Miranda Blue's blog

Sandy Rios: Liberals Love Radical Islam Because They Both Come From Satan

On her radio program this morning, the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios got to talking about comments that liberals leave on her Facebook page, which she says she doesn’t mind because she knows that “this is a spiritual battle” and her critics don’t “understand who it is that they serve,” which is Satan and the “spiritual forces of darkness.”

“This is a spiritual battle and I don’t think people understand who they’ve signed up to serve, and it’s not God,” she said.

Rios then read an email from a listener who said, “Liberals don’t seem to be outraged about radical Islam but they hate Christianity. The only thing that I can figure is evil likes evil.”

“Yep,” Rios responded, “well, they have the same root, the same father, and that’s Satan himself.

Sandy Rios Tells Caller Media Has Made Him An 'Angry Black Man' Over Police Shootings

After saying on her radio program today that President Obama has “pushed things so far back” in terms of race relations, the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios told a man who called in to challenge her statement that the media had made him an “angry black man” in its efforts to “whip the black community into a frenzy” over police shootings.

Rios played a clip from an interview Wicomoco County, Maryland, Sheriff Michael Lewis gave to Fox’s Sean Hannity about unrest in Baltimore, in which he said that race relations have “eroded tremendously” under the Obama administration and are the “worst” he’s ever seen.

Rios wholeheartedly agreed with Lewis, saying that President Obama and former Attorney General Eric Holder “have pushed things so far back” in terms of race relations. “I hate that," she said. “I hate what it’s done to race relations. I hate that. It’s divisive. And that’s what the president’s all about, is dividing people by race, color, sex, it’s just amazing to me.”

Later in the program, a listener who identified himself as Charles from Columbus, Ohio, called in to challenge Rios on the point, citing the recent acquittal of a police officer in the shooting deaths of an unarmed black couple in Cleveland. “Unfortunately, sisters and brothers like yourselves and others just don’t get it as it pertains to basically to black America and the history of black America with regards to America,” he told Rios. “I get so discouraged when I hear you guys talk about the current situation with policing and black America.”

Rios told Charles that he was being duped by “people who want to whip the black community in a frenzy by misrepresenting facts” on police shootings, saying that he has to be careful with the facts just as the Right does in talking about Jade Helm 15 and other anti-Obama conspiracy theories (something that Rios herself does not exactly do).

She even compared Charles’ outrage over police shootings to the backlash she received over her comment connecting the recent Amtrak derailment to the conductor’s homosexuality

“You do understand, Charles, that there are people who want to whip the black community into a frenzy by misrepresenting facts?” she asked. “You know, I was just the object of this, I have just been — people have been whipped into a frenzy over statements that I made about the train conductor. And what they’re saying is, they take a lot of what I said and twist it, and then it goes like a house afire. So I know how this works. Maybe you don’t. But I tell you there are people that benefit from twisting the story ever so slightly to get you whipped into a rage.”

“Look, ABC doesn’t care about giving you the whole story, neither does CBS, because they want you to be an angry black man,” she said. “Do you understand that?”

Walker Claims ‘Cool’ Ultrasound Comment Was Twisted By ‘Lazy’ Media

Earlier this week, we reported on Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s comment on Dana Loesch’s radio program that a bill he signed requiring that women seeking abortions first undergo a medically unnecessary ultrasound was no big deal because ultrasounds are “lovely” and “just a cool thing.”

The comment was subsequently picked up by a number of media outlets, eventually leading to a backlash from the right-wing media, who claimed that the whole thing was taken out of context.

Yesterday, Walker returned to Loesch’s show to slam the media for being “biased” and “lazy” for reporting on his comments, encouraged by pro-choice advocates who “can’t win” on the issues.

But then he repeated the very same sentiment he expressed in the original interview, saying that mandatory ultrasounds are no big deal: “Who’s opposed to an ultrasound?’”

Here, as in our original post, is the full audio of Walker’s comments. Judge for yourself:

Marriage Equality Opponent: Gay Marriage 'Mess' Started With Contraception

The Heritage Foundation’s Ryan T. Anderson — the fresh face of the movement against marriage equality — agreed with an interviewer last week that the road to marriage equality started with widespread contraception use, saying that the acceptance of gay marriage came about because “we’ve had a culture since the ‘60s, since the sexual revolution, that has largely made a mess of human sexuality, the family and marriage.”

Patrick Coffin, who hosts a podcast for the group Catholic Answers, asked Anderson whether “the widespread acceptance of contraception” was “the first domino to fall” on the way to marriage equality.

“Yes, the sexual revolution explains quite a bit of this,” Anderson agreed. “We only arrived at the place where we are today, in 2015, at the cusp of a potential Supreme Court case redefining marriage everywhere because we’ve had a culture since the ‘60s, since the sexual revolution, that has largely made a mess of human sexuality, the family and marriage. It’s only after a generation or two of premarital sex, non-marital childbearing, the hookup culture, pornography, no-fault divorce, that you’d then be at the point of saying, ‘Oh, yeah, marriage has nothing to do with men and women.’”

Opponents of marriage equality don’t always acknowledge that the rights that they would like to roll back don’t stop with gay marriage. But just as the gay rights and women’s rights movements have been intertwined for decades, so has the opposition to those advances.

In fact, Anderson made this very argument in a 2006 essay in defense of the radically anti-contraception Quiverfull movement (made famous by the Duggar family), in which he wondered if a backlash against gay marriage might lead Christians to reexamine their "sexual practice" and come to realize "the immorality of contraception":

As people continue to see the bad results of the sexual revolution, they are likely to reevaluate their current attitudes toward sex, and while doing so they may find that the logic of human sexuality leads right back to traditional Christian orthodoxy. Might the continued push for same-sex "marriage" and the normalization of homosexuality prove to be the tipping point, the catalyst for a widespread reexamination of Christian sexual practice? Might these issues push the envelope so far that, as faithful Christians reflect on the reasons why they must conclude that homosexual acts fail to embody the truth of human sexuality, they come to realize that these same reasons entail the immorality of contraception? (For the moment I’ll assume that anyone entertaining this line of thought has already concluded that premarital and extramarital sex likewise fail to embody the truth of human sexuality.)

Last month, during the Supreme Court arguments in the Obergefell v. Hodges marriage equality cases, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg challenged the idea that the definition of marriage has existed for “millennia,” pointing out that the ground for same-sex marriage was paved by a “change in the institution of marriage to make it egalitarian” for women. More recently, the legal fight for reproductive rights for women — starting with defending the right to contraception — has gone hand in hand with the fight for LGBT rights.

This post has been updated with Anderson's 2006 article.

Phyllis Schlafly: Today's Immigrants Are 'Not The Same Sort' As Europeans 'Who Contributed So Much'

In a radio commentary earlier this month, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly acknowledged that it’s “quite true that America was built by hard-working people from all over the world,” but cautioned that today’s immigrants from Latin America are “not the same sort” as the wave of mostly European immigrants who came to the U.S. in the early 20th century.

Schlafly criticized President Obama for calling the U.S. “a nation of immigrants,” saying, “The problem is that the immigrants coming into our country today are not the same sort as the immigrants who contributed so much to building our great country. The immigrants who came to America in the 1920s and ‘30s were different – with very different motives.”

“It’s quite true that America was built by hard working people from all over the world who sought a place of freedom where they could realize their dream,” she said. “But today’s immigrants don’t have the same motivation, the same love for America, the same desire to be part of the American culture and dream.”

She cited Russian-born songwriter Irving Berlin as the kind of America-loving immigrant who supposedly no longer come to the United States.

Schlafly's commentary varies slightly from a transcript provided on Eagle Forum's website, which adds this thought: "[Today's immigrants] don’t want to leave their homes and become Americans, accepting all that comes along with it. Many of them just want to reap the rewards of our free nation without accepting American culture, the English language, and the rule of law.”

Pat Robertson Warns Against The 'Charlie Charlie Challenge': Demons Will 'Possess' & 'Destroy' You

We guess the newest craze among kids these days is the “Charlie Charlie Challenge,” basically a homemade Ouija board made out of pencils that will supposedly “summon a Mexican demon” to answer your pressing yes-or-no questions.

Pat Robertson’s “The 700 Club” ran an alarmed segment about this “new social media trend” today, citing “spiritual experts” who warn that there are “clear warnings” against such activities in the Bible.

Robertson was also not amused, warning that “like it or not, demons are real” and “they will possess and they will destroy” those who mess with them:

CWA: Gay Leaders Will 'Dismantle' Boy Scouts And 'Put Our Young Sons At Risk'

Concerned Women for America is joining the right-wing freakout over Boy Scouts head Robert Gates’ suggestion that the organization lift its ban on gay troop leaders. In a fundraising email today, CWA president Penny Nance declares that the Boy Scouts “have taken a radical turn” and that allowing gay leaders will “dismantle one of the last remaining traditional institutions that make America great” while putting “our young sons at risk.”

Dear ____,

The Boy Scouts of America have taken a radical turn.

Last week, Robert Gates, president of the Boy Scouts, called for an end to the ban on homosexual leaders ... effectively caving to the forces of political correctness ...

• Betraying parents

• Betraying young scouts

• Betraying the Scout Oath to remain "morally straight"

• And betraying the Boy Scouts' decades-old record of courage and leadership.

I will not stand by while activist groups dismantle one of the last remaining traditional institutions that make America great - and put our young sons at risk.

Sex and politics don't belong in the Boy Scouts.

Please sign CWA's Open Letter to Robert Gates - to protect America's children from becoming caught up in a cultural fight started by radical proponents.

Homosexual activists long ago declared war on the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) and have for years delivered blow after blow against them for their stand against open homosexuality within their leadership.

The Scouts have stood with dignity and valor through every attempt, but that's about to change ...

Homosexual activists are on the brink of finally bullying them into submission. and BSA President Gates needs to know just where you stand regarding his lack of courage.

Sign our Open Letter right now and demand moral leadership from Robert Gates: Do not lift the ban on "gay" Scout leaders, destroy the Scouts' reputation, and put our sons' safety at risk.

Don't let the Scouts become just one more institution where Christians will be forced to compromise their convictions. .

Join us as we call on the Boy Scouts of America to remain faithful to their founding and to, above all, be courageous in pursuing their core principle of "Duty to God."

Sincerely,

Penny Nance
Chief Executive Officer and President
Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee

Just Weeks Before Saying Abortion Should Be Left To The States, Rand Paul Wanted To 'Bypass Roe v. Wade'

Sen. Rand Paul’s recent remark that the issue of abortion rights would be best handled “by the states” rather than “under the 14th Amendment” and his ambiguous answer to the question of “when does life begin” were, as commentators on the left and the right have pointed out, somewhat confounding since Paul has sponsored a Senate bill that aims to undermine Roe v. Wade by defining life as beginning “at conception.”

Adding to the confusion, just a few weeks before Paul made his remarks, the “personhood” group National Pro-Life Alliance forwarded to its members a fundraising email Paul wrote last year urging them to support the effort to “bypass Roe v. Wade” by declaring “unborn children ‘persons’ as defined by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, entitled to legal protection.”

On April 4, National Pro-Life Alliance forwarded Paul’s letter with the subject line “Sign the petition to bypass Roe v. Wade”:

In the past, many in the pro-life movement have felt limited to protecting a life here and there -- passing some limited law to slightly control abortion in the more outrageous cases.

But some pro-lifers always seem to tiptoe around the Supreme Court, hoping they won't be offended.

Now the time to grovel before the Supreme Court is over .

Working from what the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade, pro-life lawmakers can pass a Life at Conception Act and end abortion using the Constitution instead of amending it.

Signing the Life at Conception Act petition will help break through the opposition clinging to abortion-on-demand and ultimately win a vote on this life-saving bill to overturn Roe v. Wade.

A Life at Conception Act declares unborn children "persons" as defined by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, entitled to legal protection .

This is the one thing the Supreme Court admitted in Roe v. Wade that would cause the case for legal abortion to "collapse."

Today, the group sent a similar message from former Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas. Paul’s and Stockman’s argument is based on the somewhat questionable legal theory — rejected by even many anti-choice leaders — that Congress can “bypass” a constitutional amendment or Supreme Court decision overturning Roe by simply passing legislation declaring fertilized eggs and fetuses to be “persons” under the law.

Some anti-choice leaders worry that this strategy would backfire in the courts, giving the Supreme Court a broad opening to strengthen Roe v. Wade. But if it were to succeed, the consequences would be enormous , not only defining all abortion as murder, but endangering common forms of birth control as well. Back in 2013, Paul claimed that such a measure would have “thousands of exceptions,” which his staff later clarified that he did not actually mean.

In fact, saying completely contradictory things on reproductive rights seems to be becoming Paul’s official campaign line. In his profile of Paul in March, Brian summarized Paul’s shifting stance on abortion rights as he heads into the 2016 presidential election:

Paul has also been on all sides of the question of abortion rights. Although Paul is the chief sponsor of a federal personhood bill that would ban abortion in all cases and has warned that a failure to pass the bill will result in the collapse of civilization, he has also said that he does not favor changing the nation’s abortion laws because the country is currently too divided on the issue. Paul insists that he opposes bans on birth control, despite the fact that his own personhood bill would give legal rights to zygotes and could ban common forms of contraception. In a 2013 CNN interview, Paul said that there would be “thousands of exceptions” to his personhood bill, but a spokesman later assured anti-choice activists that the senator approved of just a single exception, allowing abortion in cases where the life of the pregnant woman is at risk.

Phyllis Schlafly: 'The Pay Gap, Really, Is Something That Women Like'

Anti-feminist crusader Phyllis Schlafly stopped by VCY America’s “Crosstalk” program yesterday to discuss her book “Who Killed The American Family?” (Spoiler:“It’s not just the gays.”)

One overlooked murderer of the family, Schlafly said, are “the free trade people who have done the work of the feminists by getting rid of [middle class] jobs.” This led her to discuss the gender pay gap, which she said is actually something that women like because they want to marry someone who makes more than they do (a sentiment that she has expressed before).

“Women like to marry a man who makes more than she does,” she explained, “so then she can take time off and work fewer hours when she has something she’d rather do like have a kid and look after her children. So the pay gap, really, is something that women like.”

Wisconsin 'Pro-Life' Group Wants To Remove 'Medical Emergency' Exception From Abortion Ban

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has indicated that he will sign a 20-week abortion ban that provides an exception only for pregant women who are suffering a “medical emergency” — and even in those cases, the doctor would likely be required to perform a C-section. This exception is even more restrictive than that provided in a similar federal bill that just passed in the U.S. House, which — after months of wrangling — provided a narrow exception for rape survivors.

But the “medical emergency” exception isn’t enough for Wisconsin’s “personhood” group, Pro-Life Wisconsin, which as the Daily Beast points out is asking legislators to withhold support from the bill until its authors remove “an exception for babies whose mother’s lives may be endangered, as if those babies don’t feel pain”:

"Pro-Life Wisconsin supports banning abortion based on the preborn child's ability to feel pain, but it is utter hypocrisy for proponents of the bill to decry the horror of dismembering a child through a dilation and evacuation abortion and then carve out an exception for babies whose mother's lives may be endangered, as if those babies somehow don't feel pain," said Matt Sande, Pro-Life Wisconsin Legislative Director. "We urge legislators to refrain from co-sponsoring this bill until the medical emergency exception is fully removed."

The personhood movement’s no-exceptions approach to abortion policy makes it a thorn in the side of the anti-choice movement , but not because the movement’s “mainstream” disagrees with personhood advocates on principle. As the Susan B. Anthony List’s Marjorie Dannenfelser acknowledged recently, exceptions are “political” tools to win support for abortion bans, which she finds “regrettable.” And, in practice, 20-week bans are meant to advance the goals of the “personhood” movement by providing a strategic challenge to the framework of Roe v. Wade.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious