C3

PFAWF: Voting Rights Act Still Key in Preventing Disenfranchisement

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.

###

Klayman: AIPAC Acting Like 'Hitler's Jews' for Not Criticizing Obama Enough

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.

We Can’t Afford to Lose the Voting Rights Act

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. 

PFAW Foundation

Anti-Muslim Activists Claim Obama and Brennan Are Likely to Be Secret Muslim Agents

John Guandolo, who left the FBI after a sex scandal, has since tried to make a career pushing anti-Muslim conspiracy theories and has found success with his latest one: that CIA chief nominee John Brennan is a secret Muslim and Saudi plant.

Fellow conspiracy theorist Rick Wiles invited Guandolo on his show TruNews yesterday to explain his theory that Brennan is seeking to “aid and abet the enemy” through assistance to Muslim Brotherhood agents who are infiltrating the government as part of a plot to introduce Sharia law to the US.

Wiles agreed with Guandolo’s assessment and claimed that Saudi Arabia is slowly taking over the United States government and “put Barack Obama in power.”

The host went on to say that “Barack Obama is a foreign agent” and “his administration is the product of a successful foreign penetration of the country” by Islamists. “The federal government is quietly being taken over and changed into a pro-Islamic, anti-Christian entity,” Wiles maintained.

In response, Guandolo strongly suggested that President Obama is indeed a Muslim although he said he couldn’t offer a “100 percent guarantee,” adding that he believes Obama “is significantly sympathetic to the cause of our enemies.” He also falsely claimed that the Islamic Society of North America is a front group for Hamas.

Guandolo: I want to answer your question or your comment about the President and this admiration. I do not have specific evidence that 100 percent guarantees that this President is Muslim and my first comment is I don’t think it matters. You just said what does matter. I look at his policies and his executive orders and without exception they are pro-Muslim Brotherhood, pro-Hamas, anti-foundational principles of this country, anti-Israel, and that is absolutely clear. He has made a significant effort to protect known members of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood inside this government.



Wiles: Well John, you know the old saying: if it waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.

Guandolo: Yes and there is certainly a lot not circumstantial evidence of data points, facts that we know even out of the President’s own mouth, when he did that interview with George Stephanopoulos and he said ‘my Muslim faith’ and Mr. Stephanopoulos had to correct him and say ‘you mean your Christian faith’ and he said ‘oh yes that’s what I mean.’

Wiles: He let it slip.

Guandolo: As an FBI agent, I spent twelve years in the bureau, I look at that and I say, when you line all these things up it at a minimum it means here’s an individual who is significantly sympathetic to the cause of our enemies and that is problematic, and that’s putting it mildly.

Guandolo concluded by arguing that President Obama and other top officials “are absolutely not upholding their oath of office and need to be removed.”

You have to ask yourself, are all of these people, are they grossly ignorant or maybe in some cases so PC as to get to a place where everything that comes out of their mouths and the policies that they create are destructive to America and if that’s the truth and they are then they are absolutely not upholding their oath of office and need to be removed. Then the question is, what do we do about all of this? That I believe is the question that has got to be addressed because wishing this away and hoping that it doesn’t get worse, you know hope is not a strategy, there has to be work at the ground level to take this on and to end this.

Voting Discrimination: Still an Obstacle to Democracy

This week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Shelby County v. Holder, a case challenging the protections of the Voting Rights Act. Based on a simple idea, one that is enshrined in our Constitution, the right to vote cannot be denied on the basis of race. It is considered by the Department of Justice to be "the most effective civil rights statute enacted by Congress," prohibiting voting discrimination in order to protect the right to vote for all Americans.

When President Lyndon Johnson signed into law the Voting Rights Act of 1965, he called the vote "the most powerful instrument ever devised by man for breaking down injustice" and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. called it the "foundation stone for political action." I call it a sacred right!

The centerpiece of that Act and the case is Section 5. It requires that all or portions of sixteen states with a history and a contemporary record of voting discrimination seek and gain approval federally before they put any changes in election practices into effect. Preclearance as it is known is intended to stop voter disenfranchisement before it can start.

In 1970 and again in 1975, Congress voted to extend the Voting Rights Act. At that time US Representative Barbara Jordan, my (s)hero and co-founder of People For the American Way, sponsored legislation that broadened the provisions of the Act to include Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, and Asian Americans.

As recently as 2006, Congress voted overwhelmingly to reauthorize Section 5 of the law with some critics then and now misguidedly asserting that it overstepped its boundaries, that voting discrimination really isn't a problem anymore, or that voting discrimination in other parts of the country somehow delegitimizes Section 5. I'd like to invite those critics to hear directly from people across the country who devoted countless hours to ensuring that marginalized communities were able to vote this past election.

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.

President Johnson called the vote "a powerful instrument," Dr. King the "foundation stone," and for me it's a sacred right for breaking down injustice, removing obstacles to democracy and empowering the dis-empowered. When discriminatory laws threaten Americans' fundamental right to vote, we are called to utilize every tool available. Across the country we have seen the importance of courts in successfully fighting back against voter suppression efforts. Section 5 remains a key to protecting communities, my community from future attempts at disenfranchisement. Hopefully, prayerfully, the Supreme Court will realize this.

 This post originally appeared at the Huffington Post.

 

PFAW Foundation

Fischer: 'There Is No Right to Engage in Immoral Behavior'

On yesterday's radio program, Bryan Fischer went after President Obama for refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act before the Supreme Court, calling it a violation of his oath of office before declaring that people do not have any right whatsoever to engage in homosexual acts: "They don't have a moral right to do it, they don't have an ethical right to do it, they don't have a right to do it according to the laws of nature, and most importantly they do not have a right to do it according to the laws of God; and beyond that they do not have a right to do it according to the Constitution of the United States."

In fact, Fischer argued, since all rights come from God, "no law can give you a right to do something that is immoral" and thus "there is no right to engage in immoral behavior":

Harvey: Obama’s Push for LGBT and Women's Rights a 'Humanitarian Disgrace'

Linda Harvey of Mission America is once again attacking the Obama administration’s handling of foreign policy regarding LGBT and women’s rights, which she described as a “humanitarian disgrace” in her radio alert today. She warned that the White House and State Department operate “through the lens of radical feminism, population control, homosexual advocacy and socialism” and praised African countries that “are strongly resisting and rightfully so” calls from the U.S. and others to decriminalize homosexuality.

I read with dismay, again, about the recent foreign policy actions of the White House and our State Department. Sometimes it seems these folks are unable to see anything clearly except through the lens of radical feminism, population control, homosexual advocacy and socialism.

In late January, the White House issued a memorandum called ‘Coordination of Policies and Programs to Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women and Girls Globally.’ Through this, Obama will have the Secretary of State appoint a new ambassador-at-large to lead an office of global women’s issues at the State Department. This new ambassador will report to incoming Secretary of State John Kerry and there will also be a council to coordinate this effort across twenty different agencies. Even though there are portions of this effort that are beneficial, like encouraging educational opportunities for girls, it also contains a substantial push for Third World countries to accept abortion, population control and the agenda of homosexuality.

These directives and executive orders by the President are methods to go around the will of Congress and implement radical liberal goals. Last year he set up a President’s Global Development Council, the people appointed to this council are well-known abortion advocates and when this is tied to our aid to foreign governments it is even more of a humanitarian disgrace. But that is what the Obama White House and Hillary Clinton’s State Department placed as a top priority and it is sure to continue under the new Secretary of State John Kerry, a long time liberal.

Another agenda tied to all this is promoting homosexuality and gender confusion as a part of so-called human rights, which Hillary announced last year would be a big push through diplomatic channels and could even be a condition of foreign aid. A lot of pressure is being put on the African countries to knuckle under and accept homosexuality as a right, but many of them are strongly resisting and rightfully so.



Please contact your congressional representatives and ask them to introduce or support legislation to stop this abuse of power and promotion of harmful agendas to other nations. Ask our U.S. Senators to not confirm this radical ambassador for an extremist agenda.

The Right Wing Takes Aim at Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is under attack this week in the Supreme Court by Shelby County, Alabama, backed by much of the legal infrastructure of the Right.

Sotomayor Calls Out Prosecutor’s Attempt to ‘Substitute Racial Stereotype for Evidence’

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a statement today in connection with the denial of a cert petition for a case from Texas. She agreed with the decision not to hear the appeal, but she recognized the need to also release a statement condemning the offensive, racially charged remarks of a federal prosecutor during a drug-focused trial.  During the cross-examination of a man who testified that he was not part of and did not know about friends’ plan to buy illegal drugs, the prosecutor asked:

“You've got African-Americans, you've got Hispanics, you've got a bag full of money. Does that tell you – a light bulb doesn't go off in your head and say, This is a drug deal?”

Sotomayor called the prosecutor’s comment “pernicious in its attempt to substitute racial stereotype for evidence, and racial prejudice for reason.” She went on:

“It is deeply disappointing to see a representative of the United States resort to this base tactic more than a decade into the 21st century. Such conduct diminishes the dignity of our criminal justice system and undermines respect for the rule of law. We expect the Government to seek justice, not to fan the flames of fear and prejudice.”

Sotomayor’s powerful response highlights the critical importance of diversity in our court system.  As Justice Sotomayor noted in 2001, “our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions.”  During her confirmation, People For the American Way Foundation documented the far right’s vitriolic reactions to Sotomayor’s insightful discussion of the ways in which her life experiences as a Latina woman inform her view of the law. 

But today’s statement is one example of what that looks like in practice.  It highlights what it looks like when a woman of color on our nation’s highest court has the power to call out blatant racism in the judicial system. 
 

PFAW Foundation

Alabama GOP Official Warns Obama Plans to Indoctrinate Children

In 2009 the National Governors Association announced the Common Core State Standards Initiative to develop educational benchmarks that states can voluntarily adopt, and it has since turned into a right-wing boogeyman.

Social conservative commentators have leveled harsh attacks against Common Core and now are working to convince lawmakers in the forty-five states which have adopted the standards to blocks its implementation. Republican legislators in the Alabama State Senate and House have proposed bills to repeal the board of education’s decision to approve Common Core, which State Sen. Dick Brebaker warned would “give the federal government a way to drive the education agenda here in Alabama.” 

During a speech at the Wetumpka Tea Party, Elois Zeanah of the Alabama Federation of Republican Women compared the adoption of Common Core to the indoctrination of children in Nazi Germany, with President Obama teaching children and imposing an “anti-Christian, anti-capitalism, anti-America…pro-homosexuality, illegal immigration, unions, environmentalism, gun control, feminism and social justice” curriculum.

“They are going to force us to pay to indoctrinate our own kids,” Zeanah warned, “this is not a novel like ‘1994’ [sic], it’s Common Core.”

Watch:

Fischer Declares That Robert Jeffress Is Now 'the Most Important Man in America'

After Tim Tebow canceled his scheduled speaking engagement at Robert Jeffress' church last week, Bryan Fischer lashed out at the "bigoted bullies at Big Gay" who were supposedly responsible for pressuring Tebow into backing down.

Jeffress' addressed the controversy in a defiant sermon on Sunday that apparently send a thrill up Fischer's spine, as he played a lengthy excerpt from it on his radio program today ... but not before declaring that Jeffress is now "the most important man in America" and predicting that the Tebow controversy represents a "turning point in the culture war; we perhaps have bottomed out and with Dr. Jeffress taking such a strong and unapologetic stand for the truth, maybe we are beginning now to climb out of the abyss":

Robertson: Worth Praying Over Clothes to Rebuke Demons

Today on the 700 Club, televangelist Pat Robertson said that demons can attach themselves to material goods and therefore it’s not a bad idea to rebuke them before bringing them into your home.

After a viewer, Carrie, asked whether to follow her mom’s recommendation to pray away demonic spirits over her secondhand sweaters, Robertson recounted a story about “a witch who had prayed over a particular ring and asked for a spirit to come into it, and this Philippine girl was so attached to this ring, she had to buy it and all hell broke loose because she finally recognized what it was.”

“Can demonic spirits attach themselves to inanimate objects, the answer is yes,” Robertson said.

While Robertson noted that people don’t have to worry that every item they purchase is possessed by demons, he added: “Hey, it ain’t going to hurt anything to rebuke any spirits that happened to have attached themselves to those clothes.”

Watch:

Beck: James Dobson's New Novel Is a Modern Day 'Uncle Tom's Cabin'

Last week, James Dobson stopped by Glenn Beck's television program last week to discuss his new novel "Fatherless," a "faith-based, dystopian thriller" set in the year 2042.

Dobson warned Beck that there is something deeply wrong with a society in which more and more couples are deciding not to have children, which prompted Beck to want to know how we can change the "hardness of people's hearts" that is at the root of this problem.  After Dobson asserted, predictably, that a lack of Christian faith is the ultimate cause, Beck agreed and predicated that, just as Harriet Beecher Stowe's "Uncle Tom's Cabin" played an important role during the Civil War, Dobson's "Fatherless" would play a similar role today because it will "wake people up":

More Evidence That David Barton's 'History' Cannot Be Trusted

As we have said time and time again, David Barton's books, DVDs, radio programs, and presentations are so riddled with misrepresentations that just about any factual claim he makes needs to be checked for accuracy.

And Barton once again demonstrated the need for such fact-checking when he recently delivered a presentation at Glen Medows Baptist Church in San Angelo, Texas where he made an utterly laughable claim about the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Abington Township v. Schempp which declared that school-sponsored Bible reading in public schools was unconstitutional.

In Barton's telling, the Court struck down the practice because reading the Bible was going to give students brain damage:

The Supreme Court, when it took the Bible out of public schools, said that this is without precedent; there is no precedent in our history for taking the Bible out of schools but this is the time to do it.

Now, if there is no historical precedent, why would they say the Bible has to go out of schools?  I mean, everything we have in history says just the opposite, so why?  They quoted Dr. Solomon Grayzel on the reason that we need to get the Bible out of schools ... In the Supreme Court decision, this is what the Court said why the Bible has to come out of schools; the Court says this:

If portions of the New Testament were read without explanation, they could be, and had been, psychologically harmful to the child.

Time out.  Let me see if I get this: if we keep reading the Bible in schools, our kids are going to suffer from brain damage? Yeah, that was the reason given by the Court for the removal of the Bible out of the classroom back in 62-63.

Of course, if you actually read the ruling in the case, you will find that this citation of Dr. Grayzel appeared at the beginning of the decision when the Supreme Court was merely describing the road the case had taken through the court system, noting that Grayzel's testimony had been heard during the initial trial. 

On top of that, Barton also utterly misrepresented the point of Grayzel's testimony, which was to note that forced Bible reading from a Christian perspective in public schools was potentially damaging to Jewish students:

Expert testimony was introduced by both appellants and appellees at the first trial, which testimony was summarized by the trial court as follows:

Dr. Solomon Grayzel testified that there were marked differences between the Jewish Holy Scriptures and the Christian Holy Bible, the most obvious of which was the absence of the New Testament in the Jewish Holy Scriptures. Dr. Grayzel testified that portions of the New Testament were offensive to Jewish tradition, and that, from the standpoint of Jewish faith, the concept of Jesus Christ as the Son of God was "practically blasphemous." He cited instances in the New Testament which, assertedly, were not only sectarian in nature but tended to bring the Jews into ridicule or scorn. Dr. Grayzel gave as his expert opinion that such material from the New Testament could be explained to Jewish children in such a way as to do no harm to them. But if portions of the New Testament were read without explanation, they could be, and, in his specific experience with children, Dr. Grayzel observed, had been, psychologically harmful to the child, and had caused a divisive force within the social media of the school.

Just about everything in Barton's description of this court decision is fundamentally misleading and demonstrably false ... and yet it will continue to make no difference to those on the Right who regularly cite him as an expert historian.

Harvey: Gay 'Deception' Going Global

Mission America’s Linda Harvey used her daily radio bulletin today to criticize efforts to limit the use of sexual orientation conversion therapy, a form of pseudo-science which has been denounced and discredited by all of the country’s leading professional medical organizations. Harvey, however, claims that gay rights supporters have tried “to make up the evidence against it” because “the successful efforts of some to leave homosexual behavior behind are terribly threatening to the homosexual political agenda” and its global ambitions:

It’s not a coincidence these days when we start to see a new angle on homosexuality suddenly pop up in news all over country and indeed the world. There’s often big money and big organizations behind whipping up a fake frenzy and creating these so-called grassroots movements, and that’s the case with the new call to ban counseling for teens on homosexuality. Christian counselors around the country are alarmed at this ferocious assault on patient freedom and freedom of religion, shouldn’t a family have the right to support their teen who wants counseling about how to overcome homosexual attraction? Not according to homosexual pressure groups.

You see, the successful efforts of some to leave homosexual behavior behind are terribly threatening to the homosexual political agenda so they have decided that this counseling must be discredited even if they have to make up the evidence against it. There’s big money behind the push to do this. Parents, schools, churches, youth organizations, we all need to stress the benefits of choosing a heterosexual identity and behavior, consistent with good health, a moral lifestyle and the way God designed us. Homosexual feelings can change with God’s help and with sound counseling. But California just passed a law to ban such therapy, a law introduced and supported with the help of gay rights groups.



This agenda is also starting to appear globally. A recent meeting of left-wing groups that lobby the United Nations called efforts to change sexual orientation a ‘violation of human rights,’ and I guess that will be their spin going forward. The good news is that in that meeting were several voices supporting this counseling. In Great Britain, there are efforts already underway to discredit this type of counseling in advance of a coming vote on same-sex marriage. Let’s pledge friends to hold fast to the truth, even as deception abounds.

Larry Klayman Reveals Obama's 'Stalinist Power Grab'

We’ve been so amused by Larry Klayman’s recent antics that we almost missed his latest call for armed revolution against President Obama and his “Stalinist power grab,” which he believes will increase “the size and role of ‘his’ anti-white, pro-radical Muslim, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, pro-gay and lesbian, pro-feminist, atheist, pro-illegal immigrant and socialist government and eliminate what few liberties and freedoms we have left.”

According to Klayman, Obama is “moving to kill any revolution” against him by preparing “to wage a counter-revolution against We the People” through black helicopters, the United Nations, Agenda 21 and “his equivalent of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.”

Unsurprisingly, Klayman’s fears are all based on reports from the one and only WorldNetDaily.

In the last few weeks WND has published three articles, all of which are verifiable from independent investigation and fact checking, that unmask Supreme Leader Barack Hussein Obama's plan to use force to extend his increasingly dictatorial power and take over the United States. Sound farfetched or just the usual paranoia the left likes to ascribe to us on the right? Hardly, given Obama's executive actions designed to pave the way for an ultimate gun ban and his State of the Union address just this week – which revealed more about his vision and plans to "communize" the United States by grossly increasing the size and role of "his" anti-white, pro-radical Muslim, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, pro-gay and lesbian, pro-feminist, atheist, pro-illegal immigrant and socialist government and eliminate what few liberties and freedoms we have left.

It is ironic indeed that just as one socialist dictator, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, is about to expire of terminal cancer on his deathbed in a Cuban hospital, another one, who is much more powerful, is seeking to extend his control in a Stalinist "gulag style" power grab. Unlike Chavez and his also-dying buddy, Cuban communist strongman Fidel Castro, our fraudulently elected ineligible president is not just some two-bit dictator-terrorist of a Third World country; he is the so-called leader of the free world – an oxymoron if there ever was one since the "mullah in chief's" apparent plans are to eliminate individual freedoms and instead install a "Big Brother" regime domestically and worldwide through his comrades at the United Nations and their Agenda 21.

Here is a synthesis of what WND reported about Obama's plans to wage a counter-revolution against We the People; as he knows that it is only a matter of a short time that his Stalinist power grab will force law-abiding, God-fearing citizens to rise up in revolution as our Founding Fathers "found" themselves compelled to do against a far less malevolent monarch, King George III, in 1776.



Claiming to have been a constitutional law professor during the earlier part of his "career," Obama knows this all too well. He knows that his vision of a "new America," when put into total practice as he is now doing after his "re-election," will ultimately send We the People into the streets and cause us to reject his total tyrannical sovereignty over us. And that is why, coupled with his Interagency Working Group to Counter Online Radicalization to Violence, Obama and his evil cohorts in his administration are moving to kill any revolution on our part.

This can be seen as well through the black-helicopter sorties now being flown by Obama's military flunkies in our urban neighborhoods, which WND crack reporter Bob Unruh reported on. The black helicopters in recent weeks have been flying overhead in major American cities, such as Miami, Chicago and Houston, firing practice rounds from government-issued machine guns. These so-called exercises are said to prepare for urban violence, but from what quarter? Terrorists, or Founding-Father-like American citizens who eventually will rise up in revolt to Obama's despotic rule?

And then there is the recent column by WND Editor Joseph Farah, which reveals that the Obama-controlled government is stockpiling and hoarding guns as part of a secret security force ("Why is government stockpiling guns, ammo?"). Farah unmasks something he predicted years ago and writes: "Many of you will remember a story I broke a long time ago – about presidential candidate Barack Obama's little-noticed announcement that, if elected in 2008, he wanted to create a 'civilian national security force' as big and as strong and as well funded at the Defense Department." It would now appear that this civilian national security force, in conjunction with the other despotic measures discussed above, are his equivalent of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard – a force that will put down any rebellion by freedom-loving Americans if he deems it necessary.

In this context, we can understand even better Obama and company's real intention with regard to so-called gun control. He wants to do away with our Second Amendment right to bear arms, just as King George III attempted to do knowing full well that revolution was coming and on the near horizon. Like our Founding Fathers, We the People will ultimately pledge our lives, our sacred honor and what fortunes we have left under this so-called president, to fight for and preserve our great nation.

Kuhner: Kerry Will Begin 'Crushing Capitalism' to Advance 'Green Socialism'

In a column today, Washington Times writer Jeffrey Kuhner claims that Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent speech about the United States’ failure to confront the reality of climate change really represents a plot to destroy capitalism and America itself.

Kuhner claims that the scientific consensus on climate change is really “junk science,” “the greatest hoax of our time” and a fabricated “dark prophecy of an eco-apocalypse.”

But why create the hoax in the first place?

Kuhner maintains that “the secular left needed a new cause” following the collapse of communism and “found it in green socialism,” which he says is now central to their goals of “crushing capitalism.”

He goes on to “expose” scientists’ grand scheme to destroy America:

Secretary of State John F. Kerry has identified America’s primary enemy. It’s not Russia, Iran, China or North Korea. Nope. It’s something even greater and more sinister: climate change. That’s right. One of the most powerful people in the world and fourth in line for succession to the presidency, Mr. Kerry is obsessed with junk science and global temperature changes. This would be comical if it were not so tragic.



His answer is radical environmentalist legislation — high carbon taxes, imposing a cap-and-trade system upon manufacturers to coerce them into lowering carbon emissions and greater transnational cooperation in combating so-called climate change. In short, Mr. Kerry peddled a dark prophecy of an eco-apocalypse unless collective action is taken.



He’s wrong — dangerously wrong. Global warming is the greatest hoax of our time. In fact, the scientific evidence points the other way: Rather than heating up, the planet’s temperatures have either been steady or slightly cooling off over the past decade. The progressive left, however, continues to insist that climate change is real and irrefutable. The green movement has become a pseudo-religion, marked by blind faith, emotionalism and intolerance against dissenters.

In the end, global warming is not — and never has been —about science or even the environment. It’s about politics. Specifically, it boils down to one seminal goal: crushing capitalism through massive taxation and bureaucratic centralism in the name of environmentalism. When the Berlin Wall collapsed, the secular left needed a new cause. They found it in green socialism. Progressives no longer argued that free-market economies exploited the working class; rather, they now supposedly exploit and ravage the planet. Either way, the private sector is to be dominated by a liberal ruling elite. The new green is the old red.

Mr. Kerry’s speech shows how disconnected from reality the administration is. Imagine what our mortal enemies must be thinking. The Kremlin’s thugs, Beijing’s communists and Tehran’s mullahs — they have all (rightly) concluded that America is destroying itself. Without firing a shot, they are watching Uncle Sam slowly commit suicide. Green socialism will crush the productive sectors of our economy, draining America of the growth, dynamism and prosperity necessary to remain a world power. Embracing a climate change agenda will turn us into Europe, which is the path to national decline.

In short, Mr. Kerry is a postmodern liberal. He is a left-wing globalist, who champions anti-capitalism and multicultural social democracy. He has not fundamentally changed since his early days in politics. His philosophy is rooted in the radical chic of the 1960s: the hatred of America.

It is deeply disturbing that the man at the head of U.S. diplomacy was a traitor to his country and fellow soldiers. In 1971, he slandered our troops by lying—under oath in front of a Senate committee—that he saw U.S. troops commit countless atrocities not seen since “Genghis Khan.” He then later threw away another soldier’s medals on Capitol Hill to protest the Vietnam War. His actions not only libeled our noble efforts in Southeast Asia, they gave aid and comfort to the communist Viet Cong. This alone should have disqualified him from being secretary of state.

Fischer: 'The Bullies and Bigots at Big Gay' Hit Tebow 'Like a Falling Safe'

American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer is none too pleased about Tim Tebow’s decision to pull out of a speaking engagement at far-right pastor Robert Jeffress’ megachurch, a gig first reported by Right Wing Watch.

In his column yesterday, Fischer warned that by pulling out of the speaking engagement, Tebow put his eternal salvation in jeopardy. Fischer piled on in his Focal Point radio program, saying that the Jets backup quarterback is the latest person to cave to the “bigoted bullies at Big Gay.”

Fischer lamented that “homosexual activists” now have “another scalp to hang on the wall, they got another notch in the belt.”

“The bullies and bigots at Big Gay,” he continued, landed “on him like a falling safe.”

Watch:

Scott Lively Finds More 'Proof' That Obama Is Gay, Having an Affair with Reggie Love

Pastor Scott Lively of Defend the Family, who is best known for his anti-gay activism in Uganda, is once again pushing the claim that President Obama is secretly gay. Like fellow conservative activists Jerome Corsi and Vic Eliason, Lively believes that President Obama is covering up his gay past.

Today, he finds new “proof” in a Weekly Standard article which notes that Obama went on a weekend trip with his aide Reggie Love over the weekend…without the First Lady.

Robertson Dismisses 'Nutty,' 'True Believer' Climate Scientists

Televangelist Pat Robertson has, like so many on the Right, turned very quickly from advocating awareness of climate change to denying that it exists at all. On today’s 700 Club, Robertson laughs off a recent Princeton University study that found that climate change is increasing the rate of blizzards while leading to a drop in total snowfall.

Without a hint of self-awareness, Robertson claims that climate scientists are simply elitist ideologues who will hold onto their beliefs in global warming no matter what.

“Only in Princeton would people say nutty things like that,” Robertson said. “You know, they get to be PhDs and they wonder where they’ve studied and learned all these things. But I tell you, if you’re a true believer bad things will happen because you see them coming.”

Among the “nutty” professors Robertson attacks is Princeton geosciences expert Michael Oppenheimer, interviewed earlier in the program, who served in the Nobel Prize-winning International Panel on Climate Change.

Watch:

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious