C4

FRC: 'Nothing More Christian' Than Massive Food Stamp Cut

Former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, now with the Family Research Council, said that the House GOP’s massive food stamp cuts that could remove around 4 million people from the program next year was an act of Christian compassion.

While many churches and Christians organizations denounced the move, Blackwell told the Christian Post that there was “nothing more Christian” than kicking low-income families off food stamps. He referred to food aid as part of the “plantation of big government” and said that churches and charitable organization will replace such government assistance.

Of course, the conservative news outlet also quoted Rev. Gary Cook of Bread for the World, who criticized the Republican plan and noted that the work of churches “is worth $4 billion dollars annually, which is essentially equal to the annual cut Congress is proposing in food stamps.”

Rev. Gary Cook, the Director of Church Relations at Christian anti-hunger advocacy group, Bread for the World, has told The Christian Post that he is worried that the latest cuts could further marginalize the most vulnerable, rather than mobilize people back to work.



"The people who take advantage of this are some of the poorest of the poor people in the country," Cook told CP. "Their average annual income is $2200 a person. They are among the most difficult to employee. If the government says our economy works well, when we have five or six percent unemployment, because that's our policy, at least they can eat." But according to Ken Blackwell, who is the Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment at the conservative Christian lobbying group, Family Research Council, programs like food stamps prevented people from being truly empowered.

"I think through empowering others and creating self-sufficiency…there within lies the path to sense of worthiness," Blackwell told CP. "When I was growing up, there was fundamental belief, that there were times in people's life when they needed a hand up…there were temporariness to hose programs, where they were structured so that they didn't breed so that they didn't breed dependency."

Blackwell also suggested that there was "nothing more Christian" than "not locking people into a permanent dependency on government handouts, but making sure they are participants in their own upliftment and empowerment so that they in fact through the dignity of work and can break from the plantation of big government."



"America is such a compassionate nation, nothing in history that suggests that churches and communities and our families would let people die of hunger, there is absolutely nothing," said Blackwell.

"We are not lacking in churches in church communities across this nation in making sure that basic human needs are met without creating another government program that establishes rules that have very low expectations for self-discipline," said Blackwell. "I think we should have an honest debate and discussion in the church community…[on a host of social issues] Christians have been in the forefront, without government prodding or dominance."

Cook's biggest worry though, was that the food stamp cuts would offset the thousands of hours and dollars that these very church ministries spend annually supporting their communities through soup kitchens, bread lines, and food pantries.

"What churches do in terms of the kind of generous giving to poor, hungry people is amazing," said Cook. "But their work is worth $4 billion dollars annually, which is essentially equal to the annual cut Congress is proposing in food stamps."

Lively: Gay Ugandans 'Dupes' Of Marxist Plot To 'Paint Me As A Demon'

After appearing on Rick Wiles’ radio show where he called President Obama the Antichrist, Scott Lively talked to Janet Mefferd on Friday about his view that “homosexuality is the moral issue of the End Times.” He maintains that “everyone is being tested with this issue” because homosexuality represents “the extreme example of rebellion on the verge of judgment.”

Lively is currently facing a lawsuit from Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), which is represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), over his role in inciting anti-LGBT persecution and legislation in Uganda. He told Mefferd that SMUG are only “a handful of Ugandan homosexuals and are really just dupes” of the “radical” and “[George] Soros-funded” CCR.

“They are very powerful, they are heavily funded, absolutely dedicated, these are ideologues,” Lively said of the CCR, “these are the hard-left, Marxist ideologues and I am their primary—I am the most visible symbol of opposition to the gay agenda right now in the United States.”

Lively, who just days before the interview claimed that gay rights advocates are on “the Devil’s side,” criticized the CCR for trying to “paint me as a demon.”

Peter LaBarbera Takes On Pope Francis, Claims 'Satan's Earthly Minions' Use Homosexuality To Undermine Catholic Church

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality head Peter LaBarbera is none too pleased with new comments on homosexuality made by Pope Francis, writing that a fear he “and many like-minded pro-family advocates share (including several Catholic friends with whom I’ve spoken) is that the pope is naive about the aggressive homosexualist agenda.”

According to LaBarbera, “Satan’s earthly minions” concocted a plan to bring gay men into the priesthood so they can “seduce and molest” boys in order to discredit and weaken the Church’s authority to condemn homosexuality. LaBarbera now fears that the Pope is giving ammunition to “pro-homosexuality and pro-abortion militants” to further their goal of bringing “corruption and destruction to many institutions.”

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality works closely with conservative Catholics from across the nation, indeed the world, in opposition to the homosexual activist movement. It is my experience that wherever the Catholic Church still has influence, if the Church or its leaders takes a strong stand against pro-”gay” legislation, the bills usually fail — but if Church leaders compromise on doctrine or go AWOL (public policy-speaking), homosexual activists triumph.

Having said that, I acutely recognize — from my perspective as an evangelical (who was raised Catholic) — that there has always been a “friendly distrust” or competition between ministry and the defense of morality. Between Christians who believe that primary role of believers is compassionate Gospel outreach to lost homosexuals — and “culture war” Christians who (although also loving the Gospel) see religious traditionalists as a crucial force resisting the Sin Movement of homosexuality that so profoundly threatens our culture.



I dare say that a more sinister plot to undermine the Catholic Church and its reputation could not have been carried out had Satan’s earthly minions spent $100 million devising one:

1. Homosexual men take advantage of more lax standards to enter priesthood.

2. Homosexual priests and male Catholic school officials use their authoritative role to seduce and molest mostly male teenagers and boys.

3. Homosexuals like then-Archbishop Weakland and their sympathizers in the Church cover up priest abuses and transfer predators to new, unsuspecting parishes, where they molest more boys.

4. The homosexual-predator scandal blows up in the media — alienating millions of Catholics from the Church and doing untold damage to its reputation and moral, spiritual and political influence.

5. Homosexuals and liberal allies who advocate for acceptance of homosexuality turn around and say Church is now discredited because it harbored “pedophiles.” Meanwhile, Church officials resist full disclosure of the scandal, thus perpetuating it.

6. Lastly, “gay” activists and their liberal allies continue to insist that the male-on-boy priest abuse scandal has little or nothing to do with homosexuals — but rather was a “pedophile” or “ephebophile” (adult who is sexual attracted to adolescents) problem.

My hunch is that each and every one of those complicit Church apologists for homosexuality, like Weakland, would consider himself “more compassionate” and “more Christ-like” than “anti-gay Catholics” who have been scandalized by the homosexualist advances in their Church. Such is the arrogance of liberals. This despite the untold suffering of boys victimized by sexual deviants masquerading as pastoral guardians of others’ souls.

All this is a roundabout way of saying that the great fear that I and many like-minded pro-family advocates share (including several Catholic friends with whom I’ve spoken) is that the pope is naive about the aggressive homosexualist agenda. Pro-”gay” ideologues are cunning and tactical — they are already using the pope’s words to advocate ideas that he surely condemns. While laying claim to the Gospel and noble concepts like tolerance and equality, they have brought corruption and destruction to many institutions, of which the Catholic Church is but one.

We understand that the pope is not embracing a change in Church doctrine, and that he truly wants to help homosexual strugglers come to God. But at the same time we recognize that words matter in this debate — indeed, they often drive it. (Witness the deviously brilliant slogan “marriage equality” used by LGBT advocates to denote sodomy-based so-called “marriage.”) And unfortunately the words Pope Francis has chosen (e.g., warning against “obsessing” about Church doctrines (such as Vatican teachings on homosexuality) and stating regarding “gay” priests: “Who am I to judge them?”) are already being manipulated, distorted and exploited by LGBT activists and their allies. That includes pro-homosexual priests like Fr. James Martin who are no friends of orthodoxy.



Nobody is predicting the dissolution of the Catholic Church, but when you see pro-homosexuality and pro-abortion militants acclaiming the new the pope’s approach, beware. AFTAH will be following this story closely.

Harvey: Ban Gay Pride Parades And Adoption

On her radio commentary yesterday, Linda Harvey said she couldn’t comprehend why anyone would be opposed to Russia’s new law criminalizing speech it considers “homosexual propaganda.”

The Mission America president, who has endorsed and promoted the law, called on the US to view the law as a model, such as its ban on gay adoption and pride events: “A ban on homosexuals adopting children was also part of this law as well as a ban on gay pride parades, something we should consider in cities here, and a ban on any public promotion of homosexuality.”

She also praised Russia’s efforts to prevent gay people from “influencing children.” 

Harvey just didn’t understand what all the fuss was all about, dismissing gay people for “playing the victim.”

“It’s amazing to me, with all of Russia’s flaws, they understand how important this is and we don’t,” Harvey maintained. “Homosexual groups specialize in playing the victim card even though in reality the Russian law is all about preventing children from being victims so it’s not victimizing anyone.”

Rep. Huelskamp: Defund Obamacare Because 90 Percent Of Americans Oppose Abortion Provision That Doesn't Exist

You really have to marvel at Republican members of Congress who believe that the message of the 2012 election, in which the candidate who campaigned for Obamacare soundly defeated the candidate who campaigned to repeal Obamacare, was that most Americans want to repeal Obamacare by any means possible.

Following an election in which Democrats won the popular vote for the House of Representatives, a mere 36 percent of Americans favor repealing the Affordable Care Act and just 28 percent of voters say they’d be more likely to support a congressman who is willing to shut down the government in order to prevent the law from being funded.

That brings us to Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), who in an interview with talk show host Steve Deace today followed his attacks on food stamp recipients by spewing the patently absurd GOP talking points that it is actually President Obama — not the Republicans — who want to shut down the government.

Then, Huelskamp asserted that voters will side with the GOP because a whopping “90 percent” of Americans oppose the reform law’s provision that “every single person under Obamacare” will pay a $1 abortion surcharge.

One problem with the congressman’s claim is that the abortion surcharge does not exist.

But no matter how many times the claim is proven false, Republicans like Huelskamp will keep repeating it and then cite the bogus charge as a justification for their nihilistic anti-Obamacare efforts.

African American Ministers in Action Condemn House GOP’s “Heartless” Vote to Slash Food Stamps

WASHINGTON – In response to the bill passed by House Republicans yesterday that cuts $39 billion over ten years from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), People For the American Way’s African American Ministers in Action (AAMIA) released the following statement:

The GOP’s vote to slash our nation’s food stamp program can only be described one way: heartless. 

More than one in seven Americans rely on food stamps.  Many of those receiving assistance through the program are our country’s most vulnerable members: children, seniors, people with disabilities, and families struggling to make ends meet.  Playing politics with the lives of low-income men, women, and children is disgraceful.  Especially at a time when so many families are struggling to recover from the recession, threatening basic access to food is the worst kind of partisan politics. 

The members of AAMIA are extremely disappointed in and strongly condemn this callous vote.

People For the American Way's African American Ministers in Action represents an ecumenical alliance of 1,500 African-American clergy working toward equality, justice and opportunity for all.

###

Rep. Huelskamp, Whose Family Takes Government Farm Subsidies, Mocks Food Stamp Recipients

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), who bravely opposed federal aid to all those greedy Northeasterners affected by Hurricane Sandy, is now boasting about his support for a House GOP plan to kick four to six million people off the food stamp program.

As Jonathan Chait details, the GOP’s draconian food stamp cuts were coupled with a push to preserve excessive subsidies for farmers and agribusinesses, which the GOP refused to cut as much as the Obama administration proposed. And, surprise surprise, Huelskamp’s family has greatly benefited from such government aid:

Huelskamp has been able to see a need for federal relief closer to his home. His brother's farm received $1.6 million in federal subsidies from 1995 to 2011. The federal payouts included more than $30,000 for disaster subsidies.

Huelskamp's parents' farm has also received subsidies. Politico reported in 2011 that the farm took in $1.1 million in federal farms subsidies from 1995 to 2009.

While speaking to right-wing talk show host Steve Deace yesterday, Huelskamp had fun sticking it to all those whiney poors trying to receive food assistance for their families.

Huelskamp pointed to Jason Greenslate, a California surfer who has been all over Fox News, as the face of American food stamp recipients. Media Matters points out that “labeling Greenslate a representative of SNAP recipients flies in the face of readily available data, which shows that the fraud and waste rate in the SNAP program is less than 1 percent and that 41 percent of food stamp recipients live ‘in a household with earnings.’”

Huelskamp joked that his two kids always feel “starved” under his watch, but that with his vote to cut food assistance, he only “decided to starve a surfer by the name of Jason in California who has decided that he’s not going to get a job in life because he gets food stamps.” 

“Go pick up trash in a road ditch,” Huelskamp said, “you got to do something. There are 3.5-4 million American adults who are able-bodied, have no dependence and what do we require them to do to get a free check for food? Nothing.”

Huelskamp went on to call the food stamp program “out of control” because of its growth in size. Gee, it’s not like America has faced a recession or high unemployment rates or anything that might have driven up enrollment. Maybe all these working families struggling to put food on the table can just buy a big farm and get government welfare that way!

PFAW Releases New Toolkit on Getting Money Out and Voters In to Our Democracy

We believe in a democratic system where all Americans have equal access to the voting booth and can express their views on a level playing field.
PFAW

GOP Senators Decide Attacking Women's Equality Is a Winning Message on Judicial Nominee

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to approve the nomination of Georgetown Law professor Cornelia “Nina” Pillard to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which is often considered to be the nation’s second-highest court. The party-line vote wasn’t exactly a surprise – Republicans have decided they don’t want President Obama to fill any of the D.C. Circuit’s three vacancies, so have voted against both nominees who have come before them so far – but the content of at least some GOP senators' objections to Pillard was notable.

Specifically, both Republican senators who chose to speak on their decision to vote against Pillard went out of their way to object to Pillard’s record on women’s equality.

Yes, the Republican “rebranding” effort is going so well that they are now threatening to hold up a judicial nominee because she believes that men and women should be equal in the eyes of the law and has been very successful in arguing that view in the courts.

Pillard has a long record of working with Republicans and Democrats to defend women’s equality: She worked with the Bush administration to successfully defend the Family and Medical Leave Act in the Supreme Court and crafted the arguments that convinced the Supreme Court to open the Virginia Military Institute to women (which earned her the respect of, among others, the head of the school who was at the time opposed to allowing women in).

She also has worked on women’s equality issues as an academic, including questioning abstinence-only education that presents a double standard to boys and girls…which  is what has sent the far right into a fit.

At yesterday's committee vote on Pillard’s nomination, both Sen. Chuck Grassley (the ranking Republican on the committee) and Sen. Orrin Hatch lifted talking points from right-wing activists like the Family Research Council, Phyllis Schlafly and Ed Whelan of the National Review to attack the nominee’s academic writings on reproductive rights and abstinence education and to even, bizarrely, question whether she appreciates the “benefits of marriage.”

And then every single Republican on the committee voted against allowing her nomination to go to the full Senate for a vote.

To put this in context, Republican senators including Grassley and Hatch were quick to defend demand the confirmation of George W. Bush judicial nominees who made rape jokes and belonged to clubs that excluded women and espoused any number of offensive views, claiming that they could hold these personal views and still be fair judges. As PFAW's Drew Courtney wrote in the Huffington Post yesterday:

Too often we're told that judicial nominations fights are too complicated, too subtle to get major national attention. Not this time. The Republican message is crystal clear: rape-joke making, gay-bashing, abuse-defending, discrimination-supporting, law-skirting, ideology-pushing Republican men are welcome to be judges in our federal courts.

Women who expect to be treated as equals are not.

Kevin Swanson Blames Colorado Floods On 'Decadent Homosexual Activity,' Marijuana And Abortion Rights

After blaming Colorado wildfires on a kiss between State House Majority Leader Mark Ferrandino and his partner that was featured on the Denver Post, pastor Kevin Swanson is also blaming the gay kiss on recent floods to hit the state.

While speaking with fellow pastor and Generations Radio co-host Dave Buehner, Swanson said that it is not a coincidence that the state experienced deadly floods at the same time Colorado “legislators committed homosexual acts on the front page of the Denver Post” and made sure to “kill as many babies as possible” and “encourage as much decadent homosexual activity as possible.” He even mentioned the new liberal marijuana law as a reason that the state is witnessing “the worst year ever in terms of flood and fire damage in Colorado’s history.”

Buehner added that “sometimes when you’re in a flood of dissipation, God might bring a real flood to show you the consequences of the flood of your dissipation.” 

Swanson: Let me ask you this: is it a coincidence that this was the worst year politically in the history of Colorado, at least if you use God’s law as a means of determining human ethics, our legislators did the worst possible things this year than I have ever witnessed in the twenty years I’ve been in Colorado. Our legislators committed homosexual acts on the front page of the Denver Post, do you remember that? So here we have the very worst year in Colorado’s year in terms of let’s kill as many babies as possible, let’s make sure we encourage as much decadent homosexual activity as possible, let’s break God’s law with impudence at every single level, at every single level let’s make sure that we offend whoever wrote the Bible, so we have the worst year possible politically in the state of Colorado and it happens to be the worst year ever in terms of flood and fire damage in Colorado’s history. That is a weird coincidence; interesting to say the least.

Buehner: It is. Allow me a little freedom here with 1 Peter. In Colorado this last year we walked in lewdness, lust, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties—

Swanson: Marijuana.

Buehner: And abominable idolatries and they think it’s strange down at that Gold Dome that we are not running with them in the same flood of dissipation. Sometimes when you’re in a flood of dissipation, God might bring a real flood to show you the consequences of the flood of your dissipation.

Rios: The Next Mass Shooting May Take Place At Starbucks Due To Howard Schultz Letter

Earlier this week Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz bought ad space in major national newspapers to run an open letter requesting “that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas.”

Naturally, this prompted American Family Association radio host Sandy Rios to speculate if the “next shooting” will occur at Starbucks because criminals will now target Starbucks coffee shops: “Speaking of shooting, you just wonder if the next one is going to take place at one of your favorite coffee establishments because Starbucks is now…asking customers to stop bringing firearms to their stores or even outdoors.”

“I don’t know if people like the shooter on Monday,” referring to the Navy Yard shooting, “read the Washington Post or these treatises from people like Starbucks,” Rios said, alluding to the NRA-pushed myth that criminals target gun-free zones.

Money Out, Voters In: A Guide to Democratic Reform

Americans today face twin threats to the integrity of our democracy: unlimited spending to influence elections and voter suppression. Find out what you can do.

Fischer: Hillary Clinton 'Could Be Our First Lesbian President'

While American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer is confident that Americans would never elect Hillary Clinton as president because she is simply “too old” and “too saggy,” he now says that if Clinton should win, then she might be the “first lesbian president.”

Fischer pointed to an interview between Gennifer Flowers and the UK-based Daily Mail in which she claims that Bill Clinton told her that Hillary is bisexual, and therefore it isn’t out of the question that she may be having an affair with aide Huma Abedin.

Since Fischer accepts pure speculation from whatever source as indisputable fact so long as it fits his agenda, it is no surprise that he now claims that “the bottom line is that if Hillary Clinton becomes president in 2016 she will not only be our first female president she could be our first lesbian president.”

Fellow AFA radio host Sandy Rios leveled a similar charge earlier this year after Clinton released a video endorsing marriage equality. Rios suggested that the former Secretary of State might be a lesbian since she has a “love of homosexuality.”

Pastor Behind Anti-Gay Amendment Joins North Carolina Senate Race, Insists Being Gay Is A Choice

After months of deliberating, Southern Baptist pastor Mark Harris announced that he will run for US Senate in North Carolina as a Republican challenger to Kay Hagan. Harris’ wife described his Senate bid as “God’s will” and claimed that “the kind of preparation God has given Mark in ministry is the kind of leadership that is needed in a legislative body.”

As we’ve noted, Harris was behind the successful campaign to amend North Carolina’s constitution to include a ban on same-sex marriage and civil unions. No stranger to anti-gay rhetoric, the Republican candidate recently sat down with Wayne Powers on “Speak Out Charlotte,” where he insisted that being gay is a choice.

“I’ve yet to buy in, as there is not the medical evidence, that an individual that chooses the homosexual lifestyle is born that way,” Harris said. “That is a choice.”

After Powers wondered why someone would choose to be gay when they will most likely face discrimination and ostracization, Harris said that “it’s kind of like if you get down to the issue of the evidence of global warming, you’ve got scientists on both sides; you have the medical community on both sides.”

Harris may want to find a new analogy, as there is indeed a consensus among climate scientists on the existence of man-made climate change.

Watch:

DC Circuit Nominee Nina Pillard's Broad Bipartisan Support

Georgetown Law professor Nina Pillard, who has had a long and impressive career in law and public service, was approved today by the Senate Judiciary Committee to serve on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Her nomination now goes to the full Senate.

Scores of people and organizations who have worked with Professor Pillard or observed her work have written to the Senate in support of her nomination. Her supporters include:

Alumni of the Virginia Military Institute, which Pillard helped open to women:

VMI gauges its success as an institution by measuring the societal contributions of its alumni. Professor Pillard would rank high for her work to open VMI to female cadets. The case was initiated by the George H.W. Bush Administration and made its way to the Supreme Court during Professor Pillard’s tenure at the office of the Solicitor General of the United States. Professor Pillard drafted the five Supreme Court briefs for the United States and her winning arguments opened VMI’s doors for women who have become leaders in the armed forces, elsewhere in public service, and in the private sector.

Josiah Bunting III, superindent of the Virginia Military Institute when women were first admitted:

During the course of the United States v. Virginia case, I was impressed by Pillard’s fairness and rigor. She respected others’ strongly held views about male-only education at VMI, and I always felt that while we had opposing positions at the time, she comported herself with integrity and understanding — qualities that distinguish the best judges at all levels.

A bipartisan group of former attorneys of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, where Pillard served for two years:

We believe that Ms. Pillard has the skill, character, and objectivity that would make her a superlative judge on the D.C. Circuit. She was a respected leader and trusted advisor in OLC, valued for her fair-minded and meticulous approach to legal questions of all sorts. She is an exemplary nominee whom we wholeheartedly endorse.

Dozens of retired members of the armed forces:

Our experience advocating for the full participation of women in the armed forces has shown us that women, indeed, are suited for rigorous military training, service, and leadership. Our military and our nation benefit when both women and men are able to fully contribute to the defense of our country. We support Professor Pillard’s nomination because her accomplishments and credentials demonstrate that she has the qualifications to be a federal
appellate judge, and because her dedication to principles of equality demonstrates that she will be a great one. We urge you to give her a swift and fair hearing, and vote to approve her nomination.

The deans of 24 top law schools:

In her legal advocacy and scholarship, Professor Pillard shows a clear understanding offundamental distinctions between the roles of courts and the political branches, and between law and culture, morality, politics or other important sources ofnorms that guide and constrain human behavior. Throughout her work, she has shown an appreciation ofnuance and respect for opposing viewpoints, grounded in a profound commitment to fair process and fidelity to the law.

In short, Professor Pillard is a talented advocate, a brilliant legal mind, a sensible and moderate problem solver, and a careful thinker who has devoted her career to public service and work for others. We wholeheartedly urge that you confirm her to the D.C. Circuit.

Prominent prosecutors and law enforcement officials:

We urge her  confirmation because she is unquestionably eminently qualified, and is a sensible and fairminded lawyer and scholar who has worked extensively with law enforcement in her career. She brings to the bench sensitivity to the compelling need for effective and legitimate law enforcement in the modern era. She stands for fidelity to the law above all, and has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the important, albeit limited, role of the courts in our federal system

William S. Sessions, director of the FBI under Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush:

I believe that Ms. Pillard has had invaluable work experience that makes her especially well-suited to the bench. While I do not know Ms. Pillard personally, others in the law enforcement community whom I know and respect are supporting her, and their views, combined with her superb experience and qualifications, convince me that she would make an excellent judge, especially on the DC Circuit, which requires someone with such experience and qualifications.

Viet Dinh, conservative scholar who served as assistant attorney general in the George W. Bush administration:

Based on our long and varied professional experience together, I know that Professor Pillard is exceptionally bright, a patient and unbiased listener, and a lawyer of great judgment and unquestioned integrity. We certainly do not agree on the merits of every issue, but Nina has always been fair, reasonable, and sensible in her judgments. She approaches faculty hiring, teaching and curriculum, and matters of faculty governance on their merits, without any ideological agenda--at times even against the tide of academic popularity to defend and respect different views and different types of people.

As we do not share academic specialties, I have not studied Professor Pillard's writings in full, but I know her to be a straight shooter when it comes to law and legal interpretation. She is a fair-minded thinker with enormous respect for the law and for the limited, and essential, role of the federal appellate judge-- qualities that make her well prepared to taken on the work of a D.C.
Circuit judge. I am confident that she would approach the judicial task of applying law to facts in a fair and meticulous manner.

The Women's Bar Association of the District of Columbia:

Ms. Pillard’s record of achievement, and unanimous rating of Well-Qualified, the highest rating available, from the ABA’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, reflects her significant talents as an appellate litigator and scholar. Her legal career is remarkable for her accomplishments and the breadth and depth of her experience, and her reputation for fairmindedness, collegiality, and dedication to principles of equal justice is well founded. 

PFAW

Pat Robertson And Ron Paul Agree Progressives Use Public Schools To 'Indoctrinate Children'

Ron Paul appeared on the 700 Club today to promote his new curriculum for homeschoolers, of which televangelist Pat Robertson is a big fan. Robertson said that Paul’s curriculum, which includes instructions on “the Biblical principles of self-government” and “a thorough understanding of Austrian school economics,” is necessary to stop “indoctrination” in public education.

“Don’t the so-called progressives and whatever, don’t they really want education to indoctrinate children. It’s not just a question of educating they want to indoctrinate them in their philosophy, don’t they?” Robertson inquired.

“I think that’s the whole purpose, it’s indoctrination; it’s compulsory; it’s conformity; destroy creativity; destroy individuality,” Paul maintained. “They don’t want kids to be curious, they have to conform and mold it and then they are obedient to the state.”

Paul said that the NSA surveillance program, government spending and militarism are all the consequences of the public schools’ efforts to “condition” children “to say the government knows best, they’ll take care of it.”

Watch:

WorldNetDaily Blames The Media, Civil Rights Activists And Obama For Navy Yard Shooting

WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush, who believes that the Navy Yard shooting was a false flag “gun-grab theater,” is out with a column today wondering if shooter Aaron Alexis was a “race warrior.”

He claims that Alexis probably went on the rampage because he “felt disaffected due to his race,” which he blames on “the self-serving machinations of the political left, career civil rights activists and the Obama administration in particular.”

According to Rush, the “political left” wins black voters over by “re-igniting the bitterness and militancy radical black activists displayed during the Civil Rights Movement,” contributing to Alexis’ supposed “racial hatred.”

Given all of the data, one cannot help but factor in the alleged racism Alexis claimed to have suffered as a possible contributing factor in the shootings. The racial climate in America has been deliberately poisoned in recent years by the self-serving machinations of the political left, career civil rights activists and the Obama administration in particular. This has led to a near-epidemic in black-on-white crime, one which goes wholly unreported by the establishment press. Might this contrived, institutional advancement of racial tension have contributed to the rage and instability of a man who already felt disaffected due to his race?

That sense of entitlement and tendency toward feeling disrespected among black Americans is part and parcel of the worldview spoon-fed to blacks by the political left. It is a common theme and corrosive thread that has run through the left’s racial narrative for decades. Indeed, this has been employed in order to entice blacks into political allegiance with the left, in keeping them in socioeconomic thralldom and – more recently – in re-igniting the bitterness and militancy radical black activists displayed during the Civil Rights Movement.

Was racial hatred the prime motivator for Aaron Alexis’ heinous attack this week, a factor, or a non-issue? While it is altogether possible that his were the actions of an individual with a psyche disintegrating so rapidly that even he may not have fully understood why he acted as he did, failing to consider race in light of the current political and social landscape would be imprudent indeed.

Rush’s WND colleague Jack Cashill agrees, and asserts that Alexis’ psychological problems “were aggravated by the message that the Democratic-media complex has been steadily pumping out, namely that a black American can never expect justice.”

“As the saner among the media elite know, the blame circles back upon themselves,” Cashill writes. “They helped create the atmosphere in which an emotionally unstable black person finds it easier to blame whites than he does himself.” The right-wing commentator goes on to blame the liberal media for having “continued to drum into the head of African-Americans the pervasiveness of racism in America.”

Aaron Alexis, the former Navy reservist who killed a dozen people in Monday’s Navy Yard shooting, no doubt had psychological problems aplenty.

But evidence suggests that those problems were aggravated by the message that the Democratic-media complex has been steadily pumping out, namely that a black American can never expect justice.

In the past, the media have desperately sought to blame mass violence directly on the right, as they did after the shootings in Tucson and Aurora, Colo., or to blame the right indirectly by focusing on guns, as they did after the Sandy Hook school shooting.

That doesn’t work here. As the saner among the media elite know, the blame circles back upon themselves. They helped create the atmosphere in which an emotionally unstable black person finds it easier to blame whites than he does himself.



In the month of his inauguration, 79 percent of whites and 63 percent of blacks held a favorable view of race relations in America.

By July 2013, those figures had fallen to 52 percent among whites and 38 percent among blacks, a calamitous decline, rarely addressed, never explained.

Although there are as many reasons for the decline in those numbers as there are for the decline in Alexis’ mental health, one fact seems undeniable: The media have continued to drum into the head of African-Americans the pervasiveness of racism in America, Obama’s election notwithstanding.

Indeed, by repeatedly interpreting criticism of Obama as racially based, the media have aggravated the tension between blacks and non-blacks.

In his paranoia and rage, Alexis seemed not at all unlike former L.A. cop and fellow Navy reservist Christopher Dorner. In February 2012, Dorner found it much easier to hold a white establishment accountable for his homicidal spree than the personal demons that beset him.

Sandy Rios Troubled By Role Of Women In Response To Navy Yard Shooting: 'It Was The Chicks Running The Show'

American Family Association radio commentator Sandy Rios was upset that women — most notably the FBI’s Valerie Parlave and Washington, D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier — took a leading role in the response to the Navy Yard shooting.

On Tuesday, Rios mocked Navy Secretary Ray Mabus for mentioning grief counseling in his comments to the media and went on to marvel at the female presence in the response.

“It really struck me that the people that stood up to speak in the press conferences, the people leading the charge on this are all women,” Rios said, expressing disbelief that “the FBI woman in charge was a little woman.”

“It was the chicks running the show yesterday,” Rios said yesterday during her interview with Elaine Donnelly, “it is a shocking switch of roles.”

PFAW Urges Timely, Yes-Or-No Senate Vote on Nina Pillard Nomination

WASHINGTON – People For the American Way Executive Vice President Marge Baker issued the following statement in response to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s approval of the nomination of Georgetown Law professor Cornelia T.L. “Nina” Pillard to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Professor Pillard’s nomination is now with the full Senate, which I hope will give her the fair consideration that she deserves.

Professor Pillard is an exceptionally qualified nominee. She has earned enormous respect from her colleagues across the ideological spectrum in her career as an appellate attorney, where she crafted the arguments that convinced the Supreme Court to open the Virginia Military Institute to women and joined the Bush administration in successfully defending the Family and Medical Leave Act. She now serves as co-director of Georgetown’s renowned Supreme Court Institute, which on a pro bono basis helped prepare attorneys for every single Supreme Court argument in the last term – regardless of the side of the case they were on. Her national reputation as a supremely talented and consistently fair attorney is well-earned.

In addition, Professor Pillard would become just the sixth women confirmed to the D.C. Circuit Court in its 120-year history.

In looking for excuses to avoid confirming Professor Pillard to this vacancy, some on the Right have attacked her academic work promoting the entirely mainstream notion that men and women should be treated equally under the law. The fact that in 2013 a nominee is being attacked for believing in women’s equality is just absurd.

We applaud the Judiciary Committee members who voted in support of this highly qualified nominee, and hope that the full Senate will review her qualifications and give her a fair yes-or-no confirmation vote.


###

To Understand GOP Government Shutdown Threats, Follow the Money

If you’re curious why many House Republicans are on board with an unhinged plan to threaten a government shutdown or default over demands to “defund” Obamacare, you should follow the money.  That’s what the New York Times editorial board argued in a compelling op-ed Tuesday. 

Far-right groups such as the Club for Growth are striking out at Republicans who refuse to take this reckless stance, wielding their considerable funds to “inflict political pain” on those who do not share their extremist position. And they are titillating their Tea Party supporters with political fantasies in order to get them to send in even more money, so they can ramp up their attack on Republicans who don’t toe the line. In “The Money Behind the Shutdown Crisis,” the editorial board wrote:

These groups, all financed with secret and unlimited money, feed on chaos and would like nothing better than to claim credit for pushing Washington into another crisis. Winning an ideological victory is far more important to them than the severe economic effects of a shutdown or, worse, a default, which could shatter the credit markets.

[…] Brian Walsh, a longtime Republican operative, recently noted in U.S. News and World Report that the right is now spending more money attacking Republicans than the Democrats are. “Money begets TV ads, which begets even more money for these groups’ personal coffers,” he wrote. “Pointing fingers and attacking Republicans is apparently a very profitable fund-raising business.”

And as more money pours into these shadowy groups, their influence – and thus their potential for inflicting further damage on our democracy – grows.  With fewer effective campaign finance regulations left standing in the post-Citizens United landscape, there is little that can stop these groups from using their money to bully elected officials.

But the functioning of our government is not a game.  And though for these fringe groups making an ideological point may seem more important than keeping our government from shutting down or defaulting, Americans are tired of having our basic economic security called into question over political posturing.

As the Times editorial board put it:

It may be good for their bank accounts, but the combination of unlimited money and rigid ideology is proving toxic for the most basic functioning of government.

PFAW
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious