Matt Trewhella of Missionaries to the Preborn hosted last week’s edition of In Focus, Voice of Christian Youth America’s flagship television show, where he attacked gays and lesbians as “filthy.” After quoting from a column by Brian Camenker from MassResistance on the supposedly detrimental effects of marriage equality in Massachusetts, Trewhella said gay marriage “totally changes the entire culture” but that most Americans “don’t care anyway.”
“Your children would be getting perverted in their minds by these filthy people,” Trewhella claimed, before turning his venom to straight people who don’t condemn gays and lesbians: “I have no respect for people who are parents, who actually have children, and have no problem with homosexuality or homosexual marriage. They are the most base people on the planet to have totally abandoned every God-given vestige to protect your child from the filth of homosexuality, to blatantly go along with it is disgusting.”
“It’s disgusting to watch, it’s disgusting to see,” Trewhella said.
Frank Gaffney today made the case on Sandy Rios in the Morning that the increase in the sexual assault rate in the Armed Forces is President Obama’ fault because of his efforts to encourage women and gay people to serve.
After arguing that Obama has “savaged” the military with “vigor and lethality,” he linked Obama’s “sexual experimentation” and “social warfare against the military” to cases of sexual violence: “We’re hearing a lot about sexual assaults in the military and the like, it’s not to defend that by any means but it is to say if anybody is surprised that by putting more women and for that matter homosexuals into the military you are not going to get as a result that kind of unacceptable behavior is fatuous, it’s irresponsible, it’s malfeasance.”
The President came to office pledging fundamentally to transform the United States of America and I believe he has gone after every institution of our country, perhaps none with the vigor and lethality of the United States military. He has savaged the resources that it has relied upon to do the job we asked it to do to keep us safe, he has reduced both its numbers and its power projection capability and perhaps as troubling as anything I think he has done much to reduce its stature as a one of the most revered institutions in this country. We’re hearing a lot about sexual assaults in the military and the like, it’s not to defend that by any means but it is to say if anybody is surprised that by putting more women and for that matter homosexuals into the military you are not going to get as a result that kind of unacceptable behavior is fatuous, it’s irresponsible, it’s malfeasance, is what it’s amounts to. I’m afraid that the consequences of all of these steps, whether it’s the social experimentation or social warfare against the military or whether it’s hallowing it out through the budget and other means, the effect is we’re breaking the only military we have at a time when unfortunately we’re going to likely need them more than ever.
Rick Perry, who has equated the fight against gays in the Boy Scouts to the fight to abolish slavery, told Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council on Friday’s edition of Washington Watch that the Boy Scouts of America’s delegates bowed to “political correctness” and “money” in ending the ban on gay members under the age of 18. The Texas governor went as so far as to say that God will hold the BSA’s leadership accountable: “they will look back on it someday and be held accountable, so that day will come and they will stand before their maker and be accountable for the decisions that they made.”
I think a loving, tolerant view towards those who have different sexual preference is the ideal position but Scouts has never been about sexuality and my point is that’s one of the reasons I wrote the book, it shouldn’t be. Scouting is not about sex, it’s about building character. But those who wanted to push their agenda have now put parents and young men in the position of making a decision, is this where I want to spend my time? Is this an organization that I do want to be associated with? I think the jury is going to be out for a while. I do think that those on that board made a decision that was driven by political correctness, by money and they will look back on it someday and be held accountable, so that day will come and they will stand before their maker and be accountable for the decisions that they made.
Later in the show, the always eloquent Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) tried to make a joke (or something) about how Boy Scouts might earn a merit badge from an openly gay troop leader.
Perkins: Even before the ink was dry on the press releases the groups pushing this were demanding that they needed more, this was not enough; they wanted to open up the ranks of leadership to those who openly practice homosexuality.
Gohmert: I wonder what you’d call that merit badge.
Perkins: I don’t know but I’m sure they’ll think of something.
Gohmert claimed that he is “brokenhearted” over the decision, telling Perkins: “You’re going to allow a situation where a seventeen-year-old guy that’s sexually attracted to other guys gets in a little tent with an eleven-year-old new rookie Boy Scout and they spend the night together, night after night at camp? I mean, come on.” He said that the Boy Scouts only made the move over the possible financial benefits and in doing so ignored the Bible.
I was just so brokenhearted over the vote with the Boy Scouts. You’re going to allow a situation where a seventeen-year-old guy that’s sexually attracted to other guys gets in a little tent with an eleven-year-old new rookie Boy Scout and they spend the night together, night after night at camp? I mean, come on. I thought we were making progress. All I can figure is—I was an Eagle Scout, we share so much of the love of scouting—when you hear what happened, the people I talked to are, ‘well just think there are so many corporations that are holding up their donations and if we will just do this all of that money is going to flow to Boy Scouts.’ Are you kidding me? Is money the most important thing in life? Gosh no. You’re blessed so much more if you follow the teachings in the little old rulebook we call the Bible.
After a week-long break from hosting the 700 Club, Pat Robertson returned to the show today bearing a special message…for us! Robertson introduced the question-and-answer portion of the show with a tirade against a group that he declined to name that monitors his show and posts clips online.
“There are organizations, there is one in particular, which I will not name, but it is set out for one purpose: to embarrass those who are conservative on television. So they take my words and they twist them and distort them,” he said.
We have a pretty good idea of who he might be talking about. Robertson specifically referred to our recent post on his response to a question from a woman struggling to preserve her marriage after her husband had an affair. At the time, Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network released a statement saying that the televangelist’s “intent was not to condone infidelity or to cast blame. We regret any misunderstanding.”
According to Robertson, by posting his entire answer and quoting him verbatim we were actually misrepresenting his words to make him look bad, but somehow at the same time we were also helping him because he received a letter endorsing his “advice.”
After co-host Terry Meeuwsen read the encouraging letter, Robertson boasted about his counseling skills and added, “I am not politically correct, in case you haven’t learned; I tell it like it is.”
“This organization misconstrues deliberately, they want to do everything they can to make my words and they twist them,” Robertson said. “I will not identify the organization but one day we may have a full-scale exposé because it’s a nasty group.”
Seeing that Robertson already blamed us for 9/11, we are eagerly waiting to see what more he reveals in his “full-scale exposé.”
Larry Klayman is very upset that Jewish-Americans aren’t standing up to oppose “the Muslim-in-Chief,” and are instead “at the forefront of a number of scandals.” He said Jews are behind “the promotion of anti-family institutions like gay marriage” and working as President Obama’s “leftist Jewish government comrades and partners in crime.” After calling Obama “a Muslim through and through,” Klayman goes on to write that the IRS scandal was perpetrated by “felonious liberal Jews” who should be in prison:
Well over a decade since the scandalous Clintons left office, the issue of leftist Jewish influence is not just about the promotion of anti-family institutions like gay marriage, but of outright criminal behavior of the Obama administration. I am more than embarrassed and appalled as a Jew to see my own people at the forefront of a number of scandals now perpetrated by the Muslim-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama, and his leftist Jewish government comrades and partners in crime. It is time for the great majority of Jews, who are honest law-abiding citizens, to speak up and play a role in helping to put these felonious liberal Jews in a place where the sun don't shine – meaning prison.
That Jews don't mince words and don't generally circle the wagons for their own creed is a Hebrew virtue. The God of Abraham and Isaac is not forgiving to His own people when they step out of line and neither have been his flock. True Jews, like true Christians, will police their own house and not allow criminal behavior to go unaddressed, no matter what the source. That is one of our main differences with Muslims, who by and large cover for, or stay silent about, the terrorist deeds of their brethren. Ironically, this helps explain why Obama, who by birth is half Muslim and who in his heart is a Muslim through and through, refuses to call Muslim terrorism the terrorism it is. We Jews and Christians are cut from a different godly cloth – Yahweh.
So in the last few weeks, when it was revealed that the three main actors in the burgeoning IRS scandal, Doug Shulman, the former IRS commissioner, Steven T. Miller, former acting IRS commissioner, and Lois Lerner, former director of exempt organizations, are all Jewish, my heart again throbbed in shame. Ominously, during the 1990s, and at the height of my efforts to bring the Clintons to justice while heading Judicial Watch, I had tangled with one of these felonious characters, Steven Miller.
As reported last week by Paul Bedard of the Washington Examiner, Miller, who headed the IRS Enforcement Division from 2009 until the end of last year, is named in court documents as part of a trio of Internal Revenue Service officials who allegedly characterized the 1998-2001 investigation of Judicial Watch as politically motivated.
Indeed, I had sued Miller and the IRS after they undertook an audit of Judicial Watch one week after our Clinton impeachment report had been entered by Rep. Bob Barr into the Congressional Record. Miller and company illegally asked in the audit papers about the political affiliations of our directors, much like has been recently exposed to have occurred in the current IRS scandal concerning conservative, pro-Israel and Christian groups during the Obama administration.
All of this underscores why we Jews must now fearlessly stand up and seek to hold our own people legally accountable for their criminal wrongdoing. If the past is a prologue, neither Congress nor our corrupt and compromised Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder will bring these disgraceful rogues to justice. To do less would be to forsake our proud Judeo- Christian roots and heritage.
According to Tea Party Nation, “the future of conservative movement” is found in a candidate who believes gay people are “sick” and “degenerate” and that Planned Parenthood is worse than the Ku Klux Klan. In an email today, the group’s president Judson Phillips said that E.W. Jackson is under criticism because his anti-gay comments “are popular in the black community” and “that shocks and offends liberals.”
Phillips compared the Virginia GOP’s candidate for Lt. Governor to Ronald Reagan and bragged that “the 2013 ticket for the Republicans in Virginia represents the victory of the Tea Party over the establishment.”
E.W. Jackson represents a threat to the left.
Immediately after E.W. Jackson was nominated, the left wing media in Virginia began pulling out comments he had made, claiming he was too radical and extreme. Jackson is pro-life. To the media, if you are not Kermit Gosnell you are too extreme.
As a minister, Jackson has blasted homosexuality (as opposed to homosexuals). Amazingly enough, his comments on that subject are popular in the black community. That shocks and offends liberals.
After E.W. Jackson was nominated, the Democrats trotted out a couple of liberal Republicans who whined that the Party was now “too extreme” with Ken Cuccinelli and E.W. Jackson leading the ticket.
A whispering campaign began that the GOP establishment was upset with Jackson’s selection and they were working on a plan to remove him.
Even the GOP establishment isn’t that dumb.
The 2013 ticket for the Republicans in Virginia represents the victory of the Tea Party over the establishment. The establishment is not happy about this but they don’t have a choice. They didn’t like Ronald Reagan either.
During the convention last Saturday when each of the candidates spoke, they all received applause. E.W. Jackson’s speech got a standing ovation and it was not just his supporters standing.
E.W. Jackson represents the future of the conservative movement.
Fred Jackson and Dan Celia of the American Family Association discussed the Boy Scouts of America’s vote to end the ban on openly gay members under the age of 18 this morning on Financial Issues, which Jackson called an “open rebellion against God.” The two expressed shock and disappointment as Jackson noted that over 60 percent of delegates backed the change in policy, and Celia predicted that this will bring “the fall of the nation.”
Todd Akin isn’t the only one urging the Republican Party to move even further to the right. In an interview with Policy Mic, Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum says the GOP should put more of an emphasis on social issues and look to conservative firebrands Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Mike Lee as their role models. She blamed Mitt Romney’s loss on a “tremendous” drop-off in white voters, even though according to exit poll data white voter turnout was about the same as the last presidential election and Romney out-performed John McCain among white voters.
Schlafly, who also revealed that she is writing a book entitled Who Killed the American Family?, called feminism “the most destructive element in our society” and claimed feminists would “really like to get rid of” all men, while insisting that the Constitution has never been a sexist document and people should “stop complaining” about a lack of female candidates for office.
She also made the absurd claim that the government didn’t play a role in fighting the Great Depression and that Mexican immigrants aren’t becoming Americans because they are too comfortable with the welfare state and not voting Republican. Schlafly called the Senate immigration reform bill “suicide for our country” and said Mexico will use it to take over US territory.
On the topic of gay rights, Schlafly said that she continues to oppose marriage equality despite having a gay son, but also seems to be under the impression that same-sex couples can already get married: “Any gay couple can get married— all they have to do is find a preacher or justice of the peace who will perform the ceremony. There’s no law against that.”
She maintained that gay rights advocates are really pushing “an interference with our free speech rights” and warned that “homosexuals are teaching their ideology in the schools, and kids are learning it.”
When asked if President Obama should be impeached, Schlafly claimed that the recent IRS controversy is far worse than Watergate, which she called “just an ordinary little break in to an office,” and added that Obama could also be impeached over his opposition to the Defense Of Marriage Act.
Sagar Jethani: Reflecting on Mitt Romney's defeat in November, Senator Lindsey Graham said "If I hear anybody say it was because Romney wasn't conservative enough I'm going to go nuts. We're not losing 95% of African-Americans and two-thirds of Hispanics and voters under 30 because we're not being hard-ass enough." You disagree.
Phyllis Schlafly: Lindsey Graham is one of the establishment Republicans. They picked Romney, and they have to defend him. There were many, many things wrong with the election and the campaign in 2012. One of them was that establishment Republicans really don't have a ground game. They really don't know how to relate to grassroots Americans. Romney appealed to the people who are well-to-do and traditionally Republican, but there wasn't any outreach from that. And the real block that he failed to get was the white voters — his drop-off from white voters was tremendous.
Who represents the future of the GOP?
People like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Mike Lee who are not establishment candidates.
What about Marco Rubio? Wasn't he a grassroots candidate?
Originally, Marco Rubio was until he went over and joined the establishment and became their salesman for unlimited amnesty.
Republicans are often criticized for wanting to dismantle the safety nets people depend on. Do you think the government has a role to play in helping those who struggle to get by?
I grew up during the Great Depression, and didn't have any of these government handouts, and we grew up to be what was called the Greatest Generation. The idea of an enormous number of people getting food stamps? Nobody's hungry in the United States. I think we need to build more self-reliance. We need to build the nuclear family, in which the father is the provider and the mother is a mother.
You recently argued against amnesty for undocumented immigrants, saying it would be suicide for the Republican Party because they would all vote Democratic. You don't think that Hispanics resonate with Republican values?
I don't see any evidence that Hispanics resonate with Republican values. They have no experience or knowledge of the whole idea of limited government and keeping government out of our private lives. They come from a country where the government has to decide everything. I don't know where you get the idea that the Mexicans coming in resonate with Republican values. They're running an illegitimacy rate that is extremely high. I think it's the highest of any ethnic group. We welcome people who want to be Americans. And then you hear many of them talk about wanting Mexico to reclaim several of our Southwestern states, because they think Mexico should really own some of those states. Well, that's unacceptable. We don't want people like that.
What do you make of the Gang of Eight's bill on comprehensive immigration reform now making its way through Congress?
It is suicide for our country, and not just for the Republican Party.
According to Gallup, the number of Americans who consider gay or lesbian relationships morally acceptable has shot up from 38% in 2002 to 54% today. Is it time for conservatives to get with the program and start supporting gay rights?
No, it certainly isn't. The polls are very defective. If you look at the polls, most of them ask the question: Are you in favor of banning same-sex marriage? Now, we have no law that bans same-sex marriage. Any gay couple can get married— all they have to do is find a preacher or justice of the peace who will perform the ceremony. There's no law against that. What they are demanding is that we respect them as being OK, and that's an interference with our free speech rights. There's no obligation that we have to respect something we think is morally wrong.
Republicans oppose gay marriage by a large margin, with only about 25% supporting it. But if you break down the results by age, you find that young Republicans are much more accepting of gay marriage, with about 40% supporting it.
What you say is certainly substantially true, but I think it's a result of what they're taught in the schools. They've been teaching in the schools that homosexuality is OK for years. So the kids who have been taught that have grown up, and they've been made to believe it. The homosexuals are teaching their ideology in the schools, and kids are learning it.
Your own son, John, is gay. What do you say to those who argue that your view on gay rights prevents people like him from enjoying the same rights that heterosexual Americans possess?
In the first place, I'd say it's really none of their business. It doesn't bother me in the slightest. My son is very supportive of my work. In fact, he works for me in the Eagle Forum. He's a fine, honorable man. It does not cause any problems in our family.
You don't think feminism has done some good in raising the status of women?
The feminist movement is the most destructive element in our society. It has done nothing but damage. It has not done anything good for women, whatsoever. The worst part of it is the attitude that breeds in young women in making them think that they are the victims of the oppressive patriarchy. That is so false. If you wake up in the morning thinking you're a victim, you're probably not going to be happy or accomplish anything.
Don't women in this country still have a long way to go in terms of enjoying the same rights that men have held from the beginning?
American women are the most fortunate class of people who ever lived on the face of the earth. We should rejoice in the great, wonderful country we have. Women have always been in the Constitution. There is no sexist word in the Constitution. It is written for We, the people and every word in it is sex-neutral, like person, citizen, elector, and Senator. I don't know what they're complaining about. You can do whatever you want.
Yesterday, Chris Jankowski, president of the Republican State Leadership Committee, said that it's hard to recruit women to run for office because Republicans don't value women as much as men.
What you said is ridiculous, and the guy who said it has been influenced by feminist propaganda. I can tell you why it's hard to recruit women. I have run for office. I ran twice for Congress. Women don't like to do what you have to do to get elected in the same proportion that men do. It's just plain tough: eat all those bad chicken dinners, travel all the time, expose yourself to attack by the other side all the time. And if you get elected to Congress, you may live a couple of thousand miles away from home. There will never be a large proportion of women who choose that lifestyle as compared to men. So stop complaining.
You argue that radical feminists have pushed for easier divorce laws to destroy the traditional family unit.
Of course, radical feminists push for divorce. They think men are not necessary, and they'd really like to get rid of them. The easy divorce law should be called unilateral divorce: it means one spouse can break a contract, and get out of solemn promises made in public before witnesses without the consent of the other party — without any fault on the side of the other party. That is so contrary to American constitutional law. Our Constitution is supposed to uphold the sanctity of contracts, but it doesn't.
We've seen a few scandals unfold in the past couple of weeks — the IRS targeting conservative groups, and the Justice Department secretly monitoring private communications at the Associated Press, Fox, and other news organizations. Do you agree with Steve King and Michele Bachmann that these scandals are worse than Watergate?
Well, of course the IRS scandal is much worse than Watergate. Watergate was just an ordinary little break in to an office. The harassment by the IRS, particularly of those who use Tea Party or Patriot in their titles, is just a total outrage. These groups had every right to get their status approved in a couple of weeks. Instead, they were harassed for years.
Do you agree with those on the right who say the recent scandals merit impeachment proceedings?
I think there are many reasons why Obama could be impeached, but I'm not leading that battle. I think the best way is for Congress to stand up and stop a lot of the mischief that he's doing which may be illegal. The Constitution makes it the duty of the president to take care that the laws are faithfully executed. He's got Eric Holder trying to overturn a law that was duly passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses and signed by Bill Clinton — namely, the Defense of Marriage Act. He's not taking care to see that the laws are faithfully executed. That's just one of his offenses.