. He may also have said that if she wants to stand on principals and not do her job, she should do the honorable and not steal from the people of her state and she should resign.

It's so sad, the Pope had done so much in helping mend the image of the catholic church and he just flushed it down the toilet by having this meeting in secrecy.

That's precisely the reason - I have "All Politics" blocked too so I don't appreciate seeing threads of political nature. If you block "All Politics," why post a political thread? Categories (and the ability to block them) exist for a reason...

mumstheword said:

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

mrincredible said:

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

Amen, Brother Lanky.

Because many people, like me, have "All Politics" blocked. What difference does it make what category it's in, unless you just want to just be obtuse?

mumstheword said:

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

mrincredible said:

lanky said:
Doesn't this thread belong in "All Politics"?

Amen, Brother Lanky.

Because many people, like me, have "All Politics" blocked. What difference does it make what category it's in, unless you just want to just be obtuse?

I'm not being obtuse. If you want to post a political thread it should be in the "All Politics" section.

This is clearly a political thread. You even mention Kim Davis' party affiliation in the thread title. But you're saying you don't want to post it in the "All Politics" category because you want people who have that category blocked to see your thread.

Can I point out that "religious freedom" does not mean the freedom to pick and choose which bits of your job to do? It also does not mean freedom to impose your beliefs on others.