turks".com. thanks everyone, sleep "viewpoint" is next. good night. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] you >> john: the u.s. deficit is rapidly decreasing ahead of styx, but you wouldn't know it from fox news because benghazi! the feds want to lower the threshold for what constitution drunk driving. which means we'll have to have less spelling errors when we text from behind the wheel. is this a public safety man or a racket to raise more money. and you may have heard about the gay teacher fired for her sexual orientation. but what does the bible really say about lesbians. turns out it's the catholic homophobes who need to repent. it's the birthday of madeleine

albright, and on this date in 1928 mickey mouse appeared in his first animated short. we all look forward to his big disney cartoon "star wars" episode 7. this is "viewpoint." [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> john: good evening, i'm john fugelsang. this is "viewpoint." thank you for joining us this evening. president obama apparently wasn't content with all the white house scandals headlines this week or the possibility thinks second term could be suffocated under a blanket ofvilleofcriminal investigations, so he did something today. for groups seeking status tax status, the president condemned them.

>> today secretary lew took the first step by accepting requesting and accepting the leader of the irs. it's important to implement new leadership to help us go forward. >> john: whether that will satisfy congressional republicans remains to be seen. earlier today, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell demanded a different sort of action from the president. >> the administration needs to make witnesses available to testify on this and any other incident of targeting the administration's ideological's opponent. >> john: and john boehner has made up his mind whether haws were broken or real crimes committed. >> my question isn't about who is going to resign. my question is who is going to jail over the scandal. >> john: the scandal where no laws were broken. on the so-called scandal front

yes, benghazi, they tried to put that to rest yet again by releasing 100 pages of internal e-mails that shows how the talking points of u.n. ambassador susan rice were shaped. rice and the white house were blasted repeatedly for not immediately labeling the attack that killed four americans as an terrorist attack. but the e-mails reportedly show that the white house the state department the fbi and c.i.a. all held shape these talking points that ambassador rice used,al while interoffice politics may have played a role that didn't play out presidential politics didn't. speaker boehner has accused the state department of political changes in the talking points. as for scandal number three the justice department seizure of phone records from the associated press, jay carney announced the president would

push congress to pass a media shield law which failed to get to the senate floor for a vote in. >> you the president's support for this kind of media shield law is well documented, it is longstanding, and he does believe it is appropriate to re resubmit that legislation and try to convert it into law at this time. >> john: meanwhile up on capitol hill eric holder insists for a second day he didn't know anything about the issue that we don't know. >> i would like to try to pin down who authorizeed the subpoenas for the ap. did the deputy eric holder do that? >> recusals are such that i don't have interactions with people who are involved in the case. >> john: for more, i'm delighted to be joined by joe williams and josh israel for think progress.org . gentlemen, a pleasure to have you both here on "viewpoint."

>> good to be here. >> many thanks. let's start with the irs president obama did say tonight he would work with congress hand in hand presumably, as it performance it's oversight role while putting in new safety guards so it never happens again. has the president finally started to put this story to rest or is it a big g.o.p. fundraising and tea party talking point for 2014 regardless? joe? >> two words cha-ching. basically you already have the republican campaign committee sending out e-mails saying help us fight the president on benghazi. help us fight the president with these scandals. we need money to run people for congress that is going to keep the pressure on. so basically the fundraising has already started and it's not a surprise in for anybody in washington. the problem is we're losing

focus especially with benghazi especially with the other two sort of scandals. typically in these sorts of situations what the real scandal is not what is illegal but what is legal. remember we're living at a time where we have the warless wireing tap. we've got people listening in on people's phone calls. we have different infringements on our civil liberty in the name of keeping us safe from terror. so what's going on in these situations is basically sort of the fruit that is being born from all the permission we've been given to look into our past and look who they're talking to try to keep us safe. >> john: josh, you wrote about how real disclosure laws could fix the irs president--problems. the irs has to decide which groups are political and which are not. >> i think the president spoke

very eloquently about one of the problems being there is very little clarity as to what the rules are there. the irs code suggests that groups in order to be a 501 c-4 the tax exempt groups we were talking about, you have to be a social welfare organization. and campaigning and election electioneering cannot be your purposes. but very little guidance of what a social welfare organization is, and so it would be changes to the tax code to make it clear what is and isn't okay. a lot of criticisms in the inspector general report has to do with the fact that low level function areas didn't understand the rules and didn't know the rules. but a big reason for the groups that are sort of masquerading as social welfare groups to avoid having to disclose the

contributers is the fact that there is no disclosure for 501 c-4 groups when they run political advertisements. >> john: exactly right. that's where it gets sticky. joe josh makes a good point. once they get involved with that process you can see where it gets tightened so they know which groups should have tax exempt status or loosened so any groups are passed, or nothing gets passed for three years. >> this is the pin yada that the g.o.p. has been hoping for. the scandal and how dare they look into tea party organizations and very little discussion about the actual law and ways to keep this from happening again, and furthermore there was not very much outrage when groups on the left were being investigated during the last american administration,

i'm thinking of the naacp. they were investigated for their status. no one raised an eyebrow on the right when this happened when clearly this is the very similar pattern we've got here. congress needs to step in, clarify and tighten but it they're too busy talking about these other issues, too busy using it as a political whacking stick to get to that point. >> john: indeed. let me bring it back to den. because i remember the quaint days of the bush administration when a terrorist attack that killed americans meant united we stand and we get behind the leader. now it's a time to get political points off the dead bodies of americans. will the e-mails released from the white house finally satisfy the president's critics or will this continue to be a criticism in the president's bubble for the next three years? >> go ahead, josh. >> after you joe. >> john: wow we're so polite.

>> i don't think there is anything you could possibly do that would satisfy the sort of standard mongering at fox news, and senators mccain and graham. but this is something that the american people cared much before and now they're really not going to care about it. these e-mails show very clearly that it was the intelligence forces that were giving information to the president and these talking points trying to keep people safe, and trying to give the best information that they could and there was nothing politicized about the process. >> john: that is a great point. this may be just a tool that the g.o.p. will use to keep their base riled up, get them to a show up to the midterms and put forth no new legislation. will it be enough for the white house politically if benghazi stayed and inflamed issues on

the right instead of creeping towards the mainstream as seem possible not long ago. >> it will have to be enough. as josh said there isn't really a whole lot more they can do. you have the head rolling at the irs over the investigation scandal. there is really not a whole lot of dramatic action you can take to of satisfy the benghazi grittics. releasing the e-mails proves what the white house has been saying all along. that is, look, it was a chaotic situation. we were trying to figure out what was going on, and trying to coordinate information from agencies that had a hand in it. i don't think it will go away, and it will have the affect of rallying the base, and giving the white house more to oh worry about in the 2014 midterms. i might add one other point the

counter veiling and the strategies they might have to play, while we're all discussing something that happened in november of 2012 the sequester grinds up, the economy is still stumbling and not running. we still have very much looming fight over the debt cerealing thatdebt sealing thatis not going to get resolved. >> john: go if you're the g.o.p. you don't want the economy getting better on the democratic president's watch is benghazi not the best tool against hillary clinton's high poll numbers. >> well, it is and it isn't. josh mention earlier most americans don't really seem to be engaged on this particular scandal. and, indeed, a survey shows that if you ask a sample of americans where benghazi is on a map, most don't really know. and a terrorist attack on an

embassy versus on the american soil, they're not going to get behind the leader. there was not a whole lot of unifying behind benghazi and there was behind boston, that's because boston is easier to relate to than an embassy around the world. >> john: and before we go, josh, is the g.o.p. stuck in a can exactly loop in the 90s like the first clinton term when our republicans pushed one fake scandal to another. does anybody remember what white water was supposed to be at this point? >> i don't think anybody understood it then. you have travel gate and file gate and it's very much the same thing here. the republicans don't want to talk about immigration reform because they know the public is to some extent against them. they don't want to talk about gun violence prevention. they don't want to talk about the economy because they're wrong on these issues.

they try to distract by bringing up anything that they could throw at the white house. i don't think much is going to stick. >> john: joe williams and josh israel senior investigative report for think progress.org it's only going to get more interesting. it's great to have you both in the program. we hope to have you both back soon. good evening gentlemen. the deaf set deficit is sinking fast, and the republicans have learned nothing! that's ahead.

(vo) later tonight current tv is the place for compelling true stories. >> jack, how old are you? >> nine. >> this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines, way inside. (vo) from the underworld, to the world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. >> what a way to start the day. (vo) followed by "talking liberally with stephanie miller" >> this is big for me. only on current tv. >> john: today's thing of the day is the daily military sex scam of the day. a soldier assigned to coordinate a sexual assault prevention

program is under investigation for sexual contact and for pimping. this comes days after an officer he himself was arrested for charges of groping a woman in a parking lot. i guess if these military officials were around in world war ii they would have hired hitler to fight nazis. what is loud and proud and wrong about everything? deficit hogs. after so many complaints that president obama is leading us down this dark well of never ending debt, a well that george w. push dug, the debt is stranging faster than anybody expected. the shortfall projection is 25% lower than they said it will be a few months ago and it's supposed to keep on dropping. by 2015 the deficit should total 2% over the total gross domestic product.

and when president bush held office it was just over 10%. it deflates under democrats. grew under bush, dropped under clinton, grew under bush. how weather is the reaction to this? john boehner said nothing. and others say it's a report of out of scroll spending even though it's the opposite. and the g.o.p. will get together to vote to repeal obama-care for the 37th time. let's go to pat in world world news. >> thank you for having me. >> john: we did work with this president. we did help to bring the deficit down together, our policies are working. have you heard any reaction from

"b" this? has this humbled anyone? >> no, of course not. i think the reason for that is two-fold. one, the republicans don't want to give obama credit for bringing the deficit down. there was the warning that taxes on the rich would kill job creation and the economy. here err the deficit is coming down. >> john: it seems to me if i was a smart republican in 2013 i presume they're out there this would be the chance to say yes the tax cuts help and it's the budget cuts that we forced. we work with this president and we take some credit for it. they're ignoring it. is this going to change the political conversation in dc if republicans don't even acknowledge the reality? >> i think this is just the latest in the slew of pieces of evidence showing that when it comes to deficit reduction the

obama is doing exactly what the republicans want him to do. meanwhile, here obama's tax increases are bringing the deficit down. i don't think it will change the debate in washington because they're going to push austerity no matter what the numbers say. >> john: you're right, there was a slight increase on the upper 2% not exactly back to clinton levels. has the administration vindicated losing those bush tax cuts with these numbers? i think the fact that we're spending so much time on this, and washington has had such a crazy deficit discussion for so on is really missing the point. if you look at and see the deficit coming down, but at the same time we're not talking about jobs.

we're not talking about economic growth. to hear the republicans tell it for all those months and months when the game was going on and in congress, if only the deficit would come down, then the job creators would be inspired to go out and start opening businesses and creating all these jobs and doing all these great things. all it would take is a little spending discipline and deficit reduction and boom, the economy would be growing. that hasn't happened even though the deficit is coming down. >> john: and after four years of screaming how to get the deficit down, it's coming down and bill o'reilly is talking over on fox with what jodi arias wore today. the deficit is down. the jobs are still down, too. there are so many out there working, paying taxes and help to go lower the tax the deficit even more. shouldn't this be the final nail in austerity.

it ain't working in europe, do you think these numbers prove that we're finally done with the austeritiment? >> i really wish that were the case. and any objective analysis of austerity should prove it's a% fleet failure. europe, it's a catastrophe. in the u.k. they've implemented the aterty austerity plan, and they're sputtering i didn't think triple recession was a thing before this came along. here it was too small but it did work to get us out of the ditch somewhat but no one is paying attention to that, at least in the places where they actually wield the power to do anything about it. i wish it were the case that this set of data would be the final nail on the coffin of austerity. but the folks who are pushing

austerity, they're impervious. >> john: they're gathering to repeal obama-care. does that even appeal to anybody other than guys who wear squeaky wheel pajamas about this? >> the goofy thing about this, it will increase the deficit according to anyone who has looked at the numbers. the deficit will increase if you repeal obama-care. the party that is screaming about deficit, now that the deficit is coming down, wants at a make it grow again. >> mark: and pat garafallo with world news and report, thank you for your time and insight. >> thank you. >> john: what a pleasure. well washington ignores the unemployed l.a. ignores our homeless veterans. you don't want to miss it coming up. going on politically and putting my own nuance on it.

not only does senator rubio just care about rich people but somehow he thinks raising the minimum wage is a bad idea for the middle class. but we do care about them, right? vo: the war room monday to thursday at 6 eastern

alright, in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks. i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they know that i'm not bs'ing them with some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us.

>> john: tonight on wtf alabama. we exam the news that jeff foxworthy and bill engvall and larry the cable guy are planning to own their theme park in foley, alabama. now i'm not here to belittle jeff bill, and larry i wish they will well. so in the spirit of comradely i will say this, alabama, where is my friggin' theme park. i know alabama may not be the best place for t but there has to be a place in some part of your beautiful state for neurotic progressive politico political comedian for john fugelsang's insecurity world. and there could be a religious section where an anamatronic tells right wings fundamentalist

christians that they're wrong about the bible and they're misinterpreting the word of god when they hate gays and oppress women but wtf alabama you're second in obesity. you're 47th in internet access and 48th for quality of life for children, and you're going to open up a blue collar theme park. i have never wanted a theme park before but now that i know other comedians have one i want one, too. that's the spiritual foundation of all which spiritual comedy are based. now. (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. you would rather deal with ahmadinejad than me. >>absolutely. >> and so would mitt romney. (vo) she's joy behar. >>and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking?

you. >> john: on any given night 62,000 of america's veterans are

sleeping in the streets. more than 10% of them are in one place--los angeles, the homeless and veterans capital of america. if only we could fix that. if only the veteran's administration had land donated specifically to house homeless vets. well, turns out it does. in 188-8400 acres were given to the va and turned into the pacific branch soldiers home. it housed veterans for 80 years in what is currently the upscale neighborhood of brentwood. but now oh those dorms have been empty for decades and parts of the land are being leased for commercial laundry for the marriott hotel, a baseball field and a dog park. that's right welcome to l.a. dogs are welcome vets ain't. let's go to jon wiener, thank you for the work you've done on

this issue. walk me through this story. why is the va doing this? >> well, the va says while they have an obligation to provide medical care for veterans, they have no obligation to provide housing, even though this lawsuit is about severely memorially ill vet who is are unable to get the medical treatment they need unless they're provided for housing on site basically. that's what the va says. it seems the main reason the va doesn't want to house homeless vets on the brentwood campus is that it's a very upscale neighborhood. these are multi-million dollar homes down the home and around the corner. and in l.a. the homeowners groups have immense power. >> john: when you say they can't receive treatment you mean they can't even go for standard medical care because they're homeless and they don't have a fixed address? >> well, if they could remember

their appointments, if they could organize to get transportation to their appointments the va would treat them, but these are people with severe ptsd traumatic brain injuries. they're living down the streets. many of them have sub stance abuse problems. >> and someone who has done work on that campus i can tell you it is very difficult to get there if you don't have a car. so sir how can a va get away with this? what is their legal justification? >> well, the aclu has taken them to court on this. they claim they have no obligation even to abide by the terms of the lease of the donation of the land without a specific authorization of congress. and the local judge here said that he was surprised but he had to rule that was true.

it seems like they are not going to move unless the courts--the higher courts change their minds on this. >> john: this is unthinkable. you wrote in your piece in the nation the va has done more than it'sit's spreadits predecessors, what is being done about the vets, and substance abuse. isn't what this controversy is about? >> what the obama administration is provide financial assistance to vets who need rental subsidies, who need rental vouchers. that's good for the vets whose only problems are poverty. but the vets we are talking about here the ones with substance abuse and mental ill

problems, they need more than rent. the va has housed homeless disabled vets at this very site, and we would like them to do it again. >> john: well, five years ago the va said they would renovate three of these buildings. did anything come of that? >> well, it's been a long slow process. congress did appropriate $20 million for renovating buildings on this west l.a. campus. they just broke land recently this year on one of the buildings which when completed now scheduled for 2014, will house something like 65 vets. now that's a pathetic number. there's between 6,000 and 7,000 homeless vets that have been counted on the streets of los angeles, and unbe doubtedly there is more than that. it seems for $20 million you ought to be able to do more than house 65 vets in a couple of years from now. >> john: well, mr. wiener, before we go, for people who are

concerned and care what can they do? how can they learn more? >> well, congress has a lot of power to do something about this. unfortunately, here in california senator barbara boxer has doing nothing. senator dianne feinstein has pushed them to finish the renovation of three buildings which would house 200 vets, and congressman henny waxman has protested against the commercial use of this land, but really it's in the hands of congress to push the va to stop being so reluctant and bureaucratic about this, and do what they ought to do to fulfill their mission regarding our veterans. >> john: john wiener, who reported this story for the nation, thank you for your reporting, and thank you for talking for us. when you talk about you what these men do for our country and how they put their lives on the line for our freedom, it's shocking that this is the treatment they come home to. i thank you gain thank you gain.

>> thank you john. >> john: you may have to be more sob for drive a car. we'll have that up next. heard the president say the other night? is this personal or is it political? a lot of my work happens by doing the things that i am given to doing anyway. staying in tough with everything that is going on politically and putting my own nuance on it. not only does senator rubio just care about rich people but somehow he thinks raising the minimum wage is a bad idea for the middle class. but we do care about them, right? vo: the war room monday to thursday at 6 eastern

alright, in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks. i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they know that i'm not bs'ing them with some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us.

view welcome back to "viewpoint." on social media i asked all the y'all about what all y'all thought about lowering the threshold for drunk driving. why not, we have so much room for our prisons for new residents. that's a good point, thank you helping the prison industrial complex. if anyone has a thought three's tweet it to me, while it's% nearly universally known that drunk drivers cause thousands of deaths each year, what is discussed less often is there the deaths that are are caused by

drivers below the legal limit. states reduce their legal blood alcohol limit from .08% to .05. under the current law 180-pound man could have four drinks in 90 minutes while still staying below the legal limit. reducing the limit would allow three drinks while still being able to get behind the wheel. of course, the new limits face opposition specifically from the american beverage institute, and trade group that represent them, who would like to make a lot of money off those fourth drinks. i'm joined but our experts. comedian scott blakeman performing june 7th at the laughing liberally lab at jimmy's number 47 right near in new york. don't miss that show if you're in new york this summer. co-host senior legal analyst

making her debut on the show. imani gandy and rude pundit's almanac, lee papa. reducing the limit from .08 to .05, is this a good idea or criminalizing something that shouldn't be criminalized. >> as you pointed out people can still have three drinks and they said it's lewdous to criminalize the responsible--you're not being responsible if you have three drinks, you know, and get behind the wheel. >> you're like the nra for drunks. >> this is happening in europe. a hundred countries have the lower limits. kind of like the alcohol version of the coalition of the willing. join the others. in europe it's already within

ten years they lowered the limit, and fatalities lowered by half. >> imani. >> i think as a small woman i think that's unfair. in the interest of safety and reducing fatalities it may be necessary to reduce the limit but it makes me wonder if there is a measurable difference in fatalities between the .08 limit and .05 limit and if we should focus on the deterrent in what the limit is, instilling the fear of god. >> john: all the background checks argument, if it saves one american life is it worth it? >> i think that--i think that's the case but it makes me wonder whether or not there are scientific studies that demonstrate that this sort of reduction will actually lead-- >> in europe when they instituted that in the ten years, it did.

>> but is it the reduction in the blood alcohol content or is it the increase in checkpoints? is it the increase in fear of, for example, i have a friend who spent some time in australia and said there is a real culture in terms of being afraid of being stopped, in terms of being afraid of check points. >> john: let's bring in the rude pundit. that means checkpoints means more cars put in corners. this law lowering the limit makes it much easier to write tickets and fines. what do you think is at play here lee? >> i want to address the european example because if we have this the public transportation system that most european countries have, it really wouldn't be that big of a deal. >> john: you're socialist. >> i want my high speed rail. >> john: madrid, mothers against drunk driving is not against this idea, but it also said it's not the right place in

government efforts, and they're going not going to be part of promoting it. >> in the last group that wants to come out that i have a problem with is mothers dense drunkagainstdrunk driving. the beverage industry is there. they'rethey only care about selling drinks. and to have people survive and come back and have their two drinks instead of getting as much as they want. >> john: from an economic standpoint reducing the amount of drinks a woman can have will reduce the birth rate. requiring those who are accused of drunk driving installing a breathalyzer in their car. imani, do you think reason not to do this, if so, why not put it in all cars. >> it's a little big brotherish.

i don't want my car reading my body signs when i get into it, but as you said before whatever can be done to reduce the amount of fatalities due to drunk driving accidents is a good idea. especially when we talk about repeat offenders. that's another thing that concerns me is that is there a real problem in terms of people with that low limit causing fatalities, or is it the people who are at .24 the people who are going to drink and drive and they're diehard about it. >> john: that's the argument. this is the argument that we heard when ralph nadar was trying to--i can say that game then--when ralph nadar was trying to get seat belts. >> i say instead of having the designated driver, have the designated person to breathe in the breatheizer. >> beyond the breathalyzer, the

car that will detect your breath without the use of a breathalyzer, i can't figure it out, but that's going to work. we need to establish a level. why not go with the .05 level. >> john: big brother rides shotgun. while drinking and driving remains a major problem another dangerous practice getting attention is texting while driving. and many companies including the four biggest cell phone providers are launching a campaign to reduce the use of cellphones actual driving. traditionally they were against laws preventing cell phone use shocker, but now they're changing their tune. >> i think probably because there are a lot of teen accidents, a lot of teen deaths that are the result of texting while driving. from marketing and p.r. perspective it's better for the four major companies to attack it together as one roar than undermine them in the marketplace. i think it's good marketing and

good pr. >> john: you're right. deaths for teens of texting while driving has surpassed. in terms of taking a responsibility of the human toll for the use of their product. >> assume lawyer must have "v" gone to somebody and said, someone is going to sue you for this. >> and maybe a sliver of social conscienceness. >> john: yeah right. >> they were on this for a couple of years and then they came on board. you know, this is something that we have to address and again i don't understand the argument of obviously if you attack these you attack the lower level it will save lives. >> i disagree with the lawyers saying somebody is going sue. people have been trying to sue the gun administers for years

i'm a lawyer. a recovering lawyer, but i think it would be pretty difficult for anyone to sue a cell phone maker because of a texting while driving accident. i really do think it's a matter of let's do something that makes us look good. we're the cell phone companies let's go out there. >> i don't want to say anything that makes the cell phone companies look good but i understand what you're saying. i don't think--obviously this is something that i've had students--i teach kids, and students who have actually been in accidents while texting. one student almost lost his life. on a serious note, i do think this is something that a good public relations push could do some good for. >> john: corporate decency, it's capable. we'll look at a supposed moral issue after the break but there is nothing moral about it. it has to do with the bible and lesbians and that's next.

>>and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were

>> john: welcome back to "viewpoint." one more quick question for my panel. you guys are wonderful by the way. what is your favorite misuse of a bible passage. >> the biggest misuse are claiming there are bible packages that don't exist. man is between a man and woman it's in the bible but it's not. >> it's matthew 19 but it's jesus coming out against divorce. i have no life and i know this.

imani gandy. >> i learned something new this morning. judge not lest ye judged is not telling you you can't judge people but it's judging by the right standards, god's standard. i'm taking that to me that i can judge people by my own standards. >> i'm coming out to the ten commandments a lot of people who were wanting to put ten commandments in courthouses were probably committing adultery. >> john: karma hale is a teacher or was before she lost they are job in columbus, ohio. when her mother died, the obituary included her long-time power. and one the students sent a copy to the school and calling it

disgraceful for employing a lesbian for a gym teacher. as soon as she returned to her job after taking a few days off to bury her mom miss hale was called in to see the administration, and they fired her. here is the worse part, her the letter said living with a partner violateed the laws of the catholic church. for this cause god gave them up for the women changed their natural use for that which is against natural. the only reference to lesbians in the entire bible. and it's not even about lesbians. see, once you get past the fact

this was written by a guy who never met jesus and women changed their natural use which sounds like the gospel according to ike turner. it says that roman women did that which was against nature. the only sexuality against nature is pretending to be straight when you are not. what paul is talking about in that part of the letter are worshiping gods mostly human animal hybrids. god turned his back against those romans. and many believe what paul is talking about is bestiality, but it's another use of the christians who really don't know their bible. now mice hale has filed a complaint based on firing her on

gender discrimination. her teacher union chose not to support her. turns out the homophobes are the ones violating the moral laws. if you still want to discriminate against americans based on something that is not in your holy book, guess what, you can start paying your taxes like everyone else. one final quote from the book of ruth, where you go i will go, your people shall be my people. where you die, i will die there i will be buried. but it's a passage by two women root and maomi, they there is one or two mentions of gay men in the entire bible but at no point does the call the women being with women. i find it interesting that god had the same policy.

i would like to thank my guests, you guys were brilliant. thanks for all our guests. we'll be back tomorrow night. this is "viewpoint" on current we're still here. good night, mom. >> joy: tonight the president is in hot water over scandals involving benghazi, the irs, and the associated press. on the bright size he just saved 15% by switching his car insurance to geico, and i'll talk to the host of the biggest loser, alison sweeney, and tabatha coffey who certainlyly i is s nenevever a afrfraid toto say a anything. [♪ theme music ♪] >> joy: oh, it has been a tough day in the white house. president obama now