South Carolina state senator Lee Bright, who is challenging Sen. Lindsey Graham in this year’s Republican primary, suggested to a Tea Party group today that Congress should impeach federal judges who rule in favor of marriage equality in order to intimidate other judges into doing “the right thing.”
Discussing the recent federal ruling legalizing marriage equality in Utah, Bright told Tea Party Express, “Congress ought to stand up and do its job and impeach one of these federal judges. And I think when you do that, being a federal judge is a pretty good gig, and I think if you’ll impeach just one, the rest of them will do the right thing. And they’ll do it out of necessity, because self-preservation is an instinct that so many folks have.”
The Constitution grants lifetime appointments to federal judges “during good behavior.” In the nation’s history, only eight federal judges have been impeached and removed from office by Congress –most for committing crimes or severely neglecting their duties.
Later in the interview, Bright launched into a discourse on the balance between liberty and security, including a rant that we don’t quite understand about how “there are institutions that can put you in a room that you can’t harm yourself but you’re not free, and I would rather take the risk and be free.”
This led him to the topic of gun laws, on which he said the U.S. should follow Israel’s example, including putting “teachers with machine guns on playgrounds.”
"You look over at Israel, and that’s an armed group of folks over there,” he said. “I mean, they are teachers with machine guns on playgrounds, because you got terrorists over there that would choose to harm children and whose teachers are there to protect them. When you’ve got folks that are armed and able to defend themselves, the threat of terrorism goes down drastically.”
In fact, Israel has much stricter gun control laws than the U.S. does and in 1995 mandated guards at the entrances to schools to protect against terrorism. As an Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman put it, “We're fighting terrorism, which comes under very specific geopolitical and military circumstances. This is not something that compares with the situation in the U.S.” Also, we weren’t able to find anything about Israeli teachers walking around playgrounds with machine guns.
The Associated Press is reporting that “dozens of gay men” have been arrested in northern Nigeria as a result of a new law strengthening the country’s prohibition on homosexuality, in what public health groups fear will be a setback to efforts to fight AIDS.
LAGOS, Nigeria (AP) — Police, working off a list of 168 suspects purportedly obtained through torture, are arresting dozens of gay men in Nigeria's northern Bauchi state, human rights activists said Tuesday.
A new law in Nigeria, dubbed the "Jail the Gays" bill, is encouraging the persecution of gays and will endanger programs fighting HIV-AIDS in the gay community, said Dorothy Aken'Ova, executive director of Nigeria's International Center for Reproductive Health and Sexual Rights.
On Monday, President Goodluck Jonathan's office confirmed that the Nigerian leader signed the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act that criminalizes gay marriage, gay organizations and anyone working with or promoting them.
CBS notes that “sodomy has been illegal in Nigeria for many years...in some parts of Nigeria’s Muslim-majority north where strict Sharia law is upheld, gays and lesbians risk being stoned to death if they are caught.”
This seems like a good time, then, to look back at the American religious right’s support for Nigeria’s harsh penalties for its LGBT residents and opposition to Obama administration efforts to protect LGBT rights abroad.
In 2011, when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that the Obama administration would work to protect LGBT rights abroad – including in places like Nigeria that criminalize homosexuality -- the religious right exploded in anger. Pat Robertson called the policy “appalling” and warned of God’s wrath in response. Radio host Janet Mefferd cited Nigeria’s anti-gay laws in a rant against the Obama administration’s policy, saying “I don’t see that this is something that the United States has to jump in on because it’s such a huge global tragedy. It’s crazy.” The Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute also cited Nigeria’s move to tighten criminal sanctions on homosexuality in its opposition to the Obama administration policy.
We wonder if any of these groups will comment about this wave of arrests.
WASHINGTON – The Senate today confirmed Judge Robert Wilkins to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Wilkins was one of three nominees blocked for months by Senate Republicans. The GOP admitted that they would block any and all of President Obama’s nominees to fill the three vacancies on this critically important court no matter who they were, which provoked the Senate to change its filibuster rules. Wilkins’ fellow nominees Patricia Millett and Nina Pillard were confirmed late last year.
Marge Baker, executive vice president of People For the American Way, responded to the vote:
“Today’s vote sends a supremely qualified and capable nominee to the nation’s second most influential court. It also puts an end to Senate Republicans’ dishonest effort to keep President Obama from filling vacancies on the D.C. Circuit, an effort that was destructive and transparently political.
“Now that the D.C. Circuit’s seats are full, it can get on with its important work for the American people. And just as importantly, if the Senate can put petty partisan fights behind it, it can get on with doing the American people's work as well, including filling the other long-vacant federal court seats across the country.”
As we all know, there is nobody more patriotic than a politician who promotes secession from the United States and backs white nationalist groups.
Take for example Texas Railroad Commission Chairman Barry Smitherman, once boasted to WorldNetDaily that thanks to him, Texas has “made great progress in becoming an independent nation.” Smitherman, now a Republican candidate for state attorney general, has also attacked the Southern Poverty Law Center for labeling as “hate groups” organizations that subscribe to white nationalism and have neo-Nazi ties.
Now, naturally, Smitherman has earned the endorsement of pseudo-historian David Barton: “David Barton, founder of Wallbuilders, has endorsed Barry Smitherman for Texas Attorney General! Stand with David to elect a true conservative to the Office of the Attorney General.”
We won’t hold our breath to see if Barton — who believes that the United States is a divinely inspired nation and that bad stuff started to happen only recently because of the removal of government-sponsored prayer from schools and homosexuality — sees a problem with reconciling his nationalistic views with a politician who talks about turning Texas into “an independent nation.”
Family Research Council president Tony Perkins told Washington Watch listeners last Friday that they should oppose gay equality because it will lead to the end of humanity.
Perkins agreed with a caller who said that gay people should be asked how they could exist “if it were not for physical relationship, intimacy between a man and a woman,” a point which followed a long rant about how President Obama is a Muslim under the influence of the Devil.
The FRC head responded that “the human race would be extinct within time if [homosexuality was] normal.”
Perkins has previously warned that government “promotion of same-sex relations” is part of a “push for population control.” Last month, Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver claimed that if gays and lesbians were allowed to legally marry then “everyone” might start “to go towards same-sex marriage” and society would “simply cease to exist.”
Caller: At the beginning of your show, I suppose it was a rhetorical question about what’s driving this administration. Well, simple explanation. If it’s not of God, it’s of the Devil; and you can certainly tell that the Obama administration is not of God. How can they expect any kind of peace with crazy stuff going on with any kind of certainty of working things out when you have a Muslim leader of a country over here per se trying to work things out between the Jewish people and Muslims and stuff, you know how can they expect it not to go the way they want it to?
One of my things about the gay and lesbian stuff. I have a non-biblical way to try to get the attention would be to ask those people that practice that lifestyle if it were not for physical relationship, intimacy between a man and a woman, how could they exist?
Perkins: Basic biology. You’re absolutely right. That’s why if you think about it, its logical conclusion would be if it were normal it would be extinct, the human race would be extinct within time if it were normal. So you’re right. Biology says the only we exist as human beings is that a man and a woman come together and we procreate. That’s the reason that government has long recognize marriage is because it is the place in which children are born.
The American Principles Project, the Religious Right group that helped torpedo Mary Cheney’s short-lived Senate bid in Wyoming, claims that Republicans can win young and women voters if they campaigned more aggressively on their party platform’s ultraconservative positions on abortion rights and LGBT equality.
The organization issued a report [PDF] last fall which criticizes Republican candidates like Mitt Romney for trying to play down or moderate the GOP’s stances on such social issues. APP’s Maggie Gallagher -- formerly of the National Organization for Marriage -- even chided the far-right Virginia gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli for not being conservative enough.
In an interview today with OneNewsNow, an affiliate of the American Family Association, APP spokeswoman Kate Bryan claims that the GOP’s opposition to choice and gay rights will actually help the party win over women and young voters.
Bryan may want to check out the 2012 election exit poll, which found that 59 percent of voters supported legal abortion, or the many studies that report support for marriage equality reaching record highs.
Spokesperson Kate Bryan of the American Principles Project points out that Mitt Romney had little to say about abortion and homosexuality, and he was defeated by Barack Obama "instead of standing strong on these foundational principles that the majority of Americans stand with."
Bryan insists Republicans were afraid they would lose the votes of women and youth, so they "deflected" on social issues.
"For lack of a better term," she says, "they were cowards."
What about the future?
"I think that they're starting to see the trend and instead of shying away from it, they're really embracing their stance and being a strong voice," says the American Principles spokesperson.
Because of that change, she predicts the GOP will garner more votes from women and from young people.
Family Research Council president Tony Perkins and the group’s senior fellow Cathy Ruse dedicated a segment of Washington Watch on Friday to attacking the Girl Scouts over a Twitter “scandal.” In December, the Girl Scouts tweeted a link to a HuffPost Women article called, “These Incredible Ladies Should Be Women Of The Year For 2013.”
The article included a HuffPost Live video in which panelists mentioned Malala Yousafzai, Beyoncé Knowles and Wendy Davis as their picks for Woman of the Year. The mention of Davis, the Texas state senator and gubernatorial candidate who gained international attention for her filibuster of a bill curtailing abortion rights, infuriated anti-choice activists, who then attacked the Girl Scouts for linking to the post.
Ruse alleged to Perkins that the leadership of the Girl Scouts is encouraging promiscuity and abortion and that the group’s decision to let a transgender girl join a Brownie troop amounted to “child abuse.”
To them abortion and sex-ed and promiscuity for very young girls is a good thing. They just have a very different mindset but they do not share the values of most American parents and the values of most people who are in the Girl Scouts. So when the Girl Scout membership begins to learn about this they find it scandalous. There’s a reason why membership is down in the Girl Scouts, there’s a reason why cookie sales are down, because all of these things are scandalous. You know, Girl Scouts now admit cross-dressing boys as little Brownie girls; it’s child abuse, frankly.
Look at what the organization at the head wants to do with your girls and where it’s taking the organization and then people can decide what they should do. You’ve got a cross-dresser in the front office, you’ve got little boys admitted as little girls and those poor little girls in those troops have to pretend this is a girl? That’s child abuse in some people’s estimation.
Perkins also revived the myth that the Girl Scouts circulated a Planned Parenthood pamphlet at an event in 2010. He argued that Planned Parenthood seeks to “encourage promiscuity and behavior that would lead [Girl Scouts] into Planned Parenthood clinics.”
Perkins: We’re talking about the agenda that’s really behind the Girl Scouts. I guess Cathy I can understand, it makes sense for Planned Parenthood to want to be teamed up with the Girl Scouts because that’s a client base for them if they can get this information into their hands to encourage promiscuity and behavior that would lead them into Planned Parenthood clinics.
Ruse: Absolutely, it’s logical isn’t it.
The Illinois Family Institute, the state affiliate of the American Family Association that led the unsuccessful fight against marriage equality last year, is back to fighting smaller battles, this time attacking the University of Notre Dame for officially recognizing an LGBT group.
In an open letter to Notre Dame president Rev. John Jenkins posted on IFI’s website, the group’s “cultural analyst” Laurie Higgins expresses her “disappointment” that Notre Dame has for the first time recognized a student LGBT group, or as she calls it, “those who affirm homosexual acts and acts related to gender confusion as normative and morally defensible.”
Higgins tells Jenkins that in recognizing its LGBT students, Notre Dame might as well affirm “other sin predispositions” like incest or pedophilia.
She then turns to the eternal consequences of LGBT organizing, warning that openly LGBT students will bring “nothing but temporal and eternal harm” to themselves and their colleagues.
I also want to express my disappointment that Notre Dame has chosen to recognize a “student organization” initiated and shaped by those who affirm homosexual acts and acts related to gender confusion as normative and morally defensible. In permitting an organization that affirms subjective moral propositions that defy Catholic (as well as orthodox Protestant) doctrine, Notre Dame’s distinct Catholic identity has been weakened. Would Notre Dame recognize other “student organizations” initiated by those who affirm other sin predispositions (e.g. polyamory, consensual adult incest, or the “sexual orientation” recently designated “minor-attracted persons”)?
If the Notre Dame-recognized “LGBT” organization had been initiated by those who were committed to helping “LGBT” students live lives that embody Catholic beliefs on sexuality and gender, such an organization would be a service to Notre Dame students. Unfortunately, the central goals of students who affirm a homosexual or “transgender” identity are contrary to Catholic doctrine and as such can bring nothing but temporal and eternal harm—intellectual, emotional, physical, and/or spiritual harm—to “LGBT”-identifying students and the larger Notre Dame community.
Higgins did, however, praise Jenkins for Notre Dame’s challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage mandate.
A New York Times report this weekend on national groups coordinating to win state-level elections noted the revelation, which first surfaced last fall, that Alabama Republicans worked to funnel money from Indian casinos to support candidates running on anti-gambling platforms in 2010.
The casinos opposed the expansion of gambling as part of plan to quash competition; meanwhile, state Republicans needed an influx of money to help them win control of the state legislature.
Alabama GOP chairman Mike Hubbard and state senator Del Marsh, who also serves as the state party’s finance chairman, worked with an Indian tribe to direct money to the Washington-based Republican State Leadership Committee. The RSLC, run by former RNC chairman and likely Virginia senate candidate Ed Gillespie, then passed the funds on to Alabama Republicans, thus shielding anti-gambling candidates from a public association with tribal casinos.
The arrangement also offered donors a way to help Mr. Hubbard without their checks showing up on the Alabama party’s public filings. One such supporter was the Poarch Band of Creek Indians, which operates several large casinos on tribal land in Alabama.
The tribe was wary of the rapid expansion of non-Indian gambling in the state, particularly the proliferation of small bingo parlors competing with their resort casinos, and stood to benefit if antigambling Republicans took control of the Legislature. But precisely because they opposed gambling, few Republican state lawmakers or candidates would accept the tribe’s contributions.
After meeting with Mr. Marsh and other Republicans, said Robert R. McGhee, director of government affairs for the tribe, the tribe chose a different approach: It donated $350,000 to the leadership committee. When the contributions were later disclosed, critics accused Mr. Hubbard of using the Washington group to launder the money by exchanging it with other contributions.
If this story sounds familiar to you, that might be because disgraced GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Ralph Reed — who once led the Christian Coalition and now runs the Faith & Freedom Coalition — hatched a similar plan in the late 1990s to raise money from Indian casinos to back the “anti-gambling” Christian Coalition in order to stifle their gambling industry competitors.
In 1999, Abramoff subcontracted Reed’s firm to generate opposition to attempts to legalize a state-sponsored lottery and video poker in Alabama, an effort that was bankrolled by the Choctaw Tribe in order to eliminate competition to its own casino in neighboring Mississippi. Reed promised that Century Strategies was “opening the bomb bays and holding nothing back” and his firm ultimately received $1.3 million from the Choctaws for this effort, which included engaging the Alabama chapter of the Christian Coalition, as well as influential right-wing figures such as James Dobson, to work to defeat the proposals. 
The strategy had one small problem: the Alabama Christian Coalition had an explicit policy that it “will not be the recipient of any funds direct or in-direct or any in-kind direct or indirect from gambling interests.” (Emphasis in original.) Knowing this, Reed and Abramoff worked to hide the source of the $850,000 paid to the Christian Coalition for its anti-gambling efforts by funneling money from the Choctaws through Americans for Tax Reform, a Washington, DC anti-tax organization headed by their old College Republican friend Grover Norquist. When asked why the tribe’s money had to be funneled through conduits such as ATR, a Choctaw representative stated it was because Reed did not want it known that casino money was funding his operation: “It was our understanding that the structure was recommended by Jack Abramoff to accommodate Mr. Reed’s political concerns.”
Nonetheless, Reed repeatedly assured the Christian Coalition that the funding for its work was not coming from gambling interests. This was technically true as the Choctaws were paying for it out of their non-gambling revenue, though their objective was obviously to protect their own gambling interests and revenue. According to emails obtained during a Senate investigation into Abramoff’s activities and reported in the media, Reed was well aware of who was paying for this anti-gambling effort. When the information began to surface in the press and the Christian Coalition learned of the source of the $850,000 it had received, it demanded an explanation from Reed who apologized in a letter saying he should have “explained that the contributions came from the Choctaws,” this admitting that he had been fully aware of the source of the funding. But by the time Reed offered his “after-the-fact apology,” the gambling initiative had been defeated and the Christian Coalition had been duped.
When word of Reed’s work for Abramoff first broke, Reed claimed that he had “no direct knowledge of [Abramoff’s lobbying firm’s] clients or their interests.” But according to the report recently released by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee on Abramoff’s bilking of the tribes, Reed was informed by Abramoff as early as 1999 that the money that was funding his anti-gambling operations was coming from the casino-owning Choctaw tribe.
The report published an email Abramoff sent to Reed instructing him to “page me with a page of no more than 90 words ... informing me of your completion of the budget and giving me a total budget figure with category breakdowns. Once I get this, I will call Nell [Rodgers] at Choctaw and get it approved.” A subsequent email to Reed asked him to send “invoices as soon as possible so I can get Choctaw to get us checks asap.”
Thus, Reed was clearly aware that the funding for his anti-gambling work was coming from the Choctaw and that he was indirectly working to protect the tribe’s multi-million dollar gambling interests. Despite the repeated references to the Choctaw in Abramoff’s emails, Reed continued to publicly insist that he did not know the source of the funding.
Jim Garrow insists that he wants nothing to do with people calling for President Obama to be killed…unless they are calling for Obama to be put to death because he is guilty of treason, in which case Garrow is on board.
Hang Em (read to the end):
If you are foolish enough to put treasonous statements or murderous statements regarding the occupant of the White House, I must notify you that I will defriend you. If you are not aware yet that the NSA, FBI, and a score of alphabet agencies of the Federal government are watching and monitoring your activities, then you need to add "ignorant" to the adjectives that must be used to describe you. To speak of the actions of the President as illegal, unconstitutional, or immoral is to speak the truth within the confines of law and right. To protest his actions and to demand his arrest or his removal for these actions is also to speak withing [sic] the confines of right and law.
The line is crossed when one demands the death of the President, or physical actions that could be seen as assault. Counseling such would be a violation of law. If you speak to issues that you believe to be treasonous or seditious and you describe the punishments set out in law for those breaches of law, then you are within your right and law in those descriptions.
So folks take care to act within law and rights defined in the Constitution. To be outraged and emotional puts you in the same "boat" as myself. But to cross the line into that which is a breach of law necessitates that I distance myself from you. A final thought however. If a person is found guilty of treason or sedition, they should be hung, or shot, or using a new corollary to those methods of punishment approved for capital offenses, beheading (it has been added), then you merely call for justice. In which case and context, I would certainly approve. (emphasis mine)
- Dr. Jim Garrow –
Of course, such claims aren’t new from Garrow, who recently agreed with Erik Rush that Obama should be executed:
Garrow: This call for the removal of the president is highly appropriate; in fact it is appropriate given what the alternative would be. If in fact this man is doing the things that he is being reported to be doing, he needs to be removed, he needs to be in fact tried for treason and of course the finality of that is a man gets either put up against a wall and shot or hung. Treason is not to be stood for — ever — and that’s what we have right now in the White House. Paul [Vallely] isn’t talking about the nuclear side of it but I know they are letting me do that and take bullets.
Rush: Aside from the fact that as I mentioned before you came one, Obama remains the consummate BS artist and actor. Despite all of that, I’m sure that he knows what the alternative is should he fail, should we succeed, should these things come out and be widely known and if he were to be removed I’m sure that he knows that the penalties for such actions that he has taken do fall within those unpleasant realms of execution and all of that unpleasant stuff. I think it is very noteworthy that General Vallely has come out and said that impeachment is not the way to go, he’s talking about making the President’s position so untenable that those in Congress right up to the Speaker and the Senate Minority Leader and all of those folks, action has to be taken and making things essentially not work, they won’t be able to get anything done for all of the political upheaval. He is talking about peaceful demonstrations.
Garrow: He’s also talking about the removal of Mr. Obama and to remove him has all sorts of ramifications and implications. How do you remove him? Frankly, we have sheriffs in the country who by law have the right to arrest people. They’re the guys, if someone was going to go in and arrest the president, it would be probably a sheriff along with military to back him up because you still got the Secret Service, you still got people who are there to protect the President, and they have to be contended with. Whether it would be legal or lawful to do it would be answered after the bullets were fired.
WorldNetDaily editor David Kupelian believes that President Obama is going to engineer several “manufactured crises” -- including the collapse of the private health care system -- manipulate the science behind climate change and maybe even fake an assassination attempt, in order to expand his political power and create a “socialist state.”
In a column today, Kupelian bizarrely reasons that if the country were stable and prosperous, then “Obama and his agenda would be seen for what they really are, and he would be swiftly and surely impeached by the House of Representatives, convicted by the Senate and removed from office.”
He writes that Obama is waging a “spiritual war” on Americans that involves “breaking us, body, mind and spirit,” and claims that Obama is responsible for that fact that “America is becoming increasingly angry, confused, depressed, sick, conflicted, addicted, suicidal, faithless and hopeless.”
Therefore, the president must create crises in order to hold onto authority and even create a one-world government, including possibly even faking an assassination plot that would “justify and even necessitate Obama’s violations of Americans’ core liberties – gun control and confiscation, censorship of conservative news and talk radio as ‘hate speech,’ the growing police state, advanced surveillance state and so on.”
Consider what would happen if, magically, there were no major societal crises in America today, and if most citizens – as has been the case in some earlier eras – were content, family-oriented, free and grateful for the blessings of living in this uniquely blessed country. Obama and his agenda would be seen for what they really are, and he would be swiftly and surely impeached by the House of Representatives, convicted by the Senate and removed from office.
But to rule like a dictator from his White House inner sanctum, and to succeed in moving the progressive agenda continually forward, one more thing is necessary: Obama needs crises. Otherwise, the spell of deception tends to break and too many people wake up and complain … and vote.
Therefore, 2014 could be called “the year of manufactured crises.”
Obama and his team may push to resolve the insurance crisis they have strategically created by “transitioning” America into “single payer” – a bloodless euphemism for full-bore socialism, where the federal government literally controls everyone’s health care and, therefore, their very lives. Good-bye freedom.
To accomplish this, Team Obama would need to: 1) destroy America’s private insurance industry, which it is currently attempting, 2) declare the hybrid Obamacare system (a cross between free-market and socialized medicine) a failure due to Republican sabotage and insurance companies’ greed and intransigence and 3) decree that, with no way back to a functional private insurance sector, and with Americans in total crisis regarding health care, the only sensible solution is for America to “join the rest of the civilized world, including Britain, Canada and Europe, and make health care a universal right and part of the government’s compact with her people.”
Remember, “single-payer” is what Obama and Democrat leaders have long claimed – publicly – as their real goal.
However, you can’t get there from here without constantly creating crises as springboards. In this case, Obamacare, which was packaged and gift-wrapped as the solution to the flaws in America’s health-care system, is actually a crisis-causing “transition” stage between free-market health care and a socialist state.
But for Obama, obsessing over “climate change” (ironically, meeting with his new global warming task force while a snowstorm shut down the federal government) is more than just a way of changing the subject and diverting attention from Obamacare. Global warming is, itself, another huge manufactured crisis, its real purpose being massive worldwide wealth distribution under the United Nations.
Christopher Monckton, who advised the late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher on issues including global warming, says “the sole purpose of the climate scam, as the U.N. [sees] it, [is] to serve as a Trojan horse allowing it to achieve its long-held ambition of destroying national sovereignty and transferring all real political power to itself.”
“If America stands firm for just a few more years,” he added, “until it becomes obvious to all that the mad scientists were more concerned with grants than with truth, we may yet prevent the world government that Mr. Ban [Ki-moon, U.N. secretary-general] longs for.”
Remember this: Obama and his team want you to be frustrated and resentful. They will wear you out and steal your strength that way. Think about it.
Look at today’s health statistics: America is becoming increasingly angry, confused, depressed, sick, conflicted, addicted, suicidal, faithless and hopeless. The kind of stress and pressure the Obama left intentionally inflicts on the rest of America is designed to “transform” us, yes, but by first breaking us, body, mind and spirit.
Friends, this is a spiritual war, and goes way beyond matters of law, politics and policy. That’s why constant crisis is literally the fabric – the warp and weft – of Barack Obama’s “transformational” presidency.
A final warning: There is one perfect crisis for Obama and the entire progressive left, one event that would serve as the ultimate validation of all their delusions, fantasies and projections, something that would validate every prejudice, lie, unworkable idea and failed policy they espouse.
The one event that would be Barack Obama’s grand-slam homerun would be if, in response to the ever-increasing outrages and provocations of the left, someone on “the right” becomes unhinged and goes violent in a big way.
That terrible event would constitute the perfect answer to all Obama’s problems, the fulfillment of the left’s fondest dreams. Haven’t you wondered why the liberal media are always painting the tea party as racist without a shred of evidence, and are always hoping out loud that every new terror act or school shooting was perpetrated by a conservative? Didn’t you see how the media fell over one another trying to portray – ridiculously and incorrectly – the Boston Marathon-bombing Tsarnaev brothers as right-wingers, and how ABC News reported – ridiculously and incorrectly – that the Aurora, Colo., movie theater mass shooter might be a tea-party member, and how the Department of Homeland Security painted pro-lifers, constitutionalists, libertarians, NRA members and returning war veterans as potential “right-wing extremists” and terrorists?
Why do they do this? Because, in their imaginations at least, violence on the right would validate their narrative. Worse, it would finally seem to justify and even necessitate Obama’s violations of Americans’ core liberties – gun control and confiscation, censorship of conservative news and talk radio as “hate speech,” the growing police state, advanced surveillance state and so on. All would be seen as necessary restraints against all those conservative terrorists out there.
Of course, in the turmoil (and secret left-wing revelry) over a major “right-wing terror attack,” forgotten and irrelevant would be the fact that you – and tens of millions like you – are being forced to obtain new and much more expensive health-care insurance. After all, we’re under attack by right-wing extremists! It’s the perfect crisis.
The DVD shows a lecture that Todd Friel of Wretched Radio delivered at AIG’s 2013 Mega Conference, in which he gave the message that while “homosexuals are victoriously waving the rainbow flag,” it is now “time to raise the Christian flag.”
For years, Christians have been waving the American flag. Today, homosexuals are victoriously waving the rainbow flag. Some would suggest it is time for us to raise the white flag. Perhaps there is a better, more biblical option.
Satan doesn’t care if America endorses heterosexual or homosexual marriage, as long as people go to hell. He knows that it doesn’t matter if a nation is moral, as long as people die in their sins.
A good general who suffers defeat does not continue with the same strategy; he wisely assesses the situation and formulates a different plan. It is time for Christians to be wise and reconsider our battle plan: Has our current strategy been working? What does the Bible say our assignment is? Have we been engaged in the right battle?
Rather than raising the white flag, perhaps it is time to raise the Christian flag. While political engagement is important, we are commanded to evangelize and train, not simply win a campaign. Todd Friel challenges viewers to reconsider how we discuss homosexuality at church, how we respond to a child who “comes out,” and how we talk about gay people in the public realm.
At a House subcommittee hearing yesterday on a bill that would severely restrict access to insurance coverage for abortion, Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa mocked an expert who testified, accurately, that paying out of pocket for an abortion could cost a low-income woman more than a month’s rent.
Susan Wood, a George Washington University professor and former FDA official, told the all-male judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution that HR7 – which would make the Hyde Amendment permanent, ban federal subsidies for private insurance plans that cover abortion and would permanently block the District of Columbia from spending local tax money on abortion services – could “virtually eliminate abortion coverage from the private insurance market” and would especially hurt low-income women, threatening to push them “deeper into poverty.”
“While it may not seem like a big expense to a Member of Congress, in these tough financial times, for many people, abortion care costs more than their monthly rent, putting it out of reach for their family’s pocketbook,” Wood said.
When it came time to ask questions, Rep. King mocked Wood’s comparison of the cost of abortion to a month’s rent, wondering, “I wonder how many abortions a month does she need to keep up with the monthly rent check.”
Rep. King: “Okay, then your answer, then, would be that, in exceptional cases it may cost a woman more for a single abortion than it does for her one month of rent check. Is that an accurate way to depict what you said?”
Prof. Wood: “That’s correct.”
Rep. King: “Okay, because I wonder how many abortions a month does she need to keep up with the monthly rent check.”
The Guttmacher Institute estimates that the average cost of a first-trimester abortion is between $450 and $500, depending on the method used; Planned Parenthood says a first-trimester abortion can cost up to $950. Later-term abortions, which are more rare, can cost many times that.
RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.
This week, we learned more details about President Obama’s sinister gay-Sharia plot. And according to one right-wing radio host, if the president fails to implement his nefarious policies before his second term runs out, he will simply set up “a satellite administration in exile.”
5. Pot Wreaking Havoc On Colorado!
Colorado’s legalization of marijuana went into effect at the start of the year, providing plenty of material for satirical websites such as the Daily Currant and the National Report. Unfortunately, it seems that many people fell for the Daily Currant’s post titled “Marijuana Overdoses Kill 37 in Colorado On First Day of Legalization”; many also believed the National Report articles, “Feds Raid Colorado Pot Shop” and “Colorado Pot Shop Accepting Food Stamps – Taxpayer Funded Marijuana for Welfare Recipients.”
Of course, we don’t need satirical stories from the Daily Currant or National Report when we already have terrible reporting on marijuana policy from folks like Fox News commentator Bill O’Reilly and Washington Times opinion editor Emily Miller.
4. Priebus Uncovers Democratic Jobless Aid Conspiracy
After Senate Republicans failed to block a vote to extend unemployment benefits for three months, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus alleged that is actually the Democrats who want the jobless aid bill to fail, even though every single Democratic member of the Senate voted to consider the legislation. “They don’t want this to pass,” Priebus said, arguing that Democrats simply want to make Republicans look bad by trying to hold a vote on an extension of unemployment insurance for 1.3 million jobseekers.
“I’m reasonably certain this theory is stark raving mad, but let’s assume for the sake of conversation that Priebus is onto something,” Steve Benen responded. “If this were true, wouldn’t it make sense for Republican leaders to pass the measures and undermine the Democratic plan?”
Instead, all but six Senate Republicans opposed it.
3. The Mythical Gay Police State
The National Organization for Marriage is still fuming Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson’s brief suspension from A&E and defending his imaginary constitutional right to appear on television. In a hysterical post about the Duck Dynasty flap — since deleted but grabbed by Jeremy Hooper — NOM president Brian Brown warned that soon the police may arrest and prosecute people for “criminal hate-speech charges.” He asserted that the “homosexual lobby” is creating “a new State regime” that will make religious beliefs “subject to punishment” and “grounds for criminal action.”
“This is what our country is facing if the same-sex ‘marriage’ movement gets its way: a society in which not just Phil and other celebrities who voice Christian values are put in the crosshairs and targeted for persecution, but any ordinary citizen who believes in traditional values — ordinary citizens like you and me — will be liable to sanction,” Brown wrote.
Laura Ingraham delivered a similar message on her radio show this week, cautioning that gay rights laws represent “a victory against religious liberty” that “puts us on a very dangerous path, it’s a path that Karl Marx would be very happy from the grave, or from hell, to see us being on right now.”
2. Limbaugh: Obama Will Keep Power After Second Term
When President Obama announced that his family may stay in the Washington, DC, area after his second term ends so his youngest daughter can graduate from school, Rush Limbaugh’s sixth sense for conspiracies was immediately triggered.
The conservative talk show host alleged that Obama will try to hold on to power by establishing “a satellite administration in exile” with the “media continuing to treat him as though he is still president.” He warned that Obama will have an “unprecedented post-presidency” that will allow him to hold onto the reins of power even outside of elected office.
“He’s gonna be staying there to protect his legacy and to make sure it is never unwound,” Limbaugh said. “Unless he’s run out of town in shame.”
1. Islamists In The White House
Doing his best Joseph McCarthy impression, Fox News pundit Tom McInerney insists that he has a list of names of the members of the Muslim Brotherhood who are working in government…except he doesn’t know their names. “We’ve got Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. government today,” McInerney told the Washington radio station WMAL. “I haven’t got their names exactly but there’s a list of them, at least 10 or 15 of them in the U.S. government.”
Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association took this theory one step further to contend that the chief Islamist in the Obama administration is Obama himself:
A sample letter opposing a proposed state antidiscrimination measure circulated by the Utah Eagle Forum this week calls homosexuality a “disturbing and disruptive” “personal weakness,” which the group compares to “theft, dishonesty [and] murder.”
Fox 13 reporter Max Roth, who attended an Eagle Forum event on the antidiscrimination bill Wednesday, posted an image of the letter on Twitter, which was then spotted by On Top Magazine. The meeting was led by Utah Eagle Forum head Gayle Ruzicka.
“Any confusion a man or woman has for their gender other than the gender that they were born with, is their personal weakness,” Petty writes. “We all have weaknesses and some are more disturbing and or disruptive than others. There is no need to categorize weaknesses.”
“However our God inspired Founding Fathers included words in describing our Constitution as a document good only for a moral people,” she continues. “Deviant sexual life styles are immoral.”
The letter goes on to compare discrimination against “immorality” to discrimination against “theft, dishonesty [and] murder” and berates Urquhart for promoting “oppression of the majority by the minority.”
We’ve transcribed the letter from Roth’s photograph. Sic throughout, bolding is ours.
Dear Senator Urqhart
We raise our voices in extreme rejection of the Anti-Discrimination Bill that you sponsored.
To propose such an option in support of a questionable life style is unacceptable.
God’s word says he created man and woman in his image. Any confusion a man or woman has for their gender other than the gender that they were born with, is their personal weakness.
We all have weaknesses and some are more disturbing and or disruptive than others. There is no need to categorize weaknesses.
However our God inspired Founding Fathers included words in describing our Constitution as a document good only for a moral people.
Deviant sexual life styles are immoral. We urge you to withdraw your anti discrimination bill and any further activity in that direction.
We discriminate against immorality, theft, dishonesty, murder etcetera and as our representative in the Utah Senate your oath of office is to uphold the constitution. We hold you to the oath you have taken.
Such action as described in the anti discrimination bill allowing a man to say he feels like a woman and wants to use the bathroom and shower facilities for women is a disgrace to the sacred covenants we have with the God of this world and offends all decency.
It is also a complete perversion of sentiment in that, in order to make a small minority feel more “comfortable” in their unnatural behavior, the overwhelming majority must suffer being uncomfortable in natural behavior. It is not an abuse of a minority to reject its abuse of the sensibilities of the majority.
Isaiah 5:20 says: “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”
What were you thinking?
Please don’t consider oppression of the majority by the minority to be good.
cc: Senator Ralph Okerlund (who voted in favor to bring this Bill out of committee)
Senator Peter Knudson (who voted in favor to bring this Bill out of committee)
You can view Roth’s report from the event and another anti-antidiscrimination event the same day here.
Right-wing activist/con artist Jim Garrow warned this week that President Obama is about to implement martial law. Garrow told Agenda 21 Radio host Paul Preston that Obama is bent on “wreaking havoc” across America and “is on the edge of being mentally ill,” while agreeing with Preston’s claim that “martial law in America” is on the horizon.
Garrow: I see him as being a fifth column, that body or group of people that come in and their whole idea is to wreak havoc everywhere they turn. Obviously, that’s exactly what’s happened with everything this president is doing. He’s wreaking havoc, destroying the constitution and the rule of law. He has to be stopped.
Preston: Do you think the prospect of martial law in America is a real prospect?
Garrow: Yes it is. That’s what a spoiled brat, a petulant child will do: throw tantrums. They’ll always go and the pendulum will swing all the way in another direction with them, there’s no common ground, there’s no stability and that’s what we see with this man, he’s not a stable person, psychologically stable or whatever. I believe he is on the edge of being mentally ill.
Garrow also informed Preston that his suspicions about Obama trying to “bring in a police state” and “literally take over the United States almost Nazi style” are indeed true.
Preston: What is his end game then here with the United States? To destroy it as much as possible in his time? To totally destroy it? To bring in a police state? We’re seeing the militarization of our regular police all over the place, is that his end game? To literally take over the United States almost Nazi style?
Garrow: It’s all of the above, I’ve got to agree with everything you have said right there.
On his Facebook page, Garrow recently warned that the Obama administration will begin firing on civilian protesters in order to hold power.
“Control, enslavement, destruction, deception and death is where his leadership will take the nation,” he told his followers.
Alan Keyes is now citing Jesus Christ in his drive to elect members of Congress who will pledge to support the impeachment and removal of President Obama, who he says is practicing “socialist gangsterism” and using gun laws to have people “slaughtered by the thousands and the hundreds of thousands.”
Writing today in WorldNetDaily, Keyes claims that most Americans do support impeachment but are being ignored by leaders in Congress. He doubts that America can “wait three more years for the chance to end Obama’s destructive socialist coup d’état” that is creating a “vicious, dictatorial regime.”
However, he is hopeful that Jesus Christ “has the power to restore [America] to the better path of human destiny” and help “the movement to impeach and remove Obama and his cronies from office.”
Leavened with malice and deceit, they rise to power, these hardcore socialists like Obama. Once positioned to do so, they move to consolidate unbridled tyranny. Their infamous goal: to impose the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
That supposedly populist Marxist catchphrase slyly distracts from the fact that everywhere they achieve political success, socialist ideologues practice gangster government – of, by and for a self-serving elitist clique. As gangsters typically do, they encourage whatever vices they can manipulate. They also liberally apply the salt of fear, to make their banal rule more palatable. And when they have attained sufficient power, they do not shrink from doing so with brutally forceful measures.
The U.S. Constitution derives from an understanding that stresses the need for effective limits and constraints on governmental power. This need arises from the same inherent evils that make government necessary in the first place. It is obviously inimical to the goal of dictatorship. Therefore, since even before his occupation of the White House, Obama and his collaborators have worked to disparage, undermine and discard the U.S. Constitution.
But many Americans are still adamantly unwilling to choke down the prospect of life under a vicious, dictatorial regime. Their eyes see past the populist disguise of socialist gangsterism. Some have (I think prematurely) concluded that America’s liberty is irretrievable defunct. But even they have by no means surrendered their allegiance to it.
Others, particularly those who believe in Jesus Christ’s permanent resurrection of hope, look unflinchingly into the abyss, sure that if they remember and trust in God’s law of love and mercy, He has the power to restore their nation to the better path of human destiny. It is especially (though not exclusively) among such people that the movement to impeach and remove Obama and his cronies from office arises.
With all this in mind, it makes no sense to pretend that the impeachment/removal issue must depend on a vote taken by the U.S. Congress “as things stand.” Lately, no matter how much their constituents plead with them, the elitist faction leaders in Congress have made it clear that they aren’t listening, on just about every vital issue.
But if people use the power the Constitution places in their hands, the power of their votes, impeachment/removal may be made to depend on where voters decide to stand in the Congressional elections next November.
Can America afford to wait three more years for the chance to end Obama’s destructive socialist coup d’état? American citizens who answer with a resounding “no” need consider what they can do about it. They need to decide what, as individuals, they are personally willing to do to restore and preserve their government of, by and for the people, the republican form of government guaranteed by the Constitution (Article IV.4)
Just two days after Israel’s cabinet approved a new policy extending government abortion subsidies to all women ages 20-33, the staunchly anti-choice Liberty Counsel released an alert entitled, “Stand With Israel Now,” complete with a photograph of Benjamin Netanyahu with Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver.
“There has never been a more critical time for you to show your support to Israel and its Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu! Become a Liberty Ambassador to Israel and have your faith strengthened and your resolve fortified to stand for Israel,” the group writes. “In light of the failed foreign policies of our current American administration, it has never been a more important time to express our unwavering resolve to stand united with Israel.”
Matt Barber, Staver’s deputy at Liberty Counsel, has praised Netanyahu as the “Leader of the Free World” who turned Israel into “the shining city on the hill,” unlike President Obama whom the group regularly berates as “one of the world’s immoral leaders.”
The group accuses Obama of implementing “forced abortion funding” and “rubbing the aborted babies in the face of every single American.” They also argue that God will punish America for Obama’s “self-destructive” pro-choice stance, and have linked abortion rights to Satan, slavery, Nazism and the Holocaust.
Just a few months ago, Staver and Barber insisted that if they were to remain silent in their opposition to abortion rights, they would be just as bad as “those who silently stood by and allowed the Nazis to murder millions of Jews.” “Silence is affirmation,” Staver said. “If you are silent on this issue, you are affirming that this is something that is acceptable.”
“Posterity will view those who stood in silence or who tacitly accepted this abortion holocaust just as history views those who silently stood by and allowed the Nazis to murder millions of Jews,” Barber said, adding: “Are we comparing the pro-choice movement to the Nazi movement? Yes! Absolutely.”
Now, imagine if it was the Obama administration rather than Netanyahu’s cabinet which adopted a far-reaching policy that the Times of Israel calls one of the “most liberal abortion coverage [policies] in the world”?
But so far from Liberty Counsel, there are no calls for Netanyahu’s ouster, no comparisons to Nazism and no warnings of divine wrath.
Instead just a statement entitled, “Stand With Israel Now.”