Without even a hint of irony, Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association on Focal Point claimed that the Pharisees whom Jesus used as an example of self-righteous, judgmental, power-seeking, sanctimonious and empty religiosity are still around today… and are liberals.
“If you look for the group of people today who are doing what the Pharisees did in the Jesus did, you have to look at secular fundamentalists, you have to look at liberals, you have to look at progressives,” Fischer said.
Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday on his radio program said that Right Wing Watch and progressive organizations “make their living by lying” about topics such as the separation of church and state and have had devastating consequences.
Perkins brought up a case about a student who was allegedly disciplined for praying over his meal during lunch, saying that it represented the result of “the misinformation that is put out there by these liberal groups.”
While Perkins didn’t name anyone in particular, it sounded remarkably similar to the story of Raymond Raines, the boy who in the 1990s claimed that he was disciplined by the school for praying over his meal at lunch time, which provoked the ire of organizations such as the FRC.
Of course, in turned out to be a complete myth: Raines was disciplined for fighting in the cafeteria and the story about being confronted by a school official for praying was a fabrication.
Perkins: When I was in office I took calls from parents and one parent had called me because their child had simply bowed their head at a lunch table in a public school to pray over their meal, silently, and one of the administrators came up and put their hand on them and said, ‘Hey, wait a minute, you come with me, you can’t do that in the school, that’s a violation of the separation of church and state.’ Now that was quickly corrected because that was so egregious in terms of that administrator’s interpretation, but that is the effect of a lot of the misinformation that is put out there by these liberal groups like Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Right Wing Watch, and all of these groups that make their living by lying, that’s deceiving people and we have acquiesced to that.
We obviously don’t think it is unconstitutional for a student to pray over his or her lunch. What upsets Perkins is that we defend the freedoms of students against the demands of groups like the FRC that the government compel them to participate in organized, government-composed prayers. Which, it turns out, is the same position taken by the Southern Baptist Convention following the Supreme Court’s Engel v. Vitale decision [PDF].
In an interview with the American Family Association’s news affiliate Instant Analysis (formerly OneNewsNow), Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality condemned the large group of corporations that joined legal briefs asking the Supreme Court to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Proposition 8.
LaBarbera blasted the corporations for “pushing homosexuality on the American public,” calling the amicus brief “a tool of repression against Christians and people of faith who simply want their right to not support homosexuality.” He claimed that if the Supreme Court rules against Prop 8, “that will be a sad day for American freedom” and “a disaster,” as deciding who should have the freedom to marry “should be left up to citizens.”
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality acknowledges that corporations are at liberty to do what they want privately, such as adopting pro-homosexual policies.
“... But when you start pushing homosexuality on the American public using the government, that's another matter,” he offers. “Then it becomes a tool of repression against Christians and people of faith who simply want their right to not support homosexuality.”
According to the family advocate, the Prop. 8 case before the nation's high court is essentially the “Roe v. Wade” of the homosexual movement.
“If the court steps in and overrides the decision of the people of California not to support homosexual so-called marriage, that will be a sad day for American freedom,” he tells American Family News. “All across the nation citizens have spoken on this issue – [and] at the very least it should be left up to citizens.
“If the court imposes national homosexual marriage, that will be a disaster – and it will fuel the culture wars for decades to come.”
Of course, it is absurd to argue that a Supreme Court decision against DOMA or Prop 8 actively represses or takes away the rights of marriage equality opponents. But the Religious Right is often inconsistent in its arguments. Another AFA news item, however, explicitly rejects paying any attention to how the public feels, contradicting LaBarbera’s argument.
Sam Rohrer, a former Republican lawmaker in Pennsylvania and head of the Pennsylvania Pastors’ Network, tells the AFA that the public’s view on marriage equality doesn’t matter because judges should rule according to “moral law” established by God as “the base of the Constitution and the individual rights guaranteed by it are based on the Bible.”
The Christian Post reported on Monday that The Washington Post has published two polls that show "Americans are done with DOMA." But the Pennsylvania Pastors' Network (PPN) contends that the results are "likely skewed."
PPN president Sam Rohrer believes that polls are worth about the amount it cost to conduct them - particularly when they are financed by organizations that advocate for the destruction of marriage, including the Respect for Marriage Coalition.
"When they use polls to try to substantiate and/or to prove an acceptance of a position that has not been historically sound, I'm saying [that] is an inappropriate use of polls," Rohrer submits. "And any judge that looks to the poll as a determination of how they may or may not judge and rule on this case is to embrace moral relativism rather than moral law."
That is especially relevant now, as the U.S. Supreme Court is to hear arguments on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act next month; the resulting ruling is expected near the end of June.
The Coalition's poll results show that 83 percent of Americans, "regardless of their personal opinion on the issue," believes same-sex "marriage" will be legal nationally "in the next five to ten years." But that can only happen if the federal Defense of Marriage Act is repealed by the Supreme Court or Congress.
And a national survey conducted on behalf of the Center for American Progress (CAP) and Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) reportedly reveals that 59 percent of registered voters "oppose" Section 3 of DOMA, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman and a spouse as someone of the opposite gender.
The PPN president asserts that the purpose of the recent polls is to influence public opinion and the courts.
"What the Pastors' Network is saying is that when making a decision, a moral decision where you're talking about an institution created by God, God doesn't need public opinion polls; so neither should a judge consider what polls may or may not be," Rohrer contends. "It's a moral decision, and moral decisions ought to be made based on what God says -- not what some poll may or may not say."
Part of the oath of office high court justices take is to support and defend the Constitution. And as Rohrer points out, the base of the Constitution and the individual rights guaranteed by it are based on the Bible -- not the popular view of the culture.
Televangelist Pat Robertson regularly hosts a segment on the 700 Club in which he cures viewers of ailments that God has revealed to him. This is part of positive confession, where Word-Faith pastors like Robertson claim to speak things into existence. Quite regularly it involves money.
For example, today Robertson announced that God is going to grant a lucky 700 Club viewer one million dollars: “God is going to supply a million dollars, somebody is praying right now, right this second, you’re praying for a million dollars and God said, ‘I have heard your prayer, I know your need, and I’m going to supply the need that you requested,’ it’s done, in Jesus’ name.’”
My family is from Selma, Alabama. My grandmother, aunt and mother (both teenagers at the time) were on the Edmund Pettus Bridge on March 7, 1965, what the history books now record as Bloody Sunday. Due to the terrible violence that occurred, my grandmother, a nurse, was called to the hospital to help treat the numerous people who had been injured, one of them being Civil Rights icon Congressman John Lewis.
I grew up hearing my family members’ Civil Rights Movement stories, continually in awe of their courage and determination. They had to deal with fire hoses, dogs, and police batons in order to receive what my generation now takes for granted, the right to vote.
Yesterday, nearly 50 years after Bloody Sunday and the passage of the Voting Rights Act, I stood outside the Supreme Court with many others who chanted, sang and rallied to protect the VRA’s Section 5. Yes, the dogs and the cattle prods are gone, but the spirit to oppress some of America’s citizens remains.
It saddens me that we still have to fight for our right to vote, and that there are those who are still trying to deny others their rights at the ballot box. But I was encouraged by the number of people who were outside the Supreme Court yesterday, people of all races and creeds and ages who are dedicated to and invested in protecting the right to vote! Together we sent a message to the Justices and to the nation that Section 5 is still needed, because while our country has come a long way from that grainy black and white footage of people getting beaten while fighting for their rights, discrimination and attempts to disenfranchise still exist, especially in the states covered by Section 5.
It’s often said that we are standing on the shoulders of giants, but in my case, I am truly a descendant of Civil Rights heroes whose names will never be in the history books. They took a risk, put their lives on the line, not just for themselves but for me, someone who would not be born for another 15 years. When I hear my grandmother at 86 years old say that she will put on her marching shoes if she has to, then I know that I have no choice but to put on mine. I was proud to be at the rally to protect Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act yesterday. I was proud to honor the legacy of my family and anyone else who participated in the Movement. I was proud to continue the fight to ensure that no one is denied the right to vote.
American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer spoke yesterday with fellow AFA radio host Alex McFarland about Project 2026, which McFarland explained is a long-term initiative to save America from annihilation at the hands of “the four groups that are actively working to secularize and destroy America: humanists; atheists; militant homosexuals; and Muslims.”
McFarland: There is a remnant, there is hope, there are still some people who know how to pray and call on Heaven but we are right now ripe for either a manifestation of God’s judgment or God’s mercy.
Fischer: Alex, you’ve got Project 2026, I want you to talk a little bit about Project 2026 because in this project you’re not just talking about what’s going on in 2013, you’re looking ahead, a forward view. 2026 is going to be the 250th anniversary of our founding, what is Project 2026 all about?
McFarland: It’s a response, it’s a fifteen year program and we are beginning to get a lot of momentum, it’s a fifteen year program to re-remind our culture about some things that are core that I believe without the rediscovery and reaffirmation of these things we’re going to lose democracy: God; life; morality; family; freedom of religion; American exclusivism, not that we’re better or deserve better but we are unique on the stage of human history. The thing that prompted me Bryan is the four groups that are actively working to secularize and destroy America: humanists; atheists; militant homosexuals; and Muslims. All four of these groups got major momentum beginning in the ’60s and ’70s but they dug in their heels and they said: ‘we’re going to work forty years and we’re going to mainstream atheism; we’re going to mainstream militant homosexuality; dare we say it we’re going to see gay marriage legitimized.’ Why can’t God’s people dig in their heels and say: ‘we’re in it for the duration and America will not die on our watch.’
Fischer claimed that Americans are unwittingly relying on the “moral and spiritual capital” created by past generations and once it is all used up “America could be finished.” McFarland warned that “apostate” churches and people “that are enlisted for Satan” are pushing societal collapse.
Fischer: The analogy that Ray [Stedman] used is what we had been doing in each succeeding generation, we had generations of Americans that built up a certain moral and spiritual capital and we have not been replenishing that capital, we have been depleting it. So succeeding generations, without even realizing that they are consuming the spiritual seed corn that was accumulated by generations that came before them, have been consuming that moral and spiritual capital and it looks to me Alex like we’re at a place where virtually all of that seed corn is gone and if we don’t once again begin to rebuild that moral and spiritual capital America could be finished.
McFarland: Exactly. You know what’s so sad is in the church, you’ve got the church existing in four states: healthy churches; alive but anemic churches; backslidden churches; and some that are apostate, they are rejecting basic biblical doctrines. The church, it ranges from healthy to apostate, but what about the world? You’ve got your garden variety lost people who need Jesus but then you’ve got those who I believe are deluded by Satan and you’ve got some that are enlisted for Satan.
WorldNetDaily’s Robert Ringer today maintains that President Obama’s gun control legislation is actually meant to confiscate all guns in order to blunt the rise of the Tea Party. Ringer claims that there are “many more rednecks” joining the Tea Party, and they will be the last line of defense against Obama’s plan to “grab people’s guns.”
If Obama succeeds, Ringer warns, “gulags, gas chambers and firing squads are easily put into place,” and the president will ultimately be able to accomplish his life mission: “the complete destruction of Western civilization.”
Boring as it may be, I have no choice but to bring in the Duplicitous Despot once again. Throughout his life, Obama has been an angry kid on a mission: the complete destruction of Western civilization.
The fake smile is cute and all that, but his bitterness is clearly visible in his actions. And, in all fairness, it’s understandable. His father, who abandoned him shortly after he was born, was an alcoholic, philandering failure with delusions of grandeur. Not a situation anyone would wish on a small child.
But such was Obama’s early life, and, unfortunately, his unhappiness drove him to seek out other angry people – from Frank Marshall Davis to Jeremiah Wright, from Bernardine Dohrn to Michelle Robinson. Today, of course, he is literally surrounded by an army of like-minded Marxists.
There is but one way to combat the emotional sewage of the left: Confront it – head-on – loud, clear and unequivocally. Timidity does not work. The left thrives on the timidity, cowardice and the lack of principle of statist conservatives.
What is annoying about all this is that millions of us knew the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about Obama before he ever took office. We knew he would never make the original of his birth certificate available to any independent authority. We knew he would use the Cloward-Piven strategy to collapse the economy and make virtually everyone dependent on the state. And we knew he would try to ban all guns in order to make citizens defenseless.
At the risk of drying out Chris Matthews’ pee-soaked trousers, I am compelled to speak the unspeakable: Barack Obama is not “the smartest guy in the room.” In fact, as those who knew him at the University of Chicago have made clear, he is not even a particularly intelligent individual. He is, however, exceedingly clever and cunning.
Which is why guns are now at the top of his agenda. He senses that the tea party is threatening to make a comeback, this time with many more rednecks in the mix. Rednecks are a government’s worst nightmare because they 1) own lots of guns, and 2) often live in hard to reach places – e.g., the Ozarks, the Appalachians and the Smokys. And they don’t much care for people who wear government badges.
Whenever government tries to exert absolute control over the citizenry, the use of force is a must. You cannot stop people from doing things they want to do, or make them do things they don’t want to do, without applying brute force. And that’s a dangerous tactic when there are several hundred million guns stashed away in private hands.
It would take an inestimable number of Waco-style attacks to root out every redneck in the U.S. That’s why Hitler, Stalin and every other brutal dictator has been smart enough to grab people’s guns early on. After that, gulags, gas chambers and firing squads are easily put into place.
Do I seriously believe that gulag prison camps are possible in the U.S.? Yes.
Do I seriously believe that gas chambers and mass executions are possible in the U.S.? Yes.
In fact, any kind of atrocities are possible, but only if government first accomplishes its No. 1 objective: confiscating your guns. Remember, when people fear the government, they get tyranny. But when the government fears the people, they get freedom. And government will continue to fear the people so long as the people have guns. In that vein, may God bless rednecks everywhere.
When the U.S. Senate finally confirmed Chuck Hagel to head the Department of Defense yesterday, Religious Right leaders who activelycampaignedandprayed against his nomination were sorely disappointed.
The Family Research Council’s prayer team today warned that Hagel, along with President Obama, have put America “on dangerous ground” as “those in power have forgotten God's covenant with Abraham: to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse her.”
Indeed, FRC suggests that Hagel’s confirmation may even bring about the judgment of God: “Students of Bible prophecy have said that amid America's declining American faith and morals, our support for Israel has slowed the advance of God's judgment since 2001. But each step we take farther away from Israel has repercussions with respect to that balance.”
Chuck Hagel Confirmed - Today, former Senator Chuck Hagel began his new job as Secretary of Defense.Senate Republicans had rightly criticized Hagel as unqualified based upon his historic disdain for Israel, support for the Palestinian cause, favor of negotiation with Hamas and Iran, lack of any managerial experience, and more, yet 18 Republicans chose not to use their cloture vote to prevent his confirmation. Four supported Hagel directly in the final vote: Thad Cochran (Miss.), Richard Shelby (Ala.), Mike Johanns (Neb.) and Rand Paul (Ky.). With a President and Defense Secretary who have often shown hostility toward Israel and favor toward our mutual enemies, Bible believing Christians know the U.S. is on dangerous ground. Those in power have forgotten God's covenant with Abraham: to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse her. Christians must keep extra vigil, standing in the gap for Israel and America, that our leaders will keep faith with our historic friendship and alliance. Students of Bible prophecy have said that amid America's declining American faith and morals, our support for Israel has slowed the advance of God's judgment since 2001. But each step we take farther away from Israel has repercussions with respect to that balance.
May God's people, who understand God's severe warnings against nations that oppose His plan for Israel, pray, stand boldly and speak out to preserve our nation's commitment to God's covenant people and land! (Gen 12:3; Ps 137: all, Is 40:1-2; 59:15-16; 62:6; Zech 12:3-9; Eze 36:24, 35; 37:11-12, 21, 25; 38:8; Hos 3:4-5; Joel 3:1-2; Amos 9:15; Zech 2:12; 8:7-8; Lk 21:24; Rom 1:16; Eph 6:10 ff)
Concerned Women for America’s Penny Nance also chided Hagel for allegedly supporting the disarmament of the US.
The confirmation of former-Sen. Chuck Hagel to be the next civilian head of the United States Military doesn't make American families feel safer, because we as a nation are more vulnerable under his leadership. Hagel does not have a sound understanding of the global threats facing America, nor does he have the discernment needed for a workable defense policy.
The Senate has failed to properly vet this candidate. As if his shaky, inconsistent committee hearing wasn't enough to show his lack of qualifications, we can also add his failure to submit critical documents. Motives follow money, and Hagel's refusal to submit financial documents, as well as his omission of funding sources, reiterates his real motives.
Our national security interests stand at a threatening juncture. Hagel's record shows his lack of knowledge when it comes to nuclear disarmament, and his vision for how to deal with these issues is dangerous to American families. While in the Senate, he voted to adopt Global Zero and reconfirmed his opinion by saying, "How can we preach to other countries that you can't have nuclear weapons but we can and our allies can?" Countries like North Korea and Iran are on the verge of nuclear power; it's naive to put false hope in the fact that anti-American countries would cease their pursuit of nuclear capability if we disarm ourselves.
By confirming Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense, the Senate has catered, once again, to the president's wants and overlooked the needs of the American people.
Sadly, the Senate voted yesterday 58-to-41 to confirm Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. I say sadly because I never thought I would see the day when a nominee for Secretary of Defense endorsed by Louis Farrakhan would be confirmed! But that day has arrived.
Every Senate Democrat voted for Hagel. They were joined by four Republicans -- Thad Cochran (MS), Mike Johanns (NE), Rand Paul (KY) and Richard Shelby (AL). All four votes are depressing, but I want to comment on Senator Paul's vote.
When Rand Paul ran for the Senate three years ago, there were concerns about his views on Israel and the Middle East. He has tried to dispel the doubts.
In January, Paul traveled to Israel and said, "I came here to show that I am supportive of the relationship between Israel and America." He later said, "I think we should … announce to the world … that any attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States." That is why his vote for Hagel yesterday was so disappointing.
And it is disappointing for another reason too. Paul explained his vote for Hagel by saying, "The president gets to choose political appointees." That's true to a point, but Paul is under no obligation to vote for them.
Rand Paul's claim to conservative support is that he is a champion of constitutional government. The Founding Fathers could have easily said that the president gets to appoint his cabinet and left it at that. But after a protracted debate, they decided that the president's nominees must receive the consent of the Senate.
Paul's explanation implies he is ignoring the clear words of the Constitution in exchange for a formulation that suggests presidential appointments are essentially guaranteed. That doesn't pass the straight face test.
I don't see how anyone who claims to support a strong national defense, who wants to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons and who believes that Israel is our best ally could vote to confirm Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. If Rand Paul wants to be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2016, he has some explaining to do.
Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission appeared yesterday on Istook Live, the Heritage Foundation radio show hosted by former Congressman Ernest Istook, to discuss why the Boy Scouts of America should maintain its ban on gay members.
Co-host C.J. Wheeler asked Land how to tell her gay peers and colleagues, “You’re my friend, but I don’t want you to be a Boy Scout leader. You’re my friend, but I’m tired of your agenda being forced down my throat.” She lamented that “it’s a hard world to really walk in out there” for “the average person out there who has friends in these communities,” because apparently life is really tough for straight people who support discrimination against their gay friends.
Land explained that gays and lesbians shouldn’t be treated any differently, except when it comes to their inclusion in the Boy Scouts, marriage and other social institutions. He told Wheeler to tell her gay friends that she respects them but thinks that if they are allowed to join the Boy Scouts they will jeopardize the ability of the organization to “protect children” and consequently “human tragedies will follow.”
Land also explained that “the homosexual activists have gone after [cultural] icons” such as the military, marriage and Disney in order to realize their “breathtaking” agenda.
Land: They do not believe in a live and let live philosophy. Let’s be very clear about what their agenda is, their agenda is to have the homosexual lifestyle affirmed by society as healthy and normal and as a perfectly acceptable to young people and to have those who disagree with that ostracized the level of being Ku Klux Klansmen.
Istook: I do want to expand on the Scouting part but you mentioned the overall agenda, Dr. Land, because it’s not just in Boy Scout’s, we see it in the policy toward same-sex marriage, we see it creeping into something’s such as the ‘anti-bullying agenda.’ What are the different fronts of this conflict?
Land: Well, every front, but the Boy Scouts are an icon and so the homosexual activists have gone after the icons, the cultural icons of our culture. They’ve gone after the military, the most admired institution in American society, the American military; they’ve gone after Disney, the family-friendly supposedly network and family-friendly entertainment venture; they’ve gone after marriage, what can be holier than marriage; now they’re going after the Boy Scouts, nothing is more American than Apple Pie than Boy Scouts. They are going to go after every front, they’ve gone after the cultural icons first but there is no place that they are not going to go and as I said there overall agenda is really quite breathtaking.
End Times radio host Rick Wiles of TruNews started yesterday’s program by reading two news stories about President Obama’s upcoming decision to file a legal brief on the Proposition 8 case before the Supreme Court and his scheduled visit to Israel. After reading from the Book of Daniel and the two articles, Wiles wondered whether he found further proof that Obama is the Antichrist.
While he concluded that Obama may not be the Antichrist, Wiles does consider Obama to be “the latest incarnation of Satan’s spirit inside a human being in a high public office” and said he is “looking, acting and talking more and more like a man who is applying for the job of Antichrist.” He even fears that Obama may “declare himself as God” while in Israel, but he noted it is “too early for that happen.”
‘He shall persecute the saints of the most high and shall intend to change times and law,’ that’s what I want you to focus on, ‘He shall persecute the saints of the most high and shall intend to change times and law.’ Every day that goes by Barack Hussein Obama is looking, acting and talking more and more like a man who is applying for the job of Antichrist. I’m not convinced as of yet that he is the one and only ‘Man of Perdition,’ but I am thoroughly convinced that he is a forerunner of the ‘Man of Perdition.’
Mr. Obama may simply be the latest incarnation of Satan’s spirit inside a human being in a high public office. There have been many such men throughout history, tyrants such as Adolf Hitler. Consider these two news articles involving Mr. Obama. ‘According to Washington sources, Mr. Obama is poised to declare this week that homosexual marriage is a constitutional right in the USA.’
‘The Obama administration must file any brief opposing the California ban by this Thursday, February 28.’ So brace yourself, Mr. Obama may declare this week that homosexual marriage is a constitutional right. Is he the Antichrist who changes times and law? Only time will tell.
Article number two: ‘Mr. Obama will travel to Jerusalem next month.’ I think it will be interesting to see if he enters Jerusalem on the same day Jesus entered the city prior to Passover.
Now here’s a crazy thought, I’m not suggesting that it’s going to happen; I’m just saying it’s kind of a crazy thought. Suppose that Mr. Obama enters the Temple and declares himself as God. Now, I don’t even want to go there today, I think it is too early for that happen but this is starting to get a little spooky, isn’t it?
We found another interview between Pratt and Solomon from January, in which they went into even more detail about the looming race war and denounced new legislative efforts to prevent gun violence.
Pratt claimed that “some kind of social implosion” is inevitable during Obama’s second term, and that “it would be a wonderful surprise if it did not happen.”
Solomon specifically claimed that under President Obama we will witness attacks “on Christian, heterosexual white haves by black, Muslim and/or atheist — not that there’s much difference — black have-nots.”
He warned that “if you are a white person in this country, and this holds for all quality people of any color, but I’m saying specifically if you are a white, heterosexual, Christian, working, married person” and don’t own a gun, then “there is at least a substantial chance that you and/or some member of your family will be hurt and/or killed.”
Pratt agreed with Solomon’s dire prediction, saying the host wasn’t “stretching to say that.” He added that the “Alinskyites” who control the Obama administration think “this is the time” to “bring violence about.”
Pratt: We’re up against people who know exactly what they want to do and how they want to do it. We had four years to watch them when they were somewhat guarded but now, certainly for Obama, he doesn’t care and you can tell already he’s making his moves and it’s not going to be pretty. I’m getting the sense; I have never heard so many people talk about the fact that they think that there is inevitably going to be some kind of social implosion, some kind of neighbor-against-neighbor; that these folks in power are seeking that kind of a confrontation and that it would be a wonderful surprise if it did not happen.
Solomon: I’ve said on this show on a couple of occasions that I believe that in the year 2013 we’re going to see an explosion of attacks on halves by have-nots. But more specifically on white halves by black have-nots; more specifically on Christian, heterosexual white haves by black, Muslim and/or atheist — not that there’s much difference — black have-nots. It’s just what I see. I believe if you are a white person in this country, and this holds for all quality people of any color, but I’m saying specifically if you are a white, heterosexual, Christian, working, married person, if you don’t have a gun on you, know how to use it and make sure that everyone in your family who is of age has a weapon and knows how to use it, there is at least a substantial chance that you and/or some member of your family will be hurt and/or killed.
Pratt: I don’t think there’s anything stretching to say that. I think there are people who really want to bring violence about because they see that as the engine of social change. That’s exactly the target for the Alinskyites. I think they must figure that they have got their guy in power, they will then have some of the agencies of the police powers of the state at their back and this is the time to go for it.
Later, Solomon mused that “the best thing that can happen to a liberal is to be mugged,” and wondered why Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) still supports gun control after she was mugged in 1995, to which Pratt replied: “Well, maybe she liked it.”
There is nodoubt in Glenn Beck's mind that President Obama is seeking to incite a civil war in this nation and he sees the decision by the administration to release hundreds of illegal immigrants from detention facilities due to looming obligatory sequestration spending cuts as further proof.
For Beck, this move was nothing more than an attempt to provoke conflict, as he predicted that if any state were to go into rebellion, Obama will simply open up the federal prisons in that state and just let all of the prisoners loose in retaliation:
In Supreme Court oral arguments on Shelby County vs. Holder today, Justice Antonin Scalia reportedly stated that the renewal of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act represents “the perpetuation of racial entitlement.”
Minister Leslie Watson Malachi, Director of People For the American Way Foundation’s African American Ministers Leadership Council, responded:
“Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act doesn’t represent the ‘perpetuation of racial entitlement,’ as Justice Scalia states. Rather, it is one of the most important tools we have for confronting the entitlement of those who believe some people’s votes and voices should matter more than others. Section 5 boldly confronted a reality of American life that still exists today: the routine devaluation of the lives and voices of people of color. Justice Scalia’s statement carries disturbing echoes of the ‘perpetual entitlement’ that has kept bigotry, discrimination, homophobia, disempowerment, sexism, and classism alive in America. I hope that Scalia’s fellow justices will approach this issue more thoughtfully, and with a greater awareness of the reality in their country.”
Don Feder of the World Congress of Families today harshly criticized the increasing number of Republicans who favor legalizing same-sex marriage, which he said would turn the GOP into “the Party of Gross Stupidity.”
Feder warns that gay rights advocates like President Obama is leading Americans “from the bath houses and fern bars to the broad sunlit plains of spouse-#1 and spouse-#2 marriage licenses” as part of “the sexual-equality death march, which ends with the demise of Judeo-Christian morality.”
While some Republicans are laboring diligently to expand the Democratic base with amnesty, others are working with equal fervor to shrink the GOP base by betraying the religious right on marriage. Not for nothing are they called the Party of Gross Stupidity.
The ads also have President Obama cautioning us, "Our journey (to the promised land of gender-neutral bathrooms) is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like everyone else under the law." Fearless Leader has a remarkable talent for self-parody. (He will lead them from the bath houses and fern bars to the broad sunlit plains of spouse-#1 and spouse-#2 marriage licenses.)
"Gay marriage" itself is merely a milepost on the sexual-equality death march, which ends with the demise of Judeo-Christian morality.
The foregoing all flow logically from societal embrace of gay rights and marriage mutation. Once a sledgehammer is taken to the foundation, why should any norms stand?
Just as there’s always been same-sex attraction, there have always been blood relatives who’ve violated the injunctions of Leviticus, men who wanted harems, adults with an unhealthy attraction to children, fetishists, sadomasochists and Michael Jackson. Erotic attraction can get as messy as the human psyche.
Civilization depends on taming self-destructive sexual urges, which do great damage to the social fabric. The continuation of the species, and the proper upbringing of the next generation, is based on men marrying women, who will remain true to each other and raise their children with loving discipline.
To sanctify any other arrangement by calling it a marriage is stupid.
Brian Camenker of MassResistance appeared on VCY America’s Crosstalk yesterday to denounce efforts in Massachusetts aimed at protecting transgender students.
He claimed that LGBT rights advocates “take advantage of these very vulnerable kids at a vulnerable time in their lives,” arguing that homosexuals do not exist: “You know, a lot of doctors have said to me that nobody is homosexual, they are just heterosexuals with homosexual problems and yes, change is possible.”
Camenker even argued that educators who support the new policy on gender identity in schools are much like “Nazi concentration camp guards” who “are doing this horrible evil and they are just taking orders or something, they believe in it.”
It’s insanity. I mean a boy cannot change his sex; your DNA does not change and you can call yourself something different, you can dress differently, you can take hormones, you are always a boy. The damage that this does to everybody, including the person involved and everybody around, is just unfathomable. These school administrators, you know I mean you think of them as what the Nazi concentration camp guards must have been like where they are doing this horrible evil and they are just taking orders or something, they believe in it. People need to rise up because it is only going to get worse.
On his radio program yesterday, Bryan Fischer cited a comment made by Charles Krauthammer based on a quote in a Washington Post article about the possible impact of the sequester to declare that liberals want bad things to happen because that is good for their political agenda and, as such, they "actually want bad things to happen to our country."
"They are like scavengers," Fischer proclaimed, "they're like vultures feeding on the carcass of the American economy, so they want it to die so they can eat. I mean, that is how perverse their worldview is":
WASHINGTON – Today the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Shelby County v. Holder, a case challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. People For the American Way Foundation released the following statement:
“The right to vote is one of the most fundamental rights we have as Americans,” said People For the American Way Foundation President Michael Keegan. “The Voting Rights Act, especially Section 5, has been a central part of safeguarding that right for nearly fifty years and continues to play a vital role in protecting Americans from disenfranchisement. The 2012 election cycle provided far too many examples that threats to voting access – in the form of voter ID laws, restrictions on early voting, and inequitable distribution of resources leading to excessively long waiting times for certain communities to vote – are alive and well. If we want a functioning democracy, everyone has to have access to the ballot box.
“The 15th Amendment of the Constitution is very clear on this issue: the right to vote cannot be denied on account of race, and Congress has the power to protect that right as it finds appropriate,” Keegan continued. “When, after a comprehensive analysis, Congress voted overwhelmingly to reauthorize Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act in 2006, it was simply doing its job. For right wing Justices on the Supreme Court to substitute their own political judgment would be a radical and unwarranted step and send a chilling message to millions of Americans who are seeing more and more burdens placed on their right to vote.”
“Voting discrimination is deeply rooted in our country’s history,” added Minister Leslie Watson Malachi, Director of the African American Ministers Leadership Council at People For the American Way Foundation. “It’s stunning to me that some say this law is no longer needed, when in the past election cycle we witnessed and fought attempts to make it harder for communities of color to vote all across the country. The right to vote remains fragile for many Americans, and the Voting Rights Act is an essential tool in protecting that right.”
For more information on the Voting Rights Act, please refer to the new PFAW Foundation report from Senior Fellow Jamie Raskin outlining the legal case for why the VRA is still necessary, or the new Huffington Post op-ed from Minister Leslie Watson Malachi describing the challenges that people of color still face at the ballot box nearly half a century after the VRA’s passage.
Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman thinks the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) “has become more akin to ‘Hitler's Jews’ than a defender of the Jewish people” because it hasn’t been sufficiently critical of President Obama.
Klayman maintains that AIPAC president Lee Rosenberg is “in bed with the Mullah-in-Chief” and claims “this ultra-leftist Jewish mafia type and his Chicago Jewish bottom-feeding allies have sold out their own people for political influence.”
It goes without saying that illegitimately elected American President Barack Hussein Obama is the most anti-Israel president in U.S. history. I need not repeat in depth in this column how the "Mullah in Chief" has undercut the Jewish state at every turn – from backing radical Islamist revolutionary movements like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere throughout the Middle East, to illegally releasing national security information that discloses sources and methods for fighting a war against Iran should one break out over this neo-Nazi regime's acquisition of nuclear weapons.
But all the blame for allowing Iran to become a virtually untouchable nuclear Muslim superpower does not rest on the shoulders of the "Mullah-in-Chief," his equally corrupt Democratic Party and the worthless political establishment hacks like McCain and Graham in the Republican Party, but also upon non-government and government Jewish leaders themselves – both in the United States and Israel.
Let's start with the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC), the so-called "Jewish lobby" defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel has denigrated in the past as being too powerful. To the contrary, AIPAC, which is now lead by Lee Rosenberg, has not challenged Obama over Iran or the Hagel nomination, as this ultra-leftist Jewish mafia type and his Chicago Jewish bottom-feeding allies have sold out their own people for political influence. Here is how even the left-leaning Washington Post describes Rosenberg:
"Chicago entrepreneur Lee 'Rosy' Rosenberg was one of President Barack Obama's staunchest Jewish allies during his 2008 presidential campaign. He advised the president on foreign policy in the Middle East and Israel and delivered speeches to Jewish groups around the country. ...
"At its (AIPAC's) annual May 2011 policy conference, Rosenberg warned supporters that the tea-party wave that swept the November 2010 elections meant that friends in high places were going to be harder to come by for AIPAC."
"Rosenberg has ties to several of Obama's Chicago associates in the Jewish community including Lester Crowne, a local billionaire whose son, Jim, was Obama's 2008 Illinois finance chairman; Penny Pritzker, the campaign's national finance chairwoman; and Abner Mikva, the former congressman and federal judge and Obama mentor."
With no real "Jewish lobby," as Hagel put it, to challenge Obama – ostensibly because Rosy Rosenberg and "his" AIPAC are in bed with the Mullah-in-Chief – it's no wonder Obama and his leftist Democratic Party have gotten their way on Iran and Israel.
In the face of this, it is also regrettable that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has seen fit, as all Israeli politicians have before him, to grace AIPAC with his support and presence each year at the lobbying group's annual conference in Washington, D.C. What is different now is that what previously had been the premier Jewish force in Washington has become more akin to "Hitler's Jews" than a defender of the Jewish people and its right to have a secure Israel.
Tomorrow morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a challenge to a pivotal section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The part of the VRA that’s under attack is Section 5, which requires the Justice Department or a federal court to approve changes to voting laws in states and counties that have a history of racially discriminatory voting practices before those laws can go into effect. The lead-up to last year’s elections, in which state legislatures passed a slew of discriminatory voter suppression measures, showed just how much Section 5 is still needed.
Today, People For the American Way Foundation released a new report from Senior Fellow Jamie Raskin detailing the history and continued need for Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and what progressives can do to ensure equal voting rights in the years to come. Raskin writes:
A decision against Section 5 preclearance or the Section 4(b) coverage formula would likely spell the political demise of the Voting Rights Act, even if it is theoretically salvageable by an updated coverage formula or an even more relaxed preclearance procedure. Our paralyzed, deadlocked Congress will never come to terms on how to revive and renovate it if the Court knocks it down or puts it into a tiny little straitjacket.
Win, lose, or draw, progressives should reckon with the prospect that the days of this landmark statute might be numbered. This means that we need to take up an ambitious democracy and voting rights agenda of our own for the new century, this time with explicitly universalist aims and general terms that deal with the complex suppression of democracy today. The voting rights struggles of the new century relate not just to old-fashioned racial trickery in Alabama and Texas but new-age vote suppression in Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio; they involve not just traditional vote dilution in the South but the increasingly untenable disenfranchisement of 600,000 Americans in Washington, D.C and 3.6 million Americans in Puerto Rico.
Also today, PFAW Foundation’s Director of African American Religious Affairs, Minister Leslie Watson Malachi, wrote in the Huffington Post about the challenges that people of color still face at the ballot box, nearly half a century after the passage of the Voting Rights Act:
In 2011 and 2012 I organized faith leaders from 22 states in combating voter suppression efforts and turning out the vote among specific communities. This election cycle offered many powerful reminders why Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is still needed. Texas, for example, passed a discriminatory voter ID law that would have required voters to present government-issued photo ID at the polls, which would have especially burdened poor people and people of color. But because Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act still stands, this law was defeated and the right to vote was protected. Reverend Simeon L. Queen of Houston, Texas, a comrade in the struggle, reflected: "It is inexcusable that nearly 50 years after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, politicians are still trying to make it harder for African Americans in Texas to vote. I wish the Voting Rights Act wasn't still necessary, but thank the Lord it's still there."
Since 1980 I have been fortunate to work with men and women, some who started before I was born, to fight for laws protecting the right to vote. Despite the commitment of those who devoted their lives to voter protections, the right to vote remains fragile for many Americans. From voter ID laws to restrictions on early voting, as a country we cannot allow anyone to say "this isn't a problem anymore" to communities who are experiencing, as others witness, those problems at the polls each election.