While Virginia Republican gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli has been trying to dodge social issues such as abortion rights and marriage equality — likely because his actual views and record are far out of the mainstream — sagging poll numbers and increasing divisions among Republicans have led the candidate to rely on his traditional far-right backers. After campaigning alongside his ultraconservative and homophobic running mate E.W. Jackson, Cuccinelli tonight will attend a fundraiser cosponsored by the Family Research Council’s political arm and the head of a major anti-choice organization.
Tonight’s fundraiser featuring Jeb Bush and a whole host of former GOP politicians-turned-lobbyists is sponsored by FRC Action PAC and Marjorie Dannenfelser, who leads the Susan B. Anthony List.
Cuccinelli has partnered with FRC in the past, addressing at their Values Voter Summit and appearing on the group’s Washington Watch radio program. Dannenfelser’s group, meanwhile, committed at least $1.5 million to boost Cuccinelli.
Dannenfelser and FRC Action hope that Cuccinelli will continue his efforts to close the majority of the state’s abortion clinics. As the Washington Post editorial board noted yesterday, “If Mr. Cuccinelli is elected governor in November, most of the remaining 18 clinics are likely to shut their doors within months.”
The FRC — whose leaders have referred to gays as pawns of Satan, abnormal and destructive while also calling for their criminalization and exportation — can also take pride in Cuccinelli’s anti-gay rhetoric and activism.
The upcoming fundraiser with two of the country’s foremost social conservative groups shows that as much as Cuccinelli would like Virginia voters to forget about his extreme stances, he is, first and foremost, a Religious Right ideologue.
WASHINGTON – Today, People For the American Way President Michael Keegan sent a letter to Texas State Board of Education members urging them to reject attempts to pressure textbook companies to include the doctrine of creationism in public high school biology textbooks.
People For the American Way also joined with the Texas Freedom Network, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, and CREDO Action in delivering nearly 300,000 petitions to the Board of Education before at its hearing on new textbooks today.
“Teaching creationism in public schools isn’t just unconstitutional: It also cheats Texas kids of the science education they need to compete in the world economy,” Keegan said. “The job of the Texas State Board of Education is to ensure that Texas students receive the best education possible, not to inject politics and religious doctrine into the classroom.”
As the Texas Freedom Network and People For the American Way’s Right Wing Watch have reported, members of the review panel appointed by the Texas Education Agency to review high school biology textbooks have urged the Board of Education to pressure textbook companies to include “creation science based on biblical principles” in science books. In 1987, the Supreme Court found that requiring the teaching of creationism in public school science classes is unconstitutional.
The full text of People For the American Way’s letter is below:
State Board of Education
1701 N. Congress Avenue
Austin, Texas, 78701
September 17, 2013
Dear Members of the Texas State Board of Education:
On behalf of People For the American Way’s 76,590 Texas members and activists, we urge you to reject attempts to pressure textbook companies to include religiously based and politically biased information in high school biology textbooks.
Recent reports by the Texas Freedom Network indicate that the majority of panelists the Texas Education Agency chose to review high school biology texts for the state do not possess post-secondary education in biological science and that many do not have any expertise in biology at all. These panelists, instead of preparing Texas students to compete in the biological sciences, have instead demanded that biology textbooks used in public schools incorporate “biblical principles” and undermine the foundational theory of evolution.
These demands run counter to the Supreme Court’s 1987 decision in Edwards v. Aguillard, which found that requirements that public schools teach creationism in science classes present a clear violation of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. These efforts also undermine the ability of Texas public schools to prepare students to compete in the field of biological sciences.
Our public schools must be dedicated to providing a world-class education and equal opportunity to all children, regardless of their religious backgrounds.
We urge you to reject attempts to insert political bias and religious teachings into biology textbooks used in public schools. In addition, we hope that future textbook reviews will be conducted by those with expertise in the relevant fields.
President, People For the American Way
Fox News hosts like Sean Hannity and Mike Huckabee seem to have no problem with hosting conservative columnist and author Erik Rush, who has urged the US to kill all Muslims and accused President Obama of being a serial killer. Rush reacted to the Navy Yard shooting yesterday by tweeting that the rampage was “part political diversion, part gun-grabbing theater. NOT random. NOT a lone psycho.”
“If you think the #dcnavyyardshooting is random or just an irate doofus, you’re kidding yourself,” Rush also tweeted.
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality joined Mission America’s Linda Harvey over the weekend to discuss how groups like GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network) are attempting to use schools to make kids gay and transgender, which they suggested would increase the rate of HIV.
Responding to GLSEN’s Transgender Students Rights initiative, Harvey asked: “Why in the world are we doing this to kids? You know, a self-destructive society would do these kinds of things, wouldn’t they? And look at us.”
“Yes. A healthy society discriminates against perverse and dangerous and unhealthy behaviors such as homosexuality, bisexuality and transgenderism,” LaBarbera said. “That’s what a healthy society does.”
Erick Stakelbeck, the former sports reporter who fashions himself to be an expert on terrorism, regularly argues that progressives and Islamic extremists are working together to establish some sort of communist, Islamic state. While appearing on It’s Supernatural!, host Sid Roth said he couldn’t understand his assertion since the “political left is not going to be aligned with someone who wants to kill homosexuals.”
But as the Christian Broadcasting Network reporter explained, even though “the left would be the first ones with their heads on the chopping block if Islamic Sharia law came into power,” both liberals and radical Islamists “hate traditional America” and “hate the name of Yeshua (Jesus) so much that they will work together, at least in the short term, to chip away at traditional America and traditional western civilization.”
Concerned Women for America’s Joseph Rossell warns in a blog post last week that environmental protection efforts represent “an incredibly evil set of values,” if not “the most dangerous agenda on earth.”
Quoting Margaret Sanger and Paul Ehrlich’s warnings about overpopulation, Rossell writes that environmentalists back a “vile” and “highly dangerous ideology” that “may very well be the most anti-human, anti-life agenda on the planet.”
What do you think of when you hear the term “environmentalism”? For most people, the word probably brings to mind images of harmless hippies out to curb pollution and encourage recycling.
But the reality is much more sinister. What most people don’t realize is that environmentalism may very well be the most anti-human, anti-life agenda on the planet. Humans are seen as a blight on the world, population levels are considered far too high, and it is believed necessary to dramatically reduce the number of people globally through brutal methods (including sterilization and abortion).
Environmentalism is not benign; it is a highly dangerous ideology. The individuals quoted above are far from obscure within the movement; they are rather mainstream environmentalists. Their vile beliefs are not simply being repeated in ivory towers, but are increasingly infiltrating public policy through a burgeoning regulatory system. These views are also gaining ground in American school systems, thanks in part to initiatives like Common Core, which promotes texts involving these themes.
Christ warns His followers, “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves” (Matthew 7:15). Environmentalism is similarly deceptive, requiring us to employ spiritual discernment. Although it may seem outwardly attractive, underneath environmentalism’s glistening veneer of social justice is actually an incredibly evil set of values.
In 2010, Wendy Wright, then the president of CWA, was featured alongside other Religious Right figures in a “documentary” about how environmental movement is a “Green Dragon” based on myths and falsehoods.
“Conservatism is too cerebral for many Americans,” writes Rachel Alexander at the Christian Post. She claims that Republicans continue to lose elections “because people are lazy” and simply not smart enough to understand why Democrats are wrong on the issues.
“While Americans deep down prefer shows like Duck Dynasty, they're allowing the left to win on social issues,” Alexander said. “Republicans need to quit lamenting over the backwards fact that the most intelligent party is not the most successful.”
One way to change to “turn the tide” and improve the GOP’s image as a “cold and heartless” party, she writes, is to shame women who seek an abortion: “Portray the woman who wants to abort her baby as cruel and selfish, and showcase those children who grew up with permanent injuries as a result of an attempted, botched abortion. These kinds of portrayals must be done frequently and everywhere.”
Americans appear to have begun entering a more conservative phase, reflected in part by the popularity of the family-oriented, God-loving TV show Duck Dynasty. Although it is not a big expensive production, just a reality show, it has become the second most popular show on cable TV.
Yet this isn't translating into changes in Americans' politics or their government. Americans are still voting for Democrats, accepting socially liberal positions and expanding government. The reason is simple. Liberalism self-perpetuates itself if left unchecked because people are lazy. This is due to the nature of government. It is difficult to feel the effects of incrementally raising taxes and increasing spending across the board.
The left is also winning the culture war. While Americans deep down prefer shows like Duck Dynasty, they're allowing the left to win on social issues. The left has accomplished this by portraying Republicans as cold and heartless, using emotional arguments to sway the public. Republicans can turn this around by doing the exact same thing back to the left. Portray the woman who wants to abort her baby as cruel and selfish, and showcase those children who grew up with permanent injuries as a result of an attempted, botched abortion. These kinds of portrayals must be done frequently and everywhere. It must become common knowledge that the left has cruel and selfish policies that injure people, in order to turn the tide.
Conservatism is too cerebral for many Americans. Consequently, the right has to try twice as hard as the left to gain support for its policies. This means working smarter too, by using methods that are effective like emotional arguments. Although it may feel foreign to most on the right to use an emotional argument about something that is not terribly worthy of emotion, to continue down the same old path that no longer works is slowly making the Republican Party a minority. Republicans need to quit lamenting over the backwards fact that the most intelligent party is not the most successful.
Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman reiterated his call today for an anti-Obama rebellion and Egyptian-style coup, writing in Renew America that Americans should gather en masse in Washington D.C. to remove President Obama from office. Klayman maintains that since neither Congress nor the courts will remove Obama, a popular uprising is needed “to cleanse the nation of the half-Muslim, anti-white, socialist fraud in the White House before the nation goes under for the final count.”
“If the Egyptians can do this with regard to another radical Muslim, former president Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, then can't we Americans do it with Obama?” Klayman asks, calling for conservatives working with his new group, Freedom Watch, to organize an “Occupy Washington” movement in which millions of people will “stand in front of the White House and other national treasures and demand that Barack Hussein Obama leave.”
“And, when we do converge on and ‘Occupy Washington’ in the millions on a date to be announced for the week before Thanksgiving, the people may think about chanting: ‘Mr. President (to use the term loosely), put the Quran down, get up off your knees and come out with your hands up!’”
“[Obama] will finally know that his time has come to leave his perverted, Islamic concept of Mecca, our nation's hallowed capital,” Klayman concludes. “I do not advocate violence, but it is time we show Obama that we mean business. He would be well advised to ride off into his Islamic sunset, link up with 72 virgins and party on at his expense – not ours!”
On Sept. 11, 2013, a dangerous and viral strain of Muslims invaded Washington, D.C., to march and declare victory over Christians and Jews and to otherwise thumb their noses at everyone who does not believe in allah. While only 30 or so had the "courage" to actually appear on the streets of D.C., having been surrounded by a horde of "Rolling Thunder" Harley Davidson motorcycle riders, and despite the fact that the Muslims secured a permit and the motorcyclists were denied one by Barack Hussein Obama's National Park Service, let us take a lesson from our Islamic "friends." It is time that we Christians, Jews, people of faith and all true patriots say enough is enough and ourselves, in a very real way, "Occupy Washington" to cleanse the nation of the half-Muslim, anti-white, socialist fraud in the White House before the nation goes under for the final count.
Having done little to nothing about the growing list of "phony" Obama scandals, ranging from Benghazi-gate, to IRS-gate, to Navy SEAL Team VI-gate, to Fast and Furious-gate, to NSA-gate, to name just a few, it is clear that our elected representatives do not have the will or courage to remove the mullah-in-chief from office.
Over the last five years, as we stand on the precipice of calamity by provoking a regional and potential global war with Obama's pro-Islamic desire to intervene to "save" his radical Muslim al-Qaida "freedom fighters" by bombing Syria, it is clear that the time to act is now. Impeachment is not an option, as Republicans, many of whom support Obama in this folly, are content to let this incompetent evil fraud continue in office until at least the run-up to the 2014 congressional elections. This was the same game Republicans played with previous Democratic presidential criminals Bill and Hillary Clinton in the run-up to the 2000 elections. Not wanting to remove Bill Clinton from office, lest Vice President Al Gore become an incumbent president with all the advantages of potential re-election, Republicans bailed out and refused to both impeach and convict "Slick Willy" of the scandals that really mattered: China-gate, File-gate and Travel-gate. So if the past is a prologue, which it is today even more than it was back in the late 1990s, the Grand Old Party is even more of a neutered, impotent elephant now.
Our court system is also not ready, willing or, practically speaking, able to get the job done. Save for federal judges like Royce Lamberth who did so much during the Clinton years to hold them accountable to the rule of law, there is no one on the bench who will stand up to the president. Just look at the judges, state and federal, who have had the chance to effectively remove Obama over his lack of eligibility to be president, as he is not a natural born citizen. From Florida, to Alabama, to Georgia, to California, lower court judges have fudged the law to squirm out of having to actually rule on not only his "phony" birth certificate but also his lack of having two American-born citizen parents as required by our Constitution. While many of these lower court rulings are on appeal, do not hold your breath that the higher courts will have the courage to do what needs to be done. That is the reason for Freedom Watch's citizens' grand juries, which are indicting and trying political felons like Obama as we speak. In this regard, a conviction is near in the case of the Obama for eligibility fraud.
Once convicted, We the People will have the right to enforce this conviction and demand that Obama surrender himself to the people's system of justice for incarceration. Will he do so voluntarily? Obviously not! His arrogance and disrespect for American law – just look at how his attorney general has flouted it – and his apparent allegiance to Shariah law make this more than unlikely, to put it mildly.
I therefore call upon all American patriots, once we obtain this conviction, which we will shortly, to converge on Washington. Millions should stand in front of the White House and other national treasures and demand that Barack Hussein Obama leave. If the Egyptians can do this with regard to another radical Muslim, former president Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, then can't we Americans do it with Obama?
And, when we do converge on and "Occupy Washington" in the millions on a date to be announced for the week before Thanksgiving, the people may think about chanting: "Mr. President (to use the term loosely), put the Quran down, get up off your knees and come out with your hands up!"
The power of the people will then be heard without firing one proverbial shot. This fraudster, who stole the presidency and has done so much harm, will finally know that his time has come to leave his perverted, Islamic concept of Mecca, our nation's hallowed capital.
I do not advocate violence, but it is time we show Obama that we mean business. He would be well advised to ride off into his Islamic sunset, link up with 72 virgins and party on at his expense – not ours!
Tony Perkins led the fight against repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and runs an organization whose spokesman called on the government to “export” gay people, so it is only natural that now Perkins is fashioning himself as a foe of discrimination…against straight service members.
He is upset that the military — which recognizes same-sex marriages — is allowing gays and lesbians in the military who are stationed in states that ban same-sex marriage to travel to states with marriage equality laws to attain a marriage license:
The new policy, which will take effect by Sept. 3, allows gay and lesbian service members in the U.S. as many as seven days of extra leave to get married, as long as they are stationed more than 100 miles from a state where same-sex marriages are legal or from the District of Columbia, where the marriages are also performed.
Military personnel who are overseas will get as many as 10 days to travel back to the U.S. to get married.
Today on his radio commentary, Perkins said the military has lost “their senses” with its “discriminatory” policies:
For our troops, marriage is becoming the biggest battlefield. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. Thanks to the Pentagon, taxpayers are giving gay service members quite a wedding gift. According to the Defense Department, homosexual troops are getting some extra incentives to get hitched--including 10 days of bonus leave. The AP says gay and lesbian military members will get as many as two weeks of extra vacation time to travel to states that allow same-sex marriage. Meanwhile, the Defense Department says it "remains committed to ensuring that all men and women who service in the U.S. military... are treated fairly." If that were true, heterosexual couples would be getting the same benefits. See, this special, taxpayer-funded leave isn't just expensive--it's discriminatory. According to the Pentagon, heterosexual couples aren't eligible. How's that for equality? The administration says this perk "level[s] the playing field between opposite-sex and same-sex couples." But when it comes to extra vacation days, the only thing the military is taking leave of is their senses!
A mandatory lecture given to the students of the Christian conservative Patrick Henry College on Friday offered apologies for rape, domestic violence and child abuse, and blamed American mass incarceration on feminists’ insistance on prosecuting sexual violence.
Patrick Henry professor Stephen Baskerville, a so-called “men’s rights” advocate, delivered the college’s annual “Faith and Reason” lecture, Libby Anne reported at Patheos. Baskerville started off with his thesis that feminists and Islamists are working together to push Christians out of public life, sort of like the alliance between Hitler and Stalin:
Though they claim to advance rights, or equality, or justice – values that in their place may be seductively legitimate – the real aim is power – or as currently phrased, “empowerment.” In comparison with this shared common goal, differences in contentare secondary. This is why alliances are readily formed between seemingly incompatible agendas: Hitler and Stalin, or Islamists and feminists. “Power is the alpha and the omega of contemporary Communism,” wrote Milovan Djilas during the repression of the 1950s.“Ideas, philosophical principles, and moral considerations…– all can be changed and sacrificed. But not power.
Feminists, he argues, have used the sexual revolution to impose “state repression” and “transformed our government into a matriarchal leviathan” by criminalizing rape, domestic violence and child abuse. Baskerville cites the work of University of Pennsylvania professor Marie Gottschalk to claim that the criminalization of sexual violence has led to the United States’ historic levels of mass incarceration. Gottschalk argued that women’s groups’ working with law and order groups in the 1960s and ‘70s “contributed to a more punitive climate,” not that the criminalization of sexual violence led to mass incarceration. But no matter— in the prosecution of rape and domestic violence, Baskerville sees “our own homegrown version of Stalinism”:
What Gottschalk has stumbled upon is our own homegrown version of Stalinism: the process by which triumphant radicals first challenge and then commandeer both traditional values and the instruments of state repression for their own purposes as they trade ideological purity for power.
Since the inception of their Revolution – and well beneath the media radar screen – militants have been creating a panoply of new crimes and expanded redefinitions of existing crimes – all involving sexual relations. While it is very likely that the Sexual Revolution has also increased incidents of real sex crimes, the new gender crimes are different: They play on the fear of sex crimes, but they redefine these politically to include not simply acts but heterodox political beliefs. The reality of the witch hunts thus bears no necessary relation to what is suggested by the inflammatory language and jargon:
- “rape” that includes consensual relations and in most instances is no more than that;
- domestic “violence” that involves no violence or any physical contact or threat of it;
- sexual “harassment” that can mean anything from simple flirtation to unauthorized opinions about morality or politics;
- “child abuse” that is routine parental discipline, or homeschooling, or concocted altogether to win advantage in divorce court;
- “bullying” that involves criticism of the homosexual agenda or other differences of belief and opinion;
- “stalking” that is forcibly divorced fathers trying to see their own children;
- and much more.
These new gender crimes have been created not despite the new sexual freedom but as the inseparable corollary to it. The new crimes operate in concert with the new freedoms and smoothly combine expanded sexual license with diminished civic freedom, and indeed, state repression.
The crime usually begins as some new sexual freedom demanded in strident terms as necessary to liberate women from some form of “oppression” – though crucially, the new freedom is also enticing to men, especially young men with strong libidos and few responsibilities. This then degenerates into a corollary criminal accusation against (usually) the man who takes the bait by indulging in the newly permitted pleasure:
- Recreational sex in the evening turns into accusations of “rape” in the morning, even when it was entirely consensual. (This is especially rampant on college campuses.)
- Demands for access to workplaces, universities, the military, and other previously male venues (accompanied with equally strident demands to engage there in female-only activities, such as pregnancy and breastfeeding) invite accusations of sexual “harassment” against the men when relations inevitably develop (and often turn sour), regardless of who initiates them.
- Cohabitation and “no-fault” divorce are demanded to liberate women from “patriarchal” marriage but quickly generate accusations of male abandonment (even when the woman ends the marriage), as well as domestic “violence” and “child abuse,” in order to procure custody of children and the financial awards they bring.
- The proclaimed right to raise children outside wedlock and without fathers to protect and discipline them soon turns into demands to prosecute adolescents and even children for “bullying” one another and eventually for more serious matters.
- Defiant declarations that women do not need men for financial support quickly give way to demands to arrest and incarcerate without trial men who do not provide women with adequate income in the form of alimony or child support.
- Assertions that women do not need men for protection soon produce hysterical outcries for intrusive police powers, innovative punishments, and expanded penal institutions to punish ever-proliferating and loosely-defined forms of “violence against women,” even when no physical contact or threat of it is involved. (Homosexuals are now mimicking this strategy.)
- The demanded right to engage in homosexual acts and public sexual displays translates almost automatically into the power to arrest or otherwise stop the mouths of preachers, “bullies,” and anyone else who objects or ridicules or offends the “feelings” or “pride” of homosexuals.
- Demands to legalize prostitution feed hysteria to find and prosecute unnamed “sex traffickers.”
- My favorite, given our setting in higher education:) Demands for unisex bathing facilities in university residences lead to… – well, any young man lacking the intelligence to detect the trap awaiting him there may not belong in a university in the first place.
Radical ideology has thus transformed our government into a matriarchal leviathan that operates like a massive, bureaucratic version of…Potiphar’s wife. We have not eliminated a “gender stereotype,” as we were promised; we have merely politicized it – in this case that of the temptress, the seductress who lures men into a “honeytrap” by offers of pleasure before springing a trap that today can mean decades in prison.
Elsewhere in the lecture, Baskerville rails against gay rights and no-fault divorce, concluding that marriage equality “can end nowhere but in prison and in death.”
Past redefinitions of marriage effected by unilateral and involuntary divorce laws have already resulted in the most repressive government machinery ever created in the United States. In the name of divorce, legally unimpeachable citizens are now summarily evicted from their homes, forcible separated from their children, expropriated of all they possess, and incarcerated without trial – while the world mouths excuses and averts its eyes. The divorce apparat is the government’s purpose-built mechanism for dismembering families and criminalizing the embodiments of the hated “patriarchy”: fathers.
The continuing redefinition of marriage now being proposed by homosexuals is another new freedom that can end nowhere but in prison and in death.
An Arizona family that fled the US by boat only to be lost at sea is planning to leave again, once again by boat. Back in August, the Gastonguay family cited “abortion, homosexuality [and] the state-controlled church” as reasons for leaving the US to the island nation of Kiribati. However, the voyage did not go as planned as damage to their boat left them “adrift for weeks.” “They were eventually picked up by a Venezuelan fishing vessel, transferred to a Japanese cargo ship and taken to Chile,” the Associated Press reported.
Sean Gastonguay appeared on TruNews with Rick Wiles yesterday to discuss his plans to leave with his wife and children once again to escape what he perceives as anti-Christian persecution.
He also talked to Wiles about how he believes the Old Testament law should be the basis for taxation and government and discussed how immigration reform will lead to biometric scanning, one of the End Times broadcaster’s favorite conspiracy theories.
Rick Scarborough’s Tea Party Unity group hailed the recall of two Colorado Democratic state senators whom were targeted by gun activists over their support for tough gun laws by likening the lawmakers to the 9/11 hijackers. Tea Party Unity, which recently hosted an event honoring Rick Santorum and American Family Association founder Don Wildmon, published a column originally posted on the Tea Party Tribune on how the Colorado recall is “a fitting commemoration of 9/11.”
Tea Party activist Stephen Nemo said that Colorado voters rose up against the “gun grabbers” just like the passengers of United Airlines Flight 93 and colonists fighting the British.
There is a reason I describe Colorado’s recall as a fitting commemoration of 9/11. That September morning twelve years ago, average citizens aboard United Airlines flight 93 fought the first battle against jihadists in America. The terrorists were determined to destroy our way of life, the freedoms we enjoy – our rights as individuals. American freedom is in direct conflict with the jihadist’s submissive, dictatorial ideology.
“Are you guys ready?” telephone operator Lisa Jefferson heard United passenger Todd Beamer say. “Let’s roll.”
Jihadists piloting the airliner were so alarmed by the unarmed but determined Americans charging them, they crashed the hijacked airplane into an open field in Pennsylvania in a last desperate act. It’s believed Beamer and his fellow warriors stopped al Qaeda terrorist from crashing the commandeered craft into the Capitol Building or the White House. Beamer led what our Founders defined as a “well-regulated militia.”
At the Battle of Lexington in 1775, American militiaman John Munroe told a fellow soldier, “I’ll give them the guts of my gun” as he lifted his musket to fire on the advancing red line of British troops. The Red Coats, you see, were under orders to confiscate the “guts” of Munroe’s gun in order to secure the conceits of a petty, royal tyrant.
Thomas Jefferson said, “The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” Colorado’s petty tyrants tried to take a cherished right from their people and paid the price for their conceit at the ballot box.
Coloradans from every walk of life, crossing party lines, said “No” to the gun grabbers …
… and “Yes” to unalienable rights.
The far-right Florida Family Association is planning to run an aerial banner this Sunday before the Cincinnati Bengals game criticizing Cincinnati-based Procter & Gamble, for running ads on Al Jazeera America.
The banner reads, ‘Procter & Gamble Sponsors Jihad TV.’
The FFA used a similar tactic when targeting Lady Gaga and ‘Gay Day’ at Disney. The fringe group has taken credit for having 128 companies drop their ads on Al Jazeera America, and similarly pressured companies to stop advertising on shows like All-American Muslim, Family Guy, Modern Family and Degrassi.
The FFA is a tiny organization run by David Caton, who became involved with the Religious Right after admitting to an addiction to pornography, and has warned that President Obama and Muslim-Americans are pushing an Islamist takeover of America.
The introduction of Al Jazeera America has led to an outpouring of anti-Muslim sentiment from right-wing commentators, and it seems that some companies may be mistaking the stunts of conspiratorial activists like Caton as popular discontent with the network.
The 700 Club regularly features a segment where Pat Robertson and his co-host read prayer request letters they have received and then pray for their authors and call out visions of God healing certain ailments (or shelling out a cool million). All viewers have to do is “claim” their particular healing and their maladies will be gone. During today’s broadcast, a viewer named Clark asked Robertson to defend the practice, which is common among Word-Faith preachers and faith healers:
I watched your son [Gordon] and a woman on TV telling people that God was healing a certain condition that people in the audience were suffering from. Then they discussed cases where viewers had written in to say that they had been healed, thus apparently proving that they have the ability to get God to heal people during the show. Is that power only available to them during the show? If not, are they spending every waking moment healing people? If not, that is just plain wrong.
Robertson tried to laugh off the question and explained that when the 700 Club hosts are praying together they receive a “Word of knowledge” and “the Lord just shows us what he is doing at some point of time, not what we are doing, it is his do.”
He insisted that he is not a healer: “I do not believe in a resident gift to heal” — just in “gifts of healing.”
Then, the televangelist likened the whole shtick to Santa Claus passing out gifts.
“It’s plural ‘gifts of healing.’” Robertson said. “It’s like Santa Claus. He has a pack on his back and he has gifts and he’s passing these gifts out but they come from God.”
“The word of knowledge says we are merely reciting what God himself is doing, okay?”
This isn’t the first time Robertson has defended the practice. Last year, Robertson said that failed healings are not the result of the pastors (like Robertson) who conduct them but due to a lack of faith among people asking for a healing.
It was a big week for lifting the veil – at least a little – on the secretive world of conservative groups funding political campaigns. On Wednesday we wrote about new reports on two of the Right’s shadowy front groups which have been able to disguise the transfer of large sums of money to organizations supporting Republican causes and candidates.
Then Politico brought us a look inside what they call “the Koch brothers’ secret bank,” a previously unknown group called Freedom Partners which gave a quarter billion dollars in 2012 to sway public debate further to the right. Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei report:
The group, Freedom Partners, and its president, Marc Short, serve as an outlet for the ideas and funds of the mysterious Koch brothers, cutting checks as large as $63 million to groups promoting conservative causes, according to an IRS document to be filed shortly…
The group has about 200 donors, each paying at least $100,000 in annual dues. It raised $256 million in the year after its creation in November 2011, the document shows. And it made grants of $236 million — meaning a totally unknown group was the largest sugar daddy for conservative groups in the last election, second in total spending only to Karl Rove’s American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, which together spent about $300 million. [emphasis added]
Though you likely have not heard of Freedom Partners before, you’ve heard of the groups it funds – including the NRA, Americans for Prosperity, Heritage Action for America, and Tea Party Patriots. According to their newly-launched website, Freedom Partners is “promoting the principles of a free market and free society” by advocating against scourges like “cronyism in America.”
This, from one of the biggest spenders in the last election.
Other than the Koch brothers, who are the donors behind this massively influential group? At this point, it’s hard to know. Despite the group’s president’s insistence that “our members are proud to be part of [the organization],” Freedom Partner’s membership page does not list a single one. It’s yet another example of the need for legislation like the DISCLOSE Act, which would shed light on the major donors behind the secretive outside groups attempting to shape our elections – and our country.
Georgetown law professor Cornelia “Nina” Pillard, one of President Obama’s three nominees to fill vacancies on the influential D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, is one of the country’s most renowned women’s rights attorneys. She crafted the argument that convinced a nearly unanimous Supreme Court to open the Virginia Military Institute to women. She worked alongside Bush administration attorneys to successfully defend the Family and Medical Leave Act in the courts. She has opposed government policies that treat men and women differently based on outmoded stereotypes that harm both sexes.
So, of course, conservative activists and their Republican allies in Congress are calling her a “radical feminist" and threatening to filibuster her nomination.
In an interview with the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins Friday, National Review columnist Ed Whelan called Pillard a “radical feminist law professor” and insisted that she would be “the most left-wing judge in the history of the republic.”
Phyllis Schlafly – who, of course, also opposed the opening of VMI to women and the Family and Medical Leave Act – calls Pillard a “scary feminist.”
The Family Research Council has also gone after Pillard, skewing the meaning of her words and even citing her use of a phrase that was actually written by the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist as evidence of her “militant feminism.”
And just this weekend, right-wing activist "Dr. Chaps" Gordon Klingenschmitt sent out an email to his backers attacking Pillard's support for women's rights, specifically charging that Pillard “attacked and questioned the Virginia Military Institute” when she argued that VMI should admit women.
Senate Republicans have picked up this line of attack. In Pillard’s hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the committee’s Republicans (all men) latched onto the nominee’s support of reproductive rights. When fellow nominee Robert Wilkins appeared before the committee last week, Sen. Chuck Grassley tried, unsuccessfully, to trick him into dissing Pillard’s writings.
So what exactly is it that makes Pillard such a “radical”/“militant”/“scary” feminist in the eyes of the Right?
In a series of columns last month, Whelan elaborated on what he meant. He takes particular issue with a 2007 law review article in which Pillard argues that many public school abstinence-only sex-ed curricula impose a double standard on girls – hardly a radical observation. She also specifically wrote that she took no position on the abstinence message itself. Nevertheless, Whelan and others have distorted this into the idea that she would strike down all abstinence programs as unconstitutional, which is not at all what she has said. In Pillard’s own words,
[The article] brings into focus those curricula's persistent, official promulgation of retrogressive, anti-egalitarian sexual ideologies-of male pleasure and female shame, male recreation and female responsibility, male agency and female passivity, and male personhood and female parenthood. I argue for a counter-stereotyping sex education that affirms women's and men's desire, sexual agency, and responsibility.
She explained her thoughts further in her hearing before the judiciary committee:
Let me say first, I'm a mother. I have two teenage children — one boy and one girl. If my children are being taught in sex education, I want both my children to be taught to say 'no,' not just my daughter. I want my son to be taught that, too. The article was very explicit in saying I don't see any constitutional objection … to abstinence-only education that does not rely upon and promulgate sex stereotypes.
This argument – that many government-funded sex-ed curricula promote harmful and regressive stereotypes that cheat girls – is what has made right-wing activists go ballistic.
Pillard has also made it exceedingly clear that she knows the difference between testing out legal theories in law review articles and applying them as a judge. As she said in her hearing, “Academics are paid to test the boundaries and look at the implications of things. As a judge, I would apply established law of the U.S. Supreme Court and the D.C. Circuit” – a sentiment that many Republican senators echoed when they were defending Bush nominees who had in the past expressed opinions not consistent with existing law.
To put it simply, what conservatives object to about Pillard is that she believes in women’s equality and that she’s really, really good at making the legal case for it. In 2013 in the Republican Party, that’s what it takes to qualify as a “scary,” “radical” and “militant” feminist.
Conservative activist and Fox News contributor Jesse Lee Peterson is angry about the growing political clout of African Americans and women, and he believes President Obama, Al Sharpton, Jamie Fox and Oprah Winfrey used the official commemoration of 50th anniversary of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom to spread anti-white racism and socialism. Never mind that the original March on Washington called for “a national minimum wage act” and “a massive federal program to train and place all unemployed workers” in jobs [PDF]: Peterson accused Obama of twisting the message of the original march by “call[ing] for a minimum wage increase” and pushing “socialist ideas.”
”[T]he 50th anniversary commemoration of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s historic march and speech looked like a Ku Klux Klan rally!”
Peterson writes in WorldNetDaily that speakers at the commemorative event “whine about the need for ‘justice’ for blacks while continuing to pervert the civil rights struggle by equating it to current efforts to legalize same-sex marriage, pass amnesty for illegal aliens and degrade the Second Amendment.”
“It was an outright attempt to rewrite history – and use King’s name to advance an anti-American political agenda,” Peterson said. “We now have a full-fledged racist, socialist president in the White House.”
Most blacks have lost the moral authority to claim the mantle of civil rights because they refuse to stand for what is right.
As an example, the 50th anniversary commemoration of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s historic march and speech looked like a Ku Klux Klan rally!
Al Sharpton, Oprah Winfrey, Jamie Foxx and others whined about the need for “justice” for blacks while continuing to pervert the civil rights struggle by equating it to current efforts to legalize same-sex marriage, pass amnesty for illegal aliens and degrade the Second Amendment.
But these malcontents were simply the opening act for Barack Obama – or, as I refer to him, the “Fallen Messiah.”
In his address, Obama, flanked by members of the King family, shamelessly said, “We would dishonor the memory of Dr. King and other heroes to suggest that the work of this nation is complete …” He then attacked Republicans who want to preserve voter integrity at the polls. Obama said we have to fight back against those who want to “erect new barriers to the vote …”
Obama also cited how black unemployment has remained twice as high as white unemployment and that the gap in wealth between the races has grown. He left out that things are far worse since he’s become president! He called for a minimum wage increase and for higher taxes on the wealthy. It was clear that Obama’s address was not about acknowledging the great strides America has made. His speech was about using the platform to sew dissatisfaction and help usher in his socialist ideas.
There were no black or white Republican speakers. As if the Civil Rights Act of 1964 could have been passed without the GOP! This was not a commemoration of the spirit of MLK’s march. It was an outright attempt to rewrite history – and use King’s name to advance an anti-American political agenda.
As a result of the absence and weakness of black men, blacks have allowed every ungodly thing to influence their communities. We literally see hell on earth in places like Detroit, Newark, Chicago and New Orleans.
The negative attitude most blacks hold is antithetical to the Christian message of love and forgiveness delivered by MLK. Yes, blacks have indeed lost the moral authority to claim the mantle of civil rights because they refuse to stand for what is right. The 90 percent of blacks who helped elect Obama have little in common with MLK.
We now have a full-fledged racist, socialist president in the White House. Obama is no different than Jeremiah Wright Jr., Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton – he’s just more polished and better at hiding who he is.
Throughout American history, whites have played a significant role in helping blacks secure freedom and equality. We can no longer relinquish the civil rights mantle to liberal racist blacks. It’s time to take back our country and confront black racism head on, but it will take both whites and freethinking blacks, standing together once again, to get it done.
Iowa congressman Steve King, who joined fellow Republicans Rep. Michelle Bachman and Rep. Louis Gohmert in Egypt last week, where they delivered a televised message praising the Egyptian military’s crackdown on dissenters, claims that the group’s insistence that the Muslim Brotherhood was linked to the 9/11 terrorist attacks comes from a “very reliable” source “within the Middle East.” But he won’t say who his source is because “then it would be a political incident.”
The Bush administration’s 9/11 commission found no such link, except to note a handful of instances where Al Qaeda members had peripheral contact with the sprawling group.
While Bachmann has attempted to backtrack from the comments, King has characteristically doubled down.
The Omaha World-Herald reports:
Tuesday, during a call with reporters, King defended Bachmann's statements.
King said he had received evidence tying the Muslim Brotherhood to both the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and last year's attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. He said his information comes from “very well-placed sources within the Middle East.”
Pressed for more details, King declined to specify even the country from which the information originated.
“That source is a very reliable source and it is very sensitive,” King said. “If I were to clarify the source of it, then it would be a political incident. And I'd just as soon not initiate that.”
Radio Iowa adds:
“I have received evidence that there was a foundation there among the Muslim Brotherhood in each of those cases and it’s not something that I think that they can just simply say is wrong. They would have to be the ones to prove the negative,” King said. “It takes a fair amount of self-confidence, sometimes misplaced self-confidence, to be so critical with a basis to do so.”
King was asked twice during his telephone news conference to reveal the source of his information.
“I think I’ll just stick with my answer of very well-placed sources within the Middle East,” King said, “and I think that it will be verified over time.”