C4

Deconstructing Ted Cruz’s DC Circuit Grandstanding

The Senate Judiciary Committee today held a hearing for the first of President Obama’s three recent nominees to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, attorney Patricia Ann Millett. Republican committee members, having no actual objections to Millett’s qualifications, used the opportunity to grandstand about what they see as the enormous injustice of a Democratic president nominating people to open seats on the federal judiciary.

Chief among the grandstanders, of course, was Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who spent most of his time telling Millett that Republican opposition to her nomination has nothing to do with her and has everything to do with President Obama’s supposed effort to “pack” the DC Circuit.

Very little of what he said had any basis in reality. He started out by claiming that the DC Circuit is currently “evenly divided” between Democratic and Republican nominees  and that President Obama and Democrats are now trying to “pack the court” with Obama’s nominees:

Right now, the DC Circuit is evenly divided among active judges, with four Republicans and four Democrats. And you find yourself one of three nominees from the president. The president and senior Democrats on this committee have made clear that they want to pick a fight on the DC Circuit. They want to pick a fight on the DC Circuit, and unfortunately I believe part of this pressure, part of the effort of stopping qualified Republican nominees and then deciding to pick a fight now, is a desire to pack the court.

While it’s true that there are currently four Democratic nominees and four Republican nominees in active service on the court, Cruz obscures the fact that the court has an active backbench of six senior judges – five of whom are Republican nominees:

This imbalance exists because Republican presidents have nominated the bulk of DC Circuit judges in the past three decades -- 15 of the last 19 confirmed to the DC Circuit were nominated by Republicans. Far from “packing” the court, President Obama has had fewer judges confirmed to the DC Circuit than any of his four most recent predecessors.

Cruz continued, insisting that President Obama is trying to “pack” the court because it is “holding this administration accountable, and in particular, holding rule-making accountable that has been contrary to federal law”:

The DC Circuit has been a court that has been holding this administration accountable, and in particular, holding rule-making accountable that has been contrary to federal law. And I believe that there is an activist base that is pressuring the president, that has been pressuring senior Senate Democrats to get judicial nominees on the DC Circuit to protect the regulations coming from this administration. And I think any effort to pack the court because the administration doesn’t like the outcomes of judges applying the law fairly should be decried.

What Cruz is referring to is the fact that the D.C. Circuit is currently dominated by right-wing Republican nominees, who have delved into far-right legal theory to strike down common-sense protections for workers, consumers and voters – you can read about some of their most appalling decisions here. President Obama is not trying to “pack” the court to get the decisions that he wants, as Cruz alleges. Instead, he is using his mandate from American voters to pick judges who will restore some ideological balance to one of the farthest-right courts in the country.

Finally, Cruz declares that his objections to Millett have nothing to do with her “very fine professional qualifications” and instead have to do with too much “partisan politics” in judicial confirmations – partisan politics which he seems to have very little interest in putting aside.

Because I think  partisan politics has driven this committee’s approach to the DC Circuit for over a decade. And I think that’s unfortunate, I would rather see a situation where able judges are confirmed irrespective of that. But it is not consistent with our responsibility to let one party prevent qualified judges from going to the court, and at the same time to enable packing the court to reach preferred outcomes. So I thank you for being here, and I think it’s regrettable, the overall context of this dispute, which as I said is irrespective of your very fine professional qualifications.

So, Cruz is refusing to support Millett, who he thinks is unquestionably qualified for the job, for purely political reasons… because he thinks the judicial nominations process has become too politicized.
 

PFAW

PFAW Memo: GOP Obstruction of Executive Branch Nominees

From: Marge Baker, Executive Vice President, People For the American Way
To: Interested Parties
Re: GOP Obstruction of Executive Branch Nominees
Date: July 10, 2013

Despite the fact that Democrats hold a significant majority in the Senate, Republican senators are continuing to block President Obama’s Executive Branch nominees at a rate never before seen, according to a review of records by People For the American Way.

From 1949 (when Senate rules were changed to provide for cloture on nominations) through 2008, cloture votes were forced on only 20 executive branch nominations. However, in just the first four and a half years of the Obama administration, there have already been 16 such cloture votes, on the nominations of: Cass Sunstein (OMB), Robert Groves (Census), Harold Koh (State Department), Chris Hill (Ambassador to Iraq), David Hayes (Interior), Ben Bernanke (Federal Reserve), M. Patricia Smith (Labor Department), Martha Johnson (GSA), Craig Becker (NLRB), Lael Brainard (Treasury Department), James Cole (DOJ), Richard Cordray (CFPB), Norman Eisen (Ambassador to Czech Republic), Mari Aponte (Ambassador to El Salvador), Chuck Hagel (DOD), and John Brennan (CIA).

That’s an increase of more than 1,000% in the rate of forced cloture votes on nominations – 20 nominations on which cloture votes were forced in sixty years compared to 16 in just four and a half.  Republicans are on pace to force 28 cloture votes by the end of the Obama administration – more than under all previous presidents combined.

An examination of President George W. Bush’s term reveals that the Senate subjected only seven executive nominations to cloture votes in the entire eight years of his presidency—compared to 16 in just the first four and a half of the Obama administration.

Yet the full extent of the problem is even greater than what these numbers tell, because not all cloture petitions lead to formal cloture votes. So the total number of cloture petitions filed is important, and it also reveals a dramatic increase in the magnitude of obstruction.  Between 1949 and 2008, there were 32 executive nominations on which cloture was filed. There have been 25 filed so far under President Obama.

Indeed, during all eight years of George W. Bush’s presidency, there were only 15 executive branch nominees on which cloture petitions were filed compared to 25 in just the first four and a half years of the Obama administration.  At the current rate, President Obama can expect 44 of his executive nominees to face cloture petitions – more than under all previous presidents combined.

Moreover, the number of cloture votes and petitions may well go much higher than that—there are currently 15 executive branch nominations on the Senate’s calendar.  All of these nominees have been waiting over three months for a vote from the Senate. Three were first nominated in 2011, meaning they have been waiting more than a year and a half, one almost two years, for a confirmation vote.

Senate Republicans are currently blocking nominees to a number of critical federal offices, including Tom Perez, nominated to be Secretary of Labor; Gina McCarthy, nominated to head the Environmental Protection Agency; Richard Cordray, picked to be the first chief of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; and five members of the National Labor Relations Board. It is no coincidence that these nominees have all been picked to head government offices that Republicans view with suspicion. Unable to eliminate these offices through democratic means, Senate Republicans are trying to cripple them through procedural obstruction.

This sort of obstruction is literally unprecedented for either party and must be stopped. It prevents executive branch departments from serving critical public needs, and it represents, essentially, an effort to overturn the results of the last election.

###

NOM: No More Brides and Grooms If Gay Marriage Becomes Legal

Jennifer Thieme of the National Organization for Marriage’s Ruth Institute is worried that marriage equality laws will mean that no one can be a bride or a groom ever again. According to Thieme, in states that recognize same-sex marriages, “no woman gets to be a bride and no man gets to be a groom,” which may come as a surprise to all of the couples who have been married there since marriage equality was approved.

And of course, big government will step in to pick up the pieces. “The state will not likely give up the increased power it gets over individuals, children, and the church as this change gains traction,” Thieme writes, urging libertarians not to back gay rights because “socialists support it.”

First, I do not think it is realistic to believe the government will actually get out of marriage, especially once the definition of marriage becomes sexless (genderless) as a widespread policy. Sexless marriage as a policy is what must happen in order to allow gay couples to marry. It wasn't fair that only straight women could be brides, and only straight men could be grooms. So now no woman gets to be a bride, and no man gets to be a groom in same sex marriage states. The state will not likely give up the increased power it gets over individuals, children, and the church as this change gains traction.



"How does gay marriage affect YOUR marriage?"

I've encountered honest, far-left leaning Democrats who admit that sexless marriage is the destruction of traditional marriage. They admit it, point blank. One even likened it to slavery. This is not how it gets marketed to voters. Voters are told that marriage is simply being expanded to include gay couples. Expanding marriage vs. eliminating traditional marriage are two very different things.

Furthermore, father of Marxist thought Friedrich Engels was against traditional marriage. It is not possible to know what sort of stand he would take on the sexless marriage issue. I think it's very fair to say that his modern day followers support it. It frustrates me that some prominent libertarians refuse to engage an important social policy that socialists support. Does it occur to them why socialists support it?

ENDA passes HELP Committee, ready for Senate floor

This critical piece of anti-discrimination legislation would make it illegal to make employment decisions – hiring, firing, promotion, or compensation – based on a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
PFAW

Rios: Obama Is an 'Enemy of the Faith'

Echoing her colleague Bryan Fischer, who earlier this year called President Obama “an antichrist,” American Family Association talk show host Sandy Rios yesterday dubbed Obama “an enemy of the faith.” Railing against the supposed “loss of religious freedom” in the military as a result of the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Rios insisted that Obama is not a Christian but one who “presses all things immoral, all things unbiblical.”

We’re releasing a report with the Family Research Council on what’s happening in the military in regard to the loss of religious freedom. It really is stunning, it is absolutely angering and we’ve talked about it before, many of you are serving in the military and we are doing what we can to stop this and to help you, those of you that are Christ-followers serving in the military, to bring people to account, to stop this out of control—really it’s a reflection of this President. You do know that, don’t you? I long ago crossed the line in trying to be careful about how I speak about him because as far as I’m concerned he’s an enemy of the faith, I believe he is. He presses all things immoral, all things unbiblical and he claims to be a Christian which to me is even worse, it’s worse.

Robertson: 'Rise Up' Against Obama Like Egyptians Revolted Against Morsi

Today on the 700 Club, Pat Robertson said Americans should “rise up” against President Obama over the “gobbledygook” health care reform law just like Egyptians took to the streets to oppose and ultimately topple Mohamed Morsi.

“You know they revolted in Egypt against the oppressive actions of the Muslim Brotherhood and this example of state socialism is something that Americans should rise up against,” Robertson said, referring to Obamacare. “They snuck that thing by us.”

Watch:

Charisma: Fight Against Gay Rights Resembles Fight Against Nazism

Pastor Larry Tomczak sure does like comparing gay rights advocates to Nazis. The Charisma columnist this week claimed that, like Nazi Germany, gay equality threatens the church and “would imperil us all—our children, our grandchildren and our future as a nation.” He praises “courageous” African countries that “outlaw homosexuality” for “standing strong amidst this moral storm” of President Obama, WNBA player Brittney Griner and “unscriptural, squishy, spineless” Christians.

Naturally, Tomczak ends the column by quoting Winston Churchill’s speech on the imminent Nazi attack on Britain.

The landmark Supreme Court ruling on gay “rights” did not redefine marriage, but it did give the rationale to deconstruct marriage.

Those of us standing up for traditional marriage now find ourselves portrayed as bigots for simply upholding marriage as it has stood for over 5,000 years of Western civilization! It’s unbelievable, but true.



All Christians are called to be salt and light, but if leaders choose calm over courage instead of addressing these issues for any number of reasons—“Just keep things positive,” “Don’t scare people off,” “We’re in a building program and can’t risk offending big donor,” Just preach the gospel; steer clear of politics,” “It’s all going down anyway,” “Why invite trouble or controversy?” “I’m warning all of you on staff that this would be a deal-breaker if you start talking about these kind of issues”—marriage as the central pillar of our civilization will be forever lost. We just cannot sit on the bench, mute in the midst of the defining moral issue of our generation, as the people will follow suit.

That’s what happened in Nazi Germany as pastors (with the exception of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and a remnant) were intimidated into silence and their flocks emulated their example. Adolf Hitler chortled derisively behind closed doors, knowing he’d discovered the key to railroading his plans through: “They [German pastors] will submit. … They are insignificant little people, submissive as dogs, and they sweat with embarrassment when you talk to them.”

Granted, we are not facing the Fuhrer, but redefining marriage means redefining religious liberty, and that would imperil us all—our children, our grandchildren and our future as a nation.



Alan Chambers, Rob Bell and Jim Wallis crisscross the country advocating for an unscriptural, squishy, spineless approach to this hot-button issue of homosexuality. The WNBA No. 1 draft pick from Baylor Baptist University, Brittany Griner, invites girls to follow her lesbian example as a new role model in USA Today. Even our president holds nothing back in pronouncing, “God bless you!” at America’s No. 1 abortion provider’s convention, then flies to Africa after the Supreme Court ruling in order to promote gay rights there after last telling them, “Africa’s future is up to Africans!”

Thank God for our courageous African counterparts who aren’t capitulating but are instead standing strong amidst this moral storm. Thirty-seven nations there outlaw homosexuality, and Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, 2011 Nobel Peace Prize winner and Africa’s first female president, boldly stands to say she opposes decriminalizing homosexuality in her country. “We’ve got certain traditional values in our society that we’d like to preserve,” she says.



Will you ask God to help you speak up as America is going down? We need to pray and foster another great revival before it’s too late. As Winston Churchill told his flock in England’s “darkest hour” as they faced the extinction of their democratic freedoms, “I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilization. … If we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new dark age. … Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its commonwealth last 4,000 years, men will still say, ‘This was their finest hour.’”

Employment Non-Discrimination Act Passes Senate Committee

WASHINGTON – In response to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) gaining bipartisan approval from the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee today, People For the American Way President Michael Keegan released the following statement:

“Today’s vote is an exciting step forward on the road toward full equality for LGBT Americans.  All employees deserve to be judged by their qualifications and work performance rather than by who they are or who they love.  ENDA is common-sense legislation that would establish employment protections for LGBT workers nationwide.

“There’s no question that protecting the rights of LGBT workers is the right thing to do, but it also increasingly reflects the values of most Americans. A majority of Americans support ENDA and they know that all hardworking people should have the same shot at earning a living and contributing to our economy and our country. And yet without ENDA, in 29 states it is currently legal to fire someone for being gay – and in 33 states for being transgender or gender non-conforming. 

“The far Right is already clamoring that passing ENDA would lead to everything from sexual assault to the end of religious freedom in our country.  But in reality, this legislation is the right thing to do and a no-brainer that all of Congress should be able to support. Workplace discrimination of any kind is not the American way.”


###
 

VDARE: South Should Secede (Again) If Immigration Reform Passes

Noting that Southern lawmakers have traditionally supported punitive and restrictive immigration policies, William Houston of the white nationalist group VDARE thinks it might be time for the South to once again mount a rebellion if Congress approves immigration reform. Houston believes that Southern opposition to new immigration laws, along with marriage equality, affirmative action, Obamacare, environmental protection and gun violence prevention legislation, are reason enough for the states to secede from the US and refuse to “continue to carry the rest of America on its back.”

How long can Dixie continue to carry the rest of America on its back? In the U.S. Senate, the Northeastern states voted 21 to 1 in favor of "comprehensive immigration reform." In 2010, every single representative from New England voted for the DREAM Act. And in 1965, every single representative in the House from the Northeast voted for the Immigration Act of 1965, and only one senator from the Northeast voted against it.

If history is our guide, Southern Republicans in the House will again probably succeed in killing "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" this time around.

But what about next time? How long can we expect this charade to continue? For almost fifty years now, Dixie has voted for border security and against Third World immigration. But, because of the existence of the Union with the Northeast, West Coast, and Upper Midwest, we have gotten illegal alien amnesty, Open Borders, and Third World immigration—among a laundry list of other undesirable things that could never pass an all-Southern Congress.



Polls have already showed that, for example, 26% of Georgians and 42% of Georgia Republicans were prepared to support secession after President Obama’s re-election. GA Republicans split on secession, Deal vulnerable, Public Policy Polling, December 07, 2012. As Southerners consider Harold Meyerson's implacably hostile words, and as they react to the recent Supreme Court rulings on gay marriage and Affirmative Action, the recent Senate votes on illegal alien amnesty and gun control, and the upcoming debate on "climate change" legislation and the imminent implementation of Obamacare, millions of them have already no doubt begun—in the phrase widely used in the ante-bellum period—to "calculate the value of the Union."

Klayman Envisions Military Coup to Remove Obama

Another day, another call for an anti-Obama revolution from Larry Klayman. In his column, ‘Americans to follow Egypt’s lead?,’ Klayman predicts that President Obama’s supposed drive to “refashion the nation through intimidation and threat, in his own Muslim, socialist image” will push the US military into removing him as leader, just as the Egyptian military deposed Mohamed Morsi.

He claims that Obama, “like Morsi before his downfall,” is “pushing the American people to the limit” and “playing with fire among the military.”

“If this display by our most distinguished and honored American military heroes is any indication, given the state of affairs generally in this nation, which borders on total political, economic, moral and ethical collapse,” Klayman asks, “is it inconceivable that one day the military in this country could rise up in support of not only the American people but themselves, and remove Obama and his radical Muslim, socialist comrades by whatever means prove necessary to preserve the republic?”

Klayman believes that there may be “no other choice” but to have the military oust Obama if Congress does not impeach and remove him from office or else “what occurred in Egypt this week might regrettably someday soon become a reality in our own nation.”

Of course Obama is committed to the democratic process in Egypt, as it was this so-called democratic process that put the "mullah in chief's" fellow religious Muslims in power there. Ironically, although Obama publicly supported Morsi's remaining in power under the guise of "the democratic process," shortly after Morsi's ouster, the Arab League, led by none other than oil-rich and influentially powerful Saudi Arabia, hailed the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood as a great event. So here you have it: The president of the United States seeks to prop up Morsi and his terrorist comrades in Egypt, while the majority of other "mainstream" Arab states, recognizing the threat of radical Islam to the region and their own regimes' stability, are content that Egypt has now purged itself of this extremist Muslim scourge. If this is not proof positive of the American president's own intentions to further an Islamic revolution in the Middle East and elsewhere, then fat dogs don't pass wind, to put it most diplomatically.

That being said, the American people and the rest of the Western world should be rejoicing today. The people of Egypt have risen up valiantly and removed one of the biggest cancers in the Middle East – the Muslim Brotherhood. They did so by organizing mass demonstrations in the heart of Egypt's capital, Cairo. The Egyptian people had the guts to do what thus far in this country we have not seen fit to do – demand the removal of a president who furthers his own subversive agendas at the expense of the people, most recently siccing the Internal Revenue Service and National Security Agency on the masses to keep them down and silent as he proceeds to refashion the nation through intimidation and threat, in his own Muslim, socialist image.

But President Obama is not only pushing the American people to the limit; he, like Morsi before his downfall, also has been playing with fire among the military. Indeed, to avoid violent revolution, it was the Egyptian military that removed Morsi to further the will of the Egyptian people who did not want to see their nation enslaved under Muslim Shariah law.



If this display by our most distinguished and honored American military heroes is any indication, given the state of affairs generally in this nation, which borders on total political, economic, moral and ethical collapse, is it inconceivable that one day the military in this country could rise up in support of not only the American people but themselves, and remove Obama and his radical Muslim, socialist comrades by whatever means prove necessary to preserve the republic?

This is not the scenario we would like to see, but like the Egyptians, when there is no other choice, anything is possible. Our Congress has shown no willingness to seriously confront Obama for his illegal and treasonous acts; the constitutional process of impeachment has never succeeded at removing a lawless and destructive president; and our judges have become the "yes-men and women" of the political establishment.

In this context, what occurred in Egypt this week might regrettably someday soon become a reality in our own nation. After all, on this anniversary of our greatest day, July 4, 1776, did not our Founding Fathers take matters into their own hands, when they threw off the slavish and evil yoke of King George III by rising up and using all God-given lawful means under the circumstances to further freedom?

Texas Americans for Prosperity Director: Pro-Choice Women Should 'Choose Sterilization'

As Texas lawmakers debate a bill that would shut down most of the state’s abortion providers, Texas Americans for Prosperity state director and GOP activist Peggy Venable yesterday tweeted that pro-choice women should “choose sterilization” as they are “nasty” and “simply should not procreate.” The Texas Freedom Network grabbed the tweet before she took it down:

Venable has since called the tweet a “lame attempt at humor” and apologized.

Dan Cummins: America Divided Between 'Gay Zones' and 'Free Zones'

Pastor Dan Cummins of Come Pray With Me has worked with a variety of Religious Right groups, including Newt Gingrich’s Renewing American Leadership, Rick Perry’s The Response USA and Tony Perkins’ Watchmen on the Wall, and organized his own prayer rally in the Capitol’s Statuary Hall.

But soon, Cummins warns, such organizations may not exist.

In a Charisma column today, Cummins writes thats gays will drive the church “underground” and turn churches into “government community centers.”

Cummins claims that the Supreme Court has created a divide in America similar to the Korean DMZ and the Berlin Wall, called “the Rainbow Curtain.” He says that the justices “from their judicial lair” have “set off a catalytic charge toppling traditional marriage” and now “the collapse of America’s moral infrastructure has been irreversibly set into motion.”

Residents of states with marriage equality are now “hostages” to a government that will use “foreign troops” to put them “re-education camps,” he argues. 

“Like a surreal scene from Red Dawn, America woke up on June 26 to a divided nation, with 95 million of its citizens in 13 states held hostage to judicial legislation, trapped behind the Rainbow Curtain,” Cummins writes. “What’s ahead for those in the gay zones who refuse to comply with Kennedy’s dictates—re-education camps for homophobic racists? Will Big Sis employ foreign troops invading through our unsecured borders to enforce the transition into this brave new world?”

He hopes that the new “refugees” will “flee with their families into neighboring free zones,” asking, “Where are Patrick Swayze and his pack of Wolverines when we need them?”

He calls on anti-gay activists in “gay zones” to “become forearmed” as society unravels into a gay dystopia and “the choking dust clouds from the collapse of the last societal pillar of biblical, natural marriage stop rolling through the streets of our cities and states.”

After World War II, Stalin installed an iron curtain around Russia, keeping his capitalist neighbors from eavesdropping. The Chinese accessorized their Cold War condo with a bamboo curtain, deterring pesky peeping toms from the West.

Soon Mr. Khrushchev, keeping up with his Commie neighbors, built a privacy wall and gated community, secluding East Berliners from greedy, free-market entrepreneurs soliciting door to door. Not to forget Kim Il-Sung’s ensemble of razor wire and land mines across North Korea’s 38th parallel to discourage those JW and LDS types from indoctrinating the folks.

Now, in the midst of the American culture war, behind another curtain of sorts—a life-size photographic scrim concealing a facelift to the Supreme Court’s crumbling west façade—Justice Anthony Kennedy has ordered a redecorating of the nation’s landscape with a bold, colorful and inclusive statement—the Rainbow Curtain—a polyamorous blend of gender-on-gender suited for a post-moralist motif designed to safeguard the modern American family from the narrow-minded views of those “animus”-filled Founding Fathers.

From their juridical lair, the liberal Gang of Five recently set off a catalytic charge toppling traditional marriage—the last principled pillar upholding Uncle Sam’s home. Just how long his 237-year-old colonial manor can remain standing minus its moral supports intact is anyone’s guess. But the collapse of America’s moral infrastructure has been irreversibly set into motion by five legislating justices.

As the new civil rights movement packs the neighborhood streets, shouting, “Move that bus,” is America ready for the extreme home makeover the LGBT architects have designed for the evolving modern family?

Like a surreal scene from Red Dawn, America woke up on June 26 to a divided nation, with 95 million of its citizens in 13 states held hostage to judicial legislation, trapped behind the Rainbow Curtain and forced to accept the moral dictates of the elitist ruling party—a pentagram of liberal judges on the Supreme Court.

Many of those hostages, like California’s residents, were disenfranchised of their constitutional votes in the process. What’s ahead for those in the gay zones who refuse to comply with Kennedy’s dictates—re-education camps for homophobic racists? Will Big Sis employ foreign troops invading through our unsecured borders to enforce the transition into this brave new world?

What stark new realities are ahead for those behind the Rainbow Curtain? Will Americans become refugees in their own country as they flee with their families into neighboring free zone states? Where are Patrick Swayze and his pack of Wolverines when we need them?

The Supremes striking down Proposition 8 and partially ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) have given the prize—marriage without borders—to the LGBT crowd and thrown the pro-biblical marriage community a legal bone by kicking the can back to the free zone states to argue it out in court.

What does this mean for the 70 percent of the U.S. population living in the free zones? Watch what happens to the families, businesses and churches in the gay zones who refuse to comply with Kennedy’s court. Be forewarned and become forearmed.



The new persecution of the church will be in the form of prosecution of the church. This legal martyrdom will be slow, painful and expensive. Some churches, especially in the gay zones initially, will fold under the financial strain.

The end result for any church refusing complicity to the court’s opinion will be loss of tax-exempt status. The IRS will not only control America’s health care but her religious institutions as well. For those churches indebted by hefty mortgages, the outcome of losing membership and their tax-exempt tithes will be potentially fatal. As foreclosed church properties flood the real estate market, they will be prime choices for government community centers.

You say this can’t happen in America? We were saying similar things 10 years ago about same-sex marriage and 40 years ago about abortion. Wake up!

Maybe China is the new model for American society. When the choking dust clouds from the collapse of the last societal pillar of biblical, natural marriage stop rolling through the streets of our cities and states, we will witness the aftermath left by Justice Kennedy’s ruling upon our families, churches and religious freedoms.

Will there only be two churches left in America when that time comes—the state church, with its complicit clergy complete with gay members, and the underground church of Jesus Christ? Take heart—the greatest revival in the world is now taking place in the underground church of China. Maybe revival is coming to America after all. Either way, you had better get a Bible.

Tony Perkins: Obama 'Scandals' a Gift from God

A new fundraising pitch from Family Research Council President Tony Perkins comes in a black envelope with a photo of a door cracking to allow light into the darkness and the message, “URGENT: God has opened a door to STOP America’s decline.” The letter inside, dated July 1, portrays the “scandals” surrounding the Obama administration – including the discredited IRS and Benghazi “scandals” hyped by right-wing media and GOP members of Congress – as an act of God:

The opportunity we have prayed for may be here . . . if we seize it.

As I witness the astounding scandals exploding within President Barack Obama’s administration, I believe Almighty God—who founded America and saved us through trials before—may be giving the American people an opportunity to stop today’s tyranny.

I believe He may be giving us an open door to turn back the plans of today’s arrogant big government: a secularist, anti-faith tyranny that is trying to snuff out religious freedom and biblical influence in the United States.

The letter calls for abolishing the IRS and opposing the enforcement of “ObamaCare,” and urges donations to help FRC:

Work with Congress and government officials to stop “hidden scandals” such as the Obama administration’s attempt to drive Christian values and religious freedom out of the military . . . impose the principles of the Employment non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which attack Christians in the workplace who refuse to affirm immoral sexuality . . . and more.

Perkins’ letter hypes the now-disproven claims that the IRS was waging jihad against conservatives:

We now know that the IRS was selectively auditing—harassing a growing number of ministries, conservative groups, Tea Party groups, and others who opposed President Obama.

The IRS threatened to remove the tax-exempt status of these citizens! These attacks by the IRS threatened to financially cripple them, costing them untold sums of money just to defend themselves against the IRS agents. The common link: ministries and organizations targeted for audits had stood against President Obama’s secularist, antireligious freedom agenda.

Actually, what we know is quite the opposite. The IRS “scandal” has evaporated as more evidence has some to light. Even some Republican officials have admitted as much. According to the New York Times, “Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, said that in retrospect, suggestions that Mr. Obama had orchestrated an I.R.S. attack on his political enemies were unwarranted.”

In addition, Perkins’ letter says a State Department “cover-up” in connection with the assassination of American officials in Benghazi, Libya “might have saved the election for President Obama. Yet it might render him paralyzed in his second term.”

Actually, that’s another “scandal” that has largely evaporated under revelations that much of it was based on a bogus story peddled by Karl Rove.

Perkins says that FRC intends to “turn the tide of the past five years.”

The scandals will help show Americans why the Bible is right when it cautions against big government. Because of sin, power corrupts, and concentrated power corrupts completely. Bit government will always see God as a rival and try to replace Him, attacking God’s people and Biblical values and principles.”

Actually, as journalist Jonathan Chait wrote in New York magazine in late June, “the entire scandal narrative was an illusion.” It lives on, of course, in the world of far-right activists and conspiracy theorists like Tony Perkins.

Markell: Satan Behind Progressive Movement

End Times broadcaster Jan Markell hosted Michael Coffman this weekend to discuss Coffman’s new book Plundered: How Progressive Ideology is Destroying America, which argues that progressives are engineering America’s demise in order to create a world government.

Markell, of course, claimed Satan was behind it all.

“Satan has used in some cases evil people, in some cases he’s used well-meaning people, but nonetheless the formula of progressivism doesn’t work, it is totally destructive,” Markell said. “These folks would say they don’t need God because they are God, government is a God.”

Coffman explained that progressives in government and the media are trying to hide the deleterious impact of their policies so when economic ruin comes people have no choice but to seek aid from a nefarious global regime, which many fundamentalists believe will occur before the Apocalypse.

“When it hits it’s going to hit hard and it bothers me that people are going to be destroyed because these people have this agenda and this blind reality,” Coffman claimed, alleging that progressives may orchestrate an “economic collapse” in order to establish a system “centered around a world government.” The world government will then “ride in on the white hat with a solution as people are starving and so forth around the world, but all you have to do is sign on this dotted line and give us all of your of rights and we’ll decide what you can or cannot do.”

Later in the interview, he called on people to begin storing “at least six months’ worth of food” before progressive policies bring about hyper-inflation, which he says may occur “in the next couple of years” and will “throw our economy into such a turmoil that we don’t get food delivered for as much as six or eight months.”

Huelskamp: Supreme Court Legalized Polygamy

Yesterday, while speaking with Janet Mefferd, Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) expanded on his claim that the Supreme Court Justices who ruled on Prop 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act should’ve flunked law school.

Huelskamp said Justice Anthony Kennedy’s decision on DOMA was “outrageous” and based on smearing gay rights opponents: “If you’re writing for the left and you’re not gonna follow the Constitution you have to make it up as you go along so you inject name-calling into a constitutional decision, I mean that’s an outrageous decision.”

He also called Chief Justice John Roberts’ ruling on Prop 8 “crazy” and described it as an example of left-wing bias. Huelskamp even argued that the DOMA ruling effectively tossed out state laws barring marriages between a mother and her daughter, adding that “polygamy should be allowed under this decision.”

“What’s the impact on our children? That’s what the left doesn’t care about,” Huelskamp said, repeating his earlier claim that “children will be hurt” by the rulings. “That’s why this is showing up in these decisions that you know what just because two adults or three adults desire one thing that doesn’t mean it’s best for our children.” 

The congressman also told Mefferd that Republicans are too timid in their opposition to gay rights and should also focus on the “fiscal impact” of gay marriage and what he believes is the legalization of polygamy: “There’s a real big fiscal impact, we’re going to extend 1,100 benefits to homosexual and polygamous couples, perhaps, what’s the impact on that?”

Chipping Away at Choice: Five Growing Threats to Women’s Healthcare Access and Autonomy

The “War on Women” currently being waged by conservatives in the U.S. Congress and state legislatures is well documented. From attacking contraception to insulting rape survivors to threatening funding for reproductive healthcare, anti-choice legislators and activists are staging an assault on women’s health, privacy and autonomy.

Ex-Gay Pride Month to Push for Congressional Resolution, Organizing Music Video Contest

Voice of the Voiceless, the “ex-gay” group led by DL Foster and Christopher Doyle, is working with the Family Research Council to host the upcoming Ex-Gay Pride Month dinner. As Doyle explained in an interview with Janet Mefferd yesterday, attendees will lobby Congress to “pass a resolution for tolerance for the ex-gay community” and condemn its supposed persecution at the hands of gay rights supporters. He also wants Congress to approve a resolution sanctioning sexual orientation conversion therapy, which is rejected and deemed dangerous by all major psychological organizations, and to oppose state efforts to limit conversion therapy on minors. 

Ex-Gay Pride Month is also organizing a music video contest to find “a voice that sings about the struggles and victories of ex-gays”: 

Ex-Gay Pride Leader: Gays Like Slave Owners, Ku Klux Klan

DL Foster, a keynote speaker at the Family Research Council’s Ex-Gay Pride Month, is unhappy with all the attention surrounding the event. In a new blog post, he compares being gay to being a slave and likens ex-gay activists like himself to Harriet Tubman…while painting gay rights advocates as modern-day slave holders.

Thus, I’ll be publishing a series of articles on the parallels of slavery our forefathers faced from white slaveowners and their supporters in politics. They hated escaped slaves and did everything they could to stop them. I’ll discuss how anti-EXhomosexual gay activists have become the new oppressors, driven by their hatred of former homosexuals. I’ll highlight brave abolitionists who risked much to help freed slaves and how pastors can help freed homosexuals stay free by creating safety networks. Finally, I will talk about how EXGLBT can work together to expand the promise of freedom for all.

“I freed a thousand slaves and I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves.” —Harriet Tubman

The parallel of Harriet Tubman’s statement hit me really hard. Like the unflinching Mrs. Tubman, Ive led many homosexuals out of that slavery into the freedom of holiness. But it comes with the sobering realization that many more will never be free simply because they refuse to acknowledge the bondage of their sin.



The same prayer and faith in the promise of freedom given by God that brought Harriet Tubman and other EXslaves out of physical bondage, brought EXhomosexuals out of spiritual bondage. But now, our prayers of freedom are being widely mocked by the bigoted oppressors as “praying away the gay”. Our efforts to help other homosexuals gain their freedom are being branded “fraudulent and dangerous”. They highlight those who have fallen back into homosexuality as proof that our efforts for freedom are little more than snake oil tactics.

Interestingly enough, after Harriet Tubman escaped the first time from slavery Sept 17, 1849 with her two brothers, she went back. Its believed that her brothers influenced her to go back because they had familial ties they were very hesistant [sic] to be separated from. Under this new white hot standard of judgment homosexual activists use against EXhomosexuals who return to homosexuality because they experience separation anxiety, Tubman would be considered a failure and a fraud. She would be considered discredited and thus unqualified to tell other slaves they could be free.

But soon after she returned to slavery, she escaped again —without her brothers— to freedom. It was the genesis of her amazing courage to return numerous times to rescue black slaves and lead them to freedom.

In another post, Foster likens gay rights advocates to the Ku Klux Klan and police officers who violently repressed civil rights marchers, wondering if “gay activists will resort to dogs, water hoses and bombs”:

Case in point, two EXGLBT advocacy organizations declared July as “Exgay Pride Month” and consequently planned a celebration event to highlight the contributions and ongoing struggles of American citizens who are EXhomosexual. They made no demands on the gay community and asked nothing of them. In fact this was just a group of people who felt the need to encourage themselves and their families. Fair enough? Nope, not for homosexual activists. The announcement set off a frenzy of attacks. From theBoston Edge to jittery RightWingWatch, the online gay allied world exploded with numerous reports, blogs and oped pieces [sic] about the event. Even NBC News mentioned it! The stories were jammed with missiles named mockery, condemnation, bullying, discrimination, judging, unwarranted name calling, bigotry, intolerance and all the detestable vices homosexuals claim have no place in a fair and equal America. But it became very clear that in the eyes of homosexuals, they are the only ones who can simultaneously engage in such vicious behavior while at the same time pretending to decry it.



Remember, the nonexistence of EXhomosexuals is incontrovertible dogma in gay orthodoxy. Exgays can’t exist because if they do, then it destroys their other parallel lie that all homosexuals are born gay and cannot change. Perhaps this premature shock and awe attempt is because they sense a serious threat to their foundational mistruths. And of course you can couch your fear in shallow comedic bullying:

“In case, you’ve never heard of VoV [Voice of the Voiceless], it’s basically an anti-ex-gay defamation group, or, in other words, a group of self-haters who feel picked on.”

That’s exactly the way the Klan reacted when African Americans showed up to vote or to march for their right to be recognized as full US citizens. If this doesn’t work, maybe the gay activists will resort to dogs, water hoses and bombs. Another favorite tactic of racists were to employ vicious written caricatures of their black victims. Likewise, gay activists use grotestque sexual caricatures against Exhomosexuals (and their supporters)

Buchanan: Immigration Reform Will Cause US to Break Up Like Soviet Union

Pat Buchanan continues to go all-out in his opposition to new bipartisan immigration policy, claiming in a recent interview with conservative radio host Andrea Tantaros that immigration reform will cause the United States to break apart like the Soviet Union.

The Daily Caller posts a clip of Buchanan warning that if “you put 100 million Hispanic folks in the United States,” the southwest will become “as much a part of Mexico as it is of the United States.”

“If they have a different language, different culture, different faith, basically you get two peoples and two peoples eventually become two countries,” he said.

Buchanan went on to offer an alternate history of the United States, which he said became “one nation back around 1960, when all the immigrants who had come from eastern and southern Europe 1890-1920 had been assimilated and Americanized” through the Depression, World War II and television programming. “That brought us all together, and now we’re falling apart,” he said.
 

What you get is a growing disintegration of the country, a fragmentation into different parts. And we see this happening all over the world in the last few decades, where ethnic groups and linguistic minorities, ethnic minorities, cultural minorities, given the pressures of ethno-nationalism, are breaking up countries all over the world. It’s happening all over the Middle East; it happened in the Balkans, where Yugoslavia broke up into seven countries; the Soviet Union broke up into 15 countries.

You put 100 million Hispanic folks in the United States, and say 70 million of them on the southwest border, that becomes as much a part of Mexico as it is of the United States. If they have a different language, different culture, different faith, basically you get two peoples and two peoples eventually become two countries.

This is what I see as the future of America is the balkanization and disintegration of the country that had become one nation back around 1960, when all the immigrants who had come from eastern and southern Europe 1890-1920 had been assimilated and Americanized. We’d all gone through the Depression together, heard radio together, went through World War II together, and American television together. That brought us all together, and now we’re falling apart.

WND: George Soros Behind Muslim Brotherhood and Muslim Brotherhood Opposition

In 2011, WorldNetDaily reporter Aaron Klein warned that George Soros, by way of the International Crisis Group ICG (Soros is a member of its executive committee), aided the Muslim Brotherhood and even authored several articles alleging that Soros was helping the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups.

But now that the Muslim Brotherhood was thrown out of power in Egypt, Klein is out with a new “exposé” on Soros’ alleged connections to their opponents.

Klein even cites the International Crisis Group as a way to link Soros to the new government…the same group which Klein claimed tied Soros to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Essentially, Soros and the ICG had a hand both in the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to power and also its ouster.

Mohamed ElBaradei, the favored candidate to head a transitional government in Egypt, was a longtime member of a George Soros-funded “crisis” group with deep ties to the Middle East revolutions.

Soros himself is one of eight members of the executive committee of the International Crisis Group, or ICG.



ElBaradei is also the reported pick of the main alliance of liberal and left-wing parties youth groups that led the anti-Morsi protests.

He is a former United Nations nuclear agency chief and a Nobel Prize winner for his work as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

ElBaradei was also a longtime member of the ICG board alongside Soros.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious