Brian Tashman's blog

Pastor Scott Lively has republished a column warning that “the First Amendment is under siege” by the gay rights movement which seeks “to crush [civil rights] under the heels of its pink jackboots.” Lively, best known for his work promoting Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill, said that the Constitution is the only document "still standing as a barrier to the homosexual agenda” and that “true human rights will be finished in America (and by extension the rest of the western world)” if “the First Amendment falls to the ‘gays.’”

This week marks the anniversary of the adoption of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations. December 10th is International Human Rights Day. Unfortunately, this is a day celebrated mostly by leftists, who have hijacked “human rights” in recent times to serve their own misguided agenda. However, true human rights as they have been understood through the centuries spring from and epitomize the biblical world view.

…

Moreover, this "right to sodomy" actually undermines true human rights, as exemplified by the collapse of the Magna Charta in the United Kingdom. The first principle of that venerable human rights document declares that "The English Church shall be free." This principle, established in the bedrock of British jurisprudence in 1215, stood unshakable for nearly 800 years until the rise of the "gay" movement which has in just the past decade achieved the power to redefine religious liberty as "homophobia" and to crush it under the heels of its pink jackboots.

…

Today there is only one human rights document still standing as a barrier to the homosexual agenda in the west: the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Indeed, this is the very source of the religious liberty and freedom of speech clauses of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights upon which all modern human rights laws and treaties rest. (The first half of the Universal Declaration was drafted by the Americans, the latter half by the Soviets in the days following the completion of the Nurenberg [sic] war crimes trials of the Nazi leaders by the Allies).

Yet despite the emergence of the Universal Declaration and all of its statutory progeny, no country in the world has been as stalwart in defense of religious liberty and freedom of speech as the United States -- because of the First Amendment. However, even as we celebrate International Human Rights Day, the First Amendment is under siege by the same forces that brought down the Magna Charta. In recent years it has survived a series of assaults that continue to grow in frequency and severity with no end in sight.

…

My friends, understand the gravity of what I am saying. If the First Amendment falls to the “gays” like the Magna Charta did, true human rights will be finished in America (and by extension the rest of the western world). There is no fall-back position. The First Amendment is the last bastion of freedom for Christians. If it fails, serious persecution of all who dare to speak the truth of the Bible will follow close behind. Pray fervently that it will stand!

A new report put out by the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund reveals that in several public school classes on the impact of the Bible on history have found classes teaching from a right-wing, fundamentalist Christian standpoint.

A Southern Methodist University religious studies professor Mark Chancey found instances of students learning a literal interpretation of the Bible, that the earth is approximately 6,000 years old and that Judaism is a “flawed and incomplete religion” with materials “designed to evangelize rather than provide an objective study of the Bible’s influence.”

TFN also found a lesson explaining “racial origins traced from Noah.”

The claim that Africans are descendants of Ham, whom Noah curses in Genesis 9 after he “saw the nakedness of his father,” has long been used as a biblical justification for anti-black racism and slavery.

The report [PDF] even found courses that embrace the Christian nationalist ideology of the Religious Right, including inauthentic quotes attributed to the Founding Fathers:

In a few districts, Bible courses echo claims made within the Religious Right that the Founding Fathers were largely orthodox Protestant Christians who intended for the United States to be a distinctively Christian nation with laws and a form of government based on the Bible. This logic is implied, for example, in a Dalhart ISD daily lesson plan: “The student understands the beliefs, and principles taken from the Biblical texts and applied to elements of the American system of government.” These claims are problematic not only because they are historically inaccurate but also because they figure prominently in attempts by the Religious Right to guarantee a privileged position in the public square for their own religious beliefs above those of others.

…

Lubbock and Prosper ISDs are among the districts that relied on material from the NCBCPS [National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools] course on this topic. Since at least 2005, the NCBCPS curriculum has included a 10-page selection of isolated quotations (at least five of them spurious) praising the Bible, God and Christianity set against a blurry backdrop depicting soldiers carrying an American flag.

UPDATE: It appears that Calvin College will no longer be hosting the event.

The American Decency Association plans to host Kamal Saleem, who claims to be a former terrorist, at Calvin College as part of a tour of Michigan. Saleem’s story of working as a terrorist all over the globe has been thoroughly debunked, but he continues to be an idol of Religious Right groups. He even spoke at last year’s Values Voter Summit following Paul Ryan where he warned that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton plans to “shut down” churches and synagogues.

Saleem has argued that President Obama is a Muslim who is using Roe v. Wade “to bring Sharia law” to the U.S. He maintains that Obama wants to make sure that “Sharia law will be supreme in America” by working with “Hamas to import Muslim people to the United States” and “legalizing terrorism.” Saleem even claims that “there are many generals who swore to destroy the United States of America are generals in the United States [military]” and that an Islamic shadow government is secretly running the U.S. through the Obama family babysitter.

He spoke at Calvin College in 2007, where he met Professor Doug Howard, who went on to write an article for Christianity Today on the “bizarre” and fantastical claims that Saleem makes in his book, The Blood of Lambs.

Because Howard, like others, raised serious doubts about Saleem’s story, Saleem has accused him of working for the Muslim Brotherhood.

Michelle Goldberg of The Daily Beast reports that “Saleem told me that Howard is an agent of the Muslim Brotherhood” and in an interview with Tim Murphy of Mother Jones, Saleem asserted that Howard supports radical Islam:

But Saleem didn't flinch. "He's related to a special group called the Muslim Brotherhood, and he works with them, he went to DC, he was with CAIR," he said.

I mentioned that Howard is a Christian, which makes him an odd fit for the Brotherhood.

"So? He's a professor of history. Islamic history professor, and he's writing on what? On Islamic history glory. So the group he's with, there are different groups. He rallied with them in DC, and he invited an Iranian radical to Calvin University. They spoke right there." That Iranian radical, it turns out, was Reza Aslan, who in addition to being an American citizen raised in the Bay Area, is famous mostly for suggesting that democracy is a useful weapon against terrorism.

("I don't know what to say! Maybe I should add that to my faculty web page," joked Howard in an email, adding that as part of his semester in DC, he took students to meet with the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, AIPAC, the Mennonites Central Committee, and, yes, one trip to a mosque.)

But now, Saleem is once again set to speak at a college which he believes is employing a Muslim Brotherhood agent who is part of an alliance between professors and terrorists.

Buster Wilson of the American Family Association routinely uses his radio show to push bizarre and false claims that the government is fomenting violence against its citizens and building concentration camps while also promoting quasi-birther allegations.

So it was no surprise that a caller on his show seemingly threatened President Obama’s life, telling Wilson that “we need to take him out, one way or the other.”

While Wilson made sure to reject and distance himself from the caller’s threat, he went on to tell her about his latest conspiracy theory, one endorsed by fellow AFA radio host Bryan Fischer, about how the government is seeking to make ammunition unavailable to gun owners. The next caller told Wilson that they might soon be sharing a jail cell.

Wilson: Cynthia, thanks for calling from Palestine, Texas, glad to have you on.

Caller: Thank you sir, I just want to say nobody is bringing up the fact that that Muslim shot up Fort Hood and they knew he was on the move to do that, and Benghazi you bet and the Border Patrol, where’s the bullets for them? But you want to come out here and you want to take everything we’ve got and set up the Muslim Brotherhood just clearly shows it’s like a zero dart right into the center. Also talking about holding us hostage to get his ceiling, the checks won’t come, you know, this guy. America, we need to take him out, one way or the other.

Wilson: Okay Cynthia, thanks for calling. Well I want to be careful on saying things like that we don’t want anybody to think we’re talking about—we don’t support any kind of concept of taking the President out. We had an opportunity to vote him out and the country didn’t take it so he is rightfully our president, he was voted by the majority so there you go, he’s in. but you did sort of sum it all up in one sentence everything from Benghazi to Fort Hood to Fast and Furious to the Border Patrol.

You know something else that a lot of people are not mentioning, I called my dealership that I trade with on a regular basis today to ask about the purchasing of another gun and they didn’t have any. They couldn’t tell me when they were going to have any in, they couldn’t tell me when they were coming, they didn’t know if there were going to be any more coming. She said “until we have the dust settled on all this stuff from yesterday” she couldn’t tell me if there were going to be any more guns coming in stock.

Ammunition, same thing, can’t find ammunition. You can find a few guns but you can’t find ammunition. Somebody asked me last night and I thought it was a perfect question to ask, almost a billion and a half rounds of ammunition purchased last year by the Department of Homeland Security, Border Patrol and even the armed services of the Postal Service ordered a large cache of ammunition. Why is the government ordering these huge, I mean the numbers are unbelievable, almost a billion and a half rounds by Homeland Security alone, why is the government ordering such large amounts of ammunition and you and I, Mr. Average Joe America, can’t find any ammunition? Is it just the supply and demand thing or is there something else going on? I don’t know, I don’t want to be the conspiracy theory guy, but it is a question somebody needs to answer. Let’s talk to John from Alabama.

Caller: Long time no hear Buster. Maybe one day we can get to share a jail cell and praise the Lord together.

Wilson: I hope not but I’m ready to go if need be.

After the caller warned that Obama is implementing the planks of the Communist Manifesto and creating a Nazi-like state, Wilson moved from his standard ‘I’m just asking the question’ excuse to plainly arguing that the government is planning to make ammunition unavailable to gun owners in order to “make our guns obsolete.”

Wilson: I’ve said this before, what they’re going to do in the place of confiscating the weapons that they know will cause too much civil unrest, they’re going to go after the ammunition. As I mentioned earlier, right now I can’t find anywhere where I live to buy the ammunition I want, it’s not out there. I believe whether it’s through taxation or whether it’s through demands on the corporations that are the manufacturers, they are going to do something that will stop the flow of ammunition and that’s how they will make our guns obsolete. It’s a Second Amendment right, that’s why we look at it. I just shared with you two stories today about how they are attacking the First Amendment right. The First and Second Amendments, our government, this government today, seems to be in all-out war against.

The right-wing press really can’t get enough of the comparisons of President Obama to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin over his new executive actions and proposed gun laws, including the reauthorization of the Assault Weapons Ban. While the first Assault Weapons Ban that lasted from 1994 to 2004 didn’t produce a fascistic dictatorship, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah writes today that “Obama’s gun grab” is how “every mass-murdering tyranny in the history of the world started.” Farah claims that the left will bring about “the end of liberty” and that Americans will be in the same situation as the colonists confronting a “tyrannical government” during the American Revolution.

Left leads to the end of liberty. The right path buys us time to restore the principle of constitutionally limited government.

If the U.S. government renders its citizens as subjects by disarming them, it will be the end of the dream of liberty that drove our founders to arms to fight for self-government and independence.

In fact, that was what precipitated the War of Independence. When British occupying forces set out to seize New Englanders’ arms depots at Lexington and Concord, the colonists drew a line in the sand. They understood that without firearms, they would lose any leverage they might have with their masters. They understood that without firearms, they would be hapless subjects of tyrannical government forever.

A new generation of Americans find themselves in just that predicament again, as Barack Obama puts on a full-court press to ban entire classifications of firearms leading inevitably to a government monopoly on force.

He’s appealing to emotion, and, for many Americans, dumbed down by government education and cultural institutions that place no value on freedom and personal responsibility, it’s working.

Yes, children were slaughtered at Newtown, Connecticut’s Sandy Hook Elementary School. But not one of those children would have been saved by Obama’s gun grab. To many Americans, that doesn’t matter. They just feel that something must be done.

What they don’t understand is that they are helping to set up more carnage, more Sandy Hooks, more bloodshed and, ultimately, the end of government accountability to its citizenry.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or a Ph.D. in history to know that every mass-murdering tyranny in the history of the world started like this. They began with a government monopoly on force. Once that is established, the citizenry is no longer served by government, government is served by its subjects.

Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation is running out of ways to express his belief that President Obama is working to destroy America. In his column for members today, he warns Republicans against cooperating with Obama on anything because “underneath that grey hair lies the heart of the young anti-American Marxist that went to Occidental and Columbia.”

“Barack Obama wants to destroy America,” Phillips maintains, warning Obama is “disarming America” because he “believes America is the focus of evil in the modern world.”

John Boehner and the House Republicans cannot seem to grasp the idea that Barack Obama does not simply want his name to go down on his agenda like Johnson did on the Great Society or Roosevelt did on the New Deal. Barack Obama wants to destroy America.

Underneath that grey hair lies the heart of the young anti-American Marxist that went to Occidental and Columbia. He still believes in disarming America, just as he did as a young man. He still believes America is the focus of evil in the modern world, just as he did then.

The Republicans believe if they can just escape the “obstructionist” label, they can move on and win.

How stupid can John Boehner be?

This is not about winning or losing an election. This is about saving the nation.

…

We conservatives are ready to bolt the GOP. What the hell good is an opposition party that does not want to oppose really bad ideas?

The fate of this nation hangs in the balance. Great men like George Washington, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson founded America. Unfortunately our fate now lies in the hands of John Boehner.

The right-wing group Gun Owners of America has for the past few years been pushing the debunked conspiracy theory that the health care reform law will be used to collect information on gun owners, information that will later be used as part of a gun-confiscation scheme.

Speaking with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) echoed that theory, claiming that President Obama’s new executive actions have “language in there talking about doctors being required to report on patients and ask patients if they own guns or not.”

He warned that President Obama’s “going to use Obamacare apparently to have doctors informing on their patients to whether or not they have guns” and will put the information into “government databanks.” He added: “I’m very much opposed to this kind of information going into government databanks because I fear that the time will come when this data will be misused.”

Paul: He’s going to use Obamacare apparently to have doctors informing on their patients to whether or not they have guns.

Perkins: I mean, that’s crazy.

Paul: How exactly he’s going to make this work, I don’t know, but there is language in there talking about doctors being required to report on patients and ask patients if they own guns or not.

Perkins: I read that and I was just flabbergasted…. Senator, not everybody may know this but you’re also a physician so I think you have probably a pretty different perspective on that, not just as a patient but as a doctor. I mean do you want to ask, how are you feeling, got a little fever and by the way how many guns do you have? I mean, how do you work that into the conversation?

Paul: The whole idea that the government is going to be in between you and your doctor, that the doctor-patient relationship which is a very private relationship. In fact it’s part of our Hippocratic Oath that if you come to me and see me and I’m treating you for problems which often can become personal problems and private problems would you want me going down to the grocery store and saying, I just saw so-and-so and he’s got this. You know it’s really not the kind of relationship you want with your patients.

Same way would you want your government to know and does your government need to know what medications you take, whether you own guns. I’m very much opposed to this kind of information going into government databanks because I fear that the time will come when this data will be misused.

Paul’s interpretation of the executive action is, of course, completely off-base, as are his claims about Obamacare.

The White House statement does discuss having doctors talk to patients about gun safety if someone in the home has mental health issues, rebutting the rumor that Obamacare prohibits doctors from asking about gun ownership.

Contrary to Paul’s claims, this neither “requires” doctors to ask patients about gun ownership nor makes doctors give government “databanks” information on who owns guns. A plain reading of the law finds that it explicitly prohibits such data collection:

‘‘(c) PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT GUN RIGHTS.—

‘‘(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS.— A wellness and health promotion activity implemented under subsection (a)(1)(D) may not require the disclosure or collection of any information relating to—

‘‘(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property of an individual; or

‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition by an individual.

‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to— ‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;

‘‘(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or

‘‘(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition.

‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON DATABASES OR DATABANKS.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used to maintain records of individual ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition.

‘‘(4) LIMITATION ON DETERMINATION OF PREMIUM RATES OR ELIGIBILITY FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.— A premium rate may not be increased, health insurance coverage may not be denied, and a discount, rebate, or reward offered for participation in a wellness program may not be reduced or withheld under any health benefit plan issued pursuant to or in accordance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act on the basis of, or on reliance upon—

‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; or

‘‘(B) the lawful use or storage of a firearm or ammunition.

‘‘(5) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS.— No individual shall be required to disclose any information under any data collection activity authorized under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act relating to—

‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; or

‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition.’’

According to WND columnist Erik Rush’s definitely real “sources,” the Obama administration is giving American land to the Chinese government in exchange for debt forgiveness. While this does sound a lot like the plot of the Albert Brooks book 2030, Rush says this is all part of Obama’s push “for the disarming of the American populace” to please his Chinese overlords and usher in communism. And all this time we thought Obama was ushering in Sharia!

Let me share that which was related to me via one international business interest with strong ties to the nations highlighted in the following scenario: According to this source, President Obama had a mid-level U.S. official meet with a Chinese officer in 2011 to find out if the Chinese were open to a land and resource swap for debt forgiveness. The upshot of this is that the Chinese are now engaging in experimental “farming” and “scientific” studies in several locations in the U.S. (in various states). The personnel involved are all Chinese military, and the plan is to use these as the base for the expansion of “land settlements” in payment of the U.S. debt to China.

…

So Obama has sold America out – literally – which will come as little surprise to many readers, this plan apparently being the brainchild of Obama’s senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, and members of China’s Politburo Standing Committee. Thus, the under-reported but long-standing goals of Jarrett, Obama, David Axelrod and a host of communist Obama cronies to bring America under communist sway will finally come to fruition.

Such activities have been rumored over the last couple of years, but had not been substantiated. However, this data has been verified by sources I know to be reliable; in fact, I have reported on their information previously, much to the consternation of the Chinese government.

It is the Chinese who are pushing for the disarming of the American populace. They do not want to bear the brunt of the backlash from the American public when their work and aspirations are exposed. Three weeks ago, I was told that “this will happen in weeks, not months,” and it is now occurring.

So much for our curiosity as to why in the midst of our economic woes, Obama is so vigorously capitalizing on the Sandy Hook massacre to advance what will certainly be draconian and unconstitutional measures relative to firearms. Obama’s gun-control plan includes at least 23 different executive actions – bypassing Congress and prompting at least one GOP lawmaker to suggest impeachment proceedings if Obama acts in this manner.

At this juncture, I think that impeachment is incredibly unlikely despite his treason, given what he has succeeded in getting away with under the noses of the Republican leadership. As I have been informed, there are key Republican leaders who are aware of what is transpiring between China and the Obama administration. These have been sold the notion that America is bankrupt, but that they can work with our debtors to see that an equitable settlement is reached.

The question to which this gives rise, of course, is: Equitable for whom? Is this the precursor to the Second American Revolution, or have gun sales gone through the roof for no apparent reason and toward no apparent objective (such as “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”)? Are heretofore sane, sober citizens of this republic taking leave of their senses en masse, or are they quietly and methodically preparing to stop our Union, to which thousands have given their lives, from being torn asunder?

I lean toward the latter. God help us all, and God bless America.

The American Family Association’s Buster Wilson has been warning for the last few weeks that Presidnet Obama is getting ready to confiscate guns en masse. When Obama announced his twenty-three executive actions yesterday, gun groups largely shrugged them off, but not Wilson. In his latest effort to stoke fear, he’s warning that the Obama administration may take guns away from pastors and radio talk show hosts like himself who denounce homosexuality:

Wilson: What if the Attorney General, and listen the reason I say this might happen is because if you remember the first report put out by the Director of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, when the President became President of the United States, she put out a paper talking about the people who are the categories of people who might be homegrown terrorists. In that list she put people who believe in the second coming of Jesus Christ, people who believe in pro-life issues, people who don’t believe in having illegal aliens here, they put a lot of good, decent categories of people in that paper. Well here’s what number four says, the Attorney General can put who he wants to on the list of people who are too dangerous to get guns. What if he decides radio talk show hosts who don’t believe in gay marriage, they’re dangerous, so they shouldn’t get guns; what about pastors who preach against abortion and homosexuality, they’re too dangerous get guns; that could happen.

Contrary to what Wilson said, the fourth executive action simply directs the Attorney General to make sure that people who are already prohibited from owning a firearm do not do so, not to come up with any new categories:

Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

Not only did Wilson clearly distort the plain wording of the executive actions, but he also grossly misrepresented the DHS report on right-wing terrorism.

He said that the DHS report tacked “good, decent” people “who believe in the second coming of Jesus Christ, people who believe in pro-life issues, people who don’t believe in having illegal aliens here.”

Not so.

The 2009 report [PDF], which concentrates on racist and anti-government militias, only mentions abortion in a single footnote as an example of how violent actions can be driven by a single issue, such as the bombings of clinics or the murder of abortion doctors. The only references to the Second Coming or Christianity are to the racist, anti-Semitic Christian Identity movement – whose members have engaged in violence – and a note about how End Times and doomsday prophesies have in the past radicalized certain individuals or groups.

As for immigration, the DHS only addresses the connection between anti-immigrant militarism and hate crimes against Hispanics, like violent border vigilantes, not political activism on illegal immigration.

The author of the report, Daryl Johnson, is actually an anti-choice, Mormon gun owner and a Republican. His warnings were prescient – right-wing extremists recently committed a massacre in a Sikh temple in Wisconsin and a shooting at the Holocaust Museum.

But to Wilson, completely twisting Obama’s gun orders and the DHS report on right-wing extremism are all par for the course of a job of an AFA spokesman.

Frank Gaffney hosted Andrew McCarthy of the National Review yesterday on Secure Freedom Radio where he warned that People For the American Way is “promoting the Islamist agenda in the attack on Michele Bachmann” and should really be called the “People For the Islamist Way.”

PFAW recently delivered a petition opposing Bachmann’s reappointment to the House Intelligence Committee due to her long history of making extremist claims including her recent charge that Muslim Brotherhood agents have “penetrated” the U.S. government, a conspiracy that Gaffney helped concoct.

McCarthy joined Gaffney to defend the Minnesota congresswoman, who smeared Muslim-Americans in government including Hillary Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin, and once again argue that Bachmann is the real victim. He said that PFAW and other progressive groups have “decided to ‘bork’” Bachmann “because she has been so effective.” Gaffney said that the petition was part of the “red-green axis” that exists “between the left and the Islamists.”

Apparently, the PFAW-Islamist conspiracy must go all the way to the top of the Republican Party as Speaker John Boehner; Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC); House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee Chair Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) have all strongly denounced Bachmann’s allegations.

Gaffney: Let’s start with a woman that I think we both admire, who has been vilified in both Democratic and Republican circles, shamefully, for having had the courage to speak the truth about a problem that you have documented, most especially involving the woman that I guess caused so much controversy when Michele Bachmann and four of her colleagues asked the perfectly reasonable question: how did Huma Abedin with her ties to the Muslim Brotherhood get a security clearance and what influence is she having on policy? Give us your read on the fact that the so-called People For the American Way and I must say it sounds much more like it’s the People For the Islamist Way is up to when they try through a very substantially subscribed-to petition to have Michele Bachmann thrown off the Intelligence Committee in the House?

McCarthy: Well it seems to me Frank that it means that Michele has irritated all the right people who ought to be irritated. The American people ought to understand since we’re talking about People For the American Way that that organization is a contrivance of a far-left television icon of the 1970s and 80s named Norman Lear who was instrumental in the slander of Judge Robert Bork, so much of a slander that Judge Bork’s name became a verb in our modern lexicon and Michele Bachmann is the latest person that the left has decided to ‘bork’ because she has been so effective and because she’s been a staunch defender of American national security.

…

Gaffney: Andy McCarthy you have also drilled down in your writings about the axis, some call it the red-green axis, between the left and the Islamists. This certainly seems to be a prime example of it as you say with Norman Lear’s background and the role that they are playing and in this instance promoting the Islamist agenda in the attack on Michele Bachmann.