In his darkly dismal and negative-- albeit low energy-- foreign policy speech in Youngstown yesterday, Trump was hawking some kind of an ideological test for immigrants and even would-be visitors to the U.S. Even before he spoke, the Associated Press reported that the prepared text distributed by the Trump campaign calls for the creation of "a new, ideological test for admission to the country that would assess a candidate's stances on issues like religious freedom, gender equality and gay rights. Through questionnaires, searching social media, interviewing friends and family or other means, applicants would be vetted to see whether they support American values like tolerance and pluralism."Nice his Geert Wilders-like agenda included gay rights but he is running on the ,most blatantly anti-gay platform any president has ever run on and running with the most overtly homophobic running mate, Mike Pence, in the history of American politics. would he deport Pence? Bar potential Attorney General Chris Christie from getting back into the country because he vetoed New Jersey's equal pay and marriage equality bills passed with bipartisan support in the state legislature? What about overt homophobic maniacs like Scott Walker? Does Florida gay basher Marco Rubio get a pass because he used to be a male prostitute when he was younger (and presumably less sweaty)?Anyone who's been reading the polls showing Hillary trouncing Trump among millennials-- 56-20%-- can see what Trump is trying to do. But with a homophobic Republican Party tied around his neck, can he accomplish anything at all. The irony here is that one of the only parts of the traditional GOP coalition to still be behind him-- the evangelicals and social conservatives-- are likely to be offended by this more than anyone. Will they turn against him for this bold demonstration of "New York values?"The multibillion dollar U.S. tourism industry probably won't be thrilled by another bizarre hurdle-- a test, ironically-- of political correctness for visa applicants. A Trumpanzee campaign official told CNN they want to "weed out any supporters of extremist ideologies," specifically noting as an example that "large numbers of people" in Afghanistan "may have attitudes about women or attitudes about Christians or gays that would be considered oppressive, even violent. We have no reason to bring someone into our country who is going to harbor that hostility. We want to bring in people who are reformers or who support moderation or who embrace or expand pluralistic ideas," the campaign adviser. The senior campaign official declined to say exactly what such a test would look like, but said it could include a questionnaire to get potential immigrants on record about their views."We turned to 4 progressive Democrats who are likely to win their congressional in November, especially if an anti-Trumpanzee tsunami continues to build: DuWayne Gregory on Long Island's South Shore, San Antonio-based candidate Tom Wakely, eastern New Hampshire's Carol Shea-Porter, and Nevada's Ruben Kihuen, each running against an embattled right-wing, homophobic incumbent who wouldn't be able to pass Trump's test and who is inexorably tied to the madman.Trump's Long Island crony, Pete King, has a horrible record when it comes to marriage equality and has voted against gay adoptions, against expanding hate crime protections to include the LGBT community, and supports a Constitutional Amendment declaring marriage defined as a man and a woman. Right after Trump's speech yesterday, DuWayne asked with a sense or irony (and sadness), "Who would have thought Donald Trump's position on LGBT issues is less extreme than Peter King's? When it comes to the LGBT community, King has voted time and again against marriage equality, protections against discrimination and even supported a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. As a LGBT parent I find Peter King's discriminatory voting history towards the LGBT community inexcusable."I guess it's not as much of a stretch to imagine Trumpy-the-clown's "New York values" to be completely foreign to an old school reactionary like Lamar Smith, even if Smith represents a more enlightened district that encompasses parts of Austin and San Antonio. Tom Wakely, who won the Democratic primary over a conservative told us, "My opponent, Lamar Smith, has yet to repudiate any of the disgusting and divisive rhetoric Donald Trump has spouted this election. At this point it's safe to assume he agrees with Trump on everything, but does that mean he'll be softening his stance on civil rights? Lamar has voted to define marriage in our Constitution as solely existing between one man and one woman. He's voted a separate time to Constitutionally ban same-sex marriage. He's voted in favor of employers who wish to discriminate in their hiring process based on sexual orientation. It should be no surprise that Lamar Smith has consistently received a 0% rating from the Human Rights Campaign, so is this where we finally see a public acknowledgement that he doesn't agree with who he hopes to be his new boss? Will Lamar Smith go the extra mile to prove he's somehow even less fit to serve his constituents than Donald Trump? Personally I'm expecting him to remain silent, as he's terrified of his constituents finding out what kind of 'public servant' he's really been for the last 30 years." Carol, who has served in Congress and was ousted in 2014 in the GOP wave election by Tea Party reactionary Frank Guinta, told us that Guinta "is a homophobe who does not believe gay people in this country are entitled to equal rights and protections. He has repeatedly stated that he is against gay marriage. His eagerness to discriminate doesn't stop there though. He voted against the Maloney Amendment, an amendment that would have made it illegal for federal contractors to discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity when they were hiring workers." That thermometer on the right is where you can contribute to Carol, as well as DuWayne Gregory, Tom Wakely and Ruben Kihuen. More on Ruben coming right up.Although Republican Cresent Hardy represents a typical all-American district just north of Las Vegas, not some Mississippi backwater, he's been outspoken in his support for every anti-gay bill that's come up since he was elected first to the Nevada Assembly and then to Congress. When the Nevada Marriage Amendment of 2002 came up for revision in 2012, Hardy blamed his Mormon faith for his opposition. although later told the Reno Gazette that "I would say that being an LDS person strengthens my views. I would probably believe that [about gay marriage] whether I was a member of the LDS church or not." The following year he voted against a resolution, which was co-spondored by Ruben Kihuen, his current opponent, at the time, requiring the state to recognize all marriages, regardless of gender, even though it gave all religious organizations and clergy the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage. The resolution passed overwhelmingly, 27-14, while Hardy was shouting "I believe that marriage between a man and woman is ordained by God... God has commanded that sacred powers of procreation are only to be employed between a man and a woman lawfully wedded as man and wife." The following year, he told KLAS-TV that he "will always oppose gay marriage. Needless to say, he also adamantly opposes gay couples adopting or using a surrogate to create a family. The difference between Hardy and state Senator Ruben Kihuen couldn't be starker. And Ruben is campaigning on Hardy's unsuitability as a Representative for NV-04. "Congressman Cresent Hardy and Donald Trump," he told us right after Trump's speech, "continue to stand on the wrong side of history on marriage equality. Worse, Hardy supports reckless and extreme legislation that would discriminate against same-sex couples in the work place."Hilariously, Harry Reid had some fun at the Trumpanzee's expense, calling on him to take his own test:
“Since Donald Trump wants to impose new tests on immigrants, he should take the one test every immigrant has to pass to become a United States citizen. He would almost certainly fail, given his general ignorance and weak grasp of basic facts about American history, principles and functioning of our government. The fact is, Donald Trump is nothing more than a spoiled, unpatriotic drain on society who has earned nothing and helped no one.“In my more than thirty years representing Nevada, I’ve found no experience more rewarding and inspiring than attending naturalization ceremonies. Dozens of times, I have had the privilege of watching new Americans raise their right hands and pledge loyalty to the United States. These are men, women and children who worked hard to get here, who worked hard to become citizens and who are now working hard as productive members of our society.“Unlike immigrants, Donald Trump represents none of the qualities that make America great. Immigrants work hard to get here and become Americans, while Trump inherited everything from his father and works hardest at Tweeting insults and ripping off hard-working people with two-bit scams.“Immigrants renounce all loyalty to foreign interests, while Trump plays footsie with Putin and invites the Russian government to launch cyberattacks against our country.“Immigrants pledge to defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic, while Trump insults Gold Star parents like Ghdara and Khazir Khan, and war heroes like my friend Senator John McCain.“Immigrants pledge true faith, while Trump lies about giving to charity.“Immigrants work hard to build better lives for their families, while Trump was born on third and thinks he hit a triple.“Immigrants work hard to learn American history and civics, while Trump appears ignorant of basic facts about this country.“Indeed, the naturalization test is just one part of the process immigrants undergo to become citizens, but Trump would almost certainly fail that test.“Immigrants make America great. Trump makes America small, petty and mean.”