C4

Calling Out Corbett: PFAW Press Conferences in Pennsylvania

The pushback against Pennsylvania Republicans’ electoral vote-rigging bill continues to grow, as more and more public officials and average voters call on Governor Corbett to dump the hyper-partisan scheme plan.

On Monday, People For the American Way held a press conference in Philadelphia with state Senator Anthony Williams and a representative from the office of U.S. Rep. Robert Brady, who said that he fears this legislation represents “more of the same” partisan tactics that we saw with last year’s voter ID bill.

Yesterday in the state capitol of Harrisburg, state Auditor Eugene DePasquale and state Treasurer Rob McCord added to the calls for Corbett to put aside partisan politics and “stand up and say, ‘This isn’t right.’” McCord warned that the bill would mean millions in lost economic activity, and called it a “shame.” DePasquale said that the bill would greatly reduce the influence of Pennsylvania in national elections by limiting the number of electoral votes in play to 3 or 4, similar to small states like Wyoming. “When was the last time you saw a major policy announcement from a president in Wyoming?,” he asked.

With the chorus of voices against the bill growing ever louder, from both Democrats and Republicans, it’s becoming harder and harder for Corbett to maintain his tacit support for this scheme. If Pennsylvanians keep speaking out against this bill, Corbett won’t be able to act like he can’t hear us for much longer. 

 

PFAW

Gohmert: Christie Might Appoint Democratic Senator to Preserve 'Bromance' With Obama

Yesterday, Rep. Louie Gohmert joined the chorus of Republicans and Democrats who are criticizing Gov. Chris Christie for his decision to schedule a special election to replace the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg in October of this year. The congressman and Newsmax’s Steve Malzberg speculated that Christie wouldn't appoint a Republican to the seat (the governor has not made an announcement yet) because it would ruin his “bromance” with President Obama.

“Think about it, if he had just up and appointed a Republican replacement as he’s authorized to do, do you think the bromance will continue? Do you think the President will come let him win little toys for him and stuffed animals for him down at the fair?” Gohmert joked, “Do you think he would ever get another hug out on the beach from the President?”

Watch:

Kansas' Kobach Pushes Plan that Would Disenfranchise Alaska Natives

Back in April, two Alaska House committees approved a bill that would require voters to show a photo ID at the polls – a particularly damaging measure in a state where many rural communities don’t even require photos on drivers’ licenses. Now, the Anchorage Daily News is reporting that there is a familiar face behind the measure. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the driving force behind voter suppression and anti-immigrant measures around the country, reportedly coordinated with Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell to push the bill in what looks like an effort to damage Democratic Sen. Mark Begich in his 2014 reelection bid. (Treadwell denies that he worked with Kobach on the bill, which he says he opposes.)

Alaska Natives say a photo ID rule would be a roadblock to voting in the Bush. A decline in turnout there, with its traditionally heavy Democratic vote, could affect the 2014 reelection hopes of U.S. Sen. Mark Begich, a Democrat running in a Republican-leaning state. One of his potential rivals is Alaska's top election official, Republican Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell.

Treadwell says he doesn't support the voter ID bill, but Kobach says Treadwell was instrumental in getting him involved in promoting the Alaska legislation.

In an April statement to reporters that didn't mention Kobach or Kansas, Treadwell touted the cross-checking as having found 14 people suspected of "actually voting in both Alaska and another state" in 2012. Treadwell threatened to prosecute the voters if the allegations were confirmed.

Alaska elections director Gail Fenumiai recently said 12 of the 14 voters cited in Treadwell's April statement were wrongly identified as duplicate voters and actually voted only in Alaska.



Kobach told the Daily News it was he who suggested to Treadwell that Alaska get involved in the Kansas project. "I personally talked to Mead Treadwell, your lieutenant governor, and encouraged him to join, and he did so," Kobach said.

And his testimony on the photo ID bill, Kobach said, was the result of a conversation with Treadwell.

"I spoke to Mead about it at one of our national conferences -- he mentioned that you guys were considering a photo ID law," Kobach said. "I said I'd be happy to share some of the experiences we've had in Kansas."

Treadwell, who said he doesn't support the Alaska bill because of the difficulty for Bush residents to get photo identification, said he didn't recall talking to Kobach about it.

As the Daily News explains, a photo ID bill would be especially damaging to Alaska Natives living in rural communities where DMVs are hard to access and where many towns don’t even require photographs on drivers’ licenses:

Photo ID measures are controversial across the country. Advocates say they help prevent fraud. Opponents say they make it more difficult for particular groups of people to vote: the elderly, students and the poor who don't own cars. In Alaska, the situation is compounded by the difficulty of getting to a Division of Motor Vehicles office in a regional hub like Nome or Bethel from a small village. Alaska doesn't even require a photograph on a driver's license in dozens of Bush communities.

Democratic activists say photo ID bills have the effect of disenfranchising more Democratic voters than Republicans. In his annual address to the Alaska Legislature this year, Begich criticized the bill as making it more difficult for Alaska Natives and Hispanics -- two traditional Democratic groups -- to vote.

The sponsor of Alaska’s bill, who has acknowledged that he drafted the measure using materials from the corporate-funded conservative group ALEC, had odd words of consolation for those concerned about the suppressive impact of the bill: at least it wouldn’t be as bad as Iraq!

Rep. Bob Lynn, an Anchorage Republican who is prime sponsor of the voter ID bill, said he wasn't trying to disenfranchise anyone. He dismissed opponents as complainers who should be happy they don't face the kind of obstacles voters do in places like Iraq.

"Terrorists have threatened to kill anyone who voted, but they voted anyway, and then these voters put ink in their finger to prove they had voted -- evidence that could have gotten them killed. Now that's a hassle, to say the least. Needing a photo ID to vote in Alaska wouldn't even come close to that," Lynn said when his State Affairs Committee first heard the bill in February.
 

Student Non-Discrimination Act Sorely Needed in Our Nation’s Schools

“I stopped going to school four months before graduation because I couldn’t handle the bullying anymore. I will not get to attend my senior prom, and…throw my graduation cap in the air.”

Harassment and bullying in schools are widely understood to be pervasive nationwide problems.  But as the above quote from an LGBT student highlights, for LGBT young people the situation can be especially severe.  Yesterday the Student Non-Discrimination Act (SNDA), which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity/expression in public schools, was both reintroduced in the Senate by Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) and included in Sen. Tom Harkin’s (D-IA) proposed education bill updating the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 

Studies show that this kind of legislation is sorely needed. The most recent Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network National School Climate Survey found that in the past year alone, more than eight in ten LGBT students had been verbally harassed because of their sexual orientation and more than six in ten because of their gender expression.  The majority of students who were harassed did not report it to school staff, believing that nothing would happen if they did – or that the situation could get even worse. 

As one student shared,

“Bullying in our school is mostly verbal, but it hurts just as much as any physical pain… Teachers rarely do anything about it.”

Those who were harassed frequently had lower GPAs and were less likely to say they planned to go on to college or other post-secondary education.  Many LGBT students reported missing class because they felt unsafe or uncomfortable, with nearly one in three LGBT students missing at least one full school day in the past month.

When harassment at school is associated with missed classes, lowered grades, shifted educational ambitions, or even depression, it can have long term implications for the wellbeing of LGBT youth.  No student should face this kind of hostility at school because of who they are or who others perceive them to be.

PFAW

Pratt: Reform Will Grant Citizenship to a 'Gazillion' Immigrants Who'll Be 'Sitting Around Drawing Welfare and Voting Democrat'

Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America once again touted his group’s staunch opposition to immigration reform yesterday, telling conservative talk show host Steve Deace that if a reform bill passes then “you can buh bye to your guns and buh bye to the rest of your freedom because this would be a country that had been californicated.”

Pratt claimed the Senate’s “scamnesty plan” would “bring in a gazillion Democrat voters” who will be mostly illiterate and “dependents.”

“They’re going to be probably just sitting around drawing welfare and voting Democrat,” Pratt said.

Pratt: The scamnesty plan is a plan to bring in a gazillion Democrat voters. The people who have not been given immigration status because they are a doctor or an engineer or some other skill that would be beneficial in the United States economy, but instead the people that would be given amnesty ultimately by this procedure that Rubio and company have been unleashing are those that don’t have even high school educations, are barely literate in their own Spanish language. I’m fluent in Spanish and I’ve spoken with some of these people and it’s amazing that they can’t even spell in Spanish when you have almost a completely phonetic language. I’ve taught people to read in Spanish if they could competently speak the language, I’ve taught them to read it’s that phonetic. Yet the people that would be coming in illiterate in Spanish, they’re going to be Democrats, they’re going to be dependents, they’re not going to be working at a nuclear reactor or a car factory, they’re going to be probably just sitting around drawing welfare and voting Democrat.

Deace: But don’t we have to pass this or we can’t win any more national elections? That’s what I keep being told.

Pratt: If we pass it we probably will guarantee not winning any more national elections.

Deace: There’s really only two conclusions to the Republicans peddling this: mass stupidity is one, the other is that they are just so tired of arguing with people like you and I about big government that they’ve just decided to go ahead and help the Democrats win. Pratt: And those are probably not mutually exclusive. What they’re doing then by bringing in this many Democrats, if they were to do that, means that by the time you get all of those folks into their citizenship status, our guess was about 2035, you can buh bye to your guns and buh bye to the rest of your freedom because this would be a country that had been californicated.

ALIPAC: Immigration Reform Will Abolish 'Civilian Control' of Government and Put an End to 'Peaceful' Opposition

Fox News can’t seem to decide whether to embrace immigration reform or continue its longtime anti-immigrant advocacy, often with amusing results.

This schizophrenic approach has not gone unnoticed by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) head William Gheen, who has sent a letter to Fox News executives is warning the network that they are committing the “greatest betrayal” against their fans by “literally working to displace and replace your most loyal viewers at the ballot box.”

He argues that “the current censorship and bias emanating from Fox News” in favor of immigration reform “is in effect leading your viewers to their own political, and possibly eventual physical, destruction.”

Gheen says that Fox News is creating a “Brave New 1984 Totalitarian World,” adding that the network realizes that “only through amnesty for illegals and further illegal immigration and non-assimilation will your investment in Fox News Latino pay off!”

“The new voting bloc of tens of millions of illegal aliens will render American conservatives and the Tea Party members permanently ineffectual in American elections,” Gheen writes. “Any hopes of reestablishing civilian control over Washington, DC, through peaceful and political means will vanish if legislation rubber stamping Obama's dictatorial decrees granting amnesty to illegals leads to eventual voting rights for illegal immigrants.”

Mr. Rupert Murdoch, Mr. Roger Ailes, and Fox News Show Hosts:

Over the last 8 years, I have been a guest on your network many times. But it appears that I, and most other opponents of illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal immigrants, are no longer welcome on Fox News now that your corporation is lobbying to pass immigration reform amnesty for millions of illegal aliens.



The greatest betrayal of Fox News and all producers and show hosts participating in these illegal alien amnesty support efforts is that you are literally working to displace and replace your most loyal viewers at the ballot box.

The new voting bloc of tens of millions of illegal aliens will render American conservatives and the Tea Party members permanently ineffectual in American elections if the amnesty bill supported by Fox News passes.

Americans who overwhelmingly support border security, debt reduction, restrained taxation, and responsible government spending clearly do not have control of our own government at this time.

Any hopes of reestablishing civilian control over Washington, DC, through peaceful and political means will vanish if legislation rubber stamping Obama's dictatorial decrees granting amnesty to illegals leads to eventual voting rights for illegal immigrants.

So the current censorship and bias emanating from Fox News is in effect leading your viewers to their own political, and possibly eventual physical, destruction.

Your corporation has now created Fox News Latino which consistently produces terribly biased propaganda pieces that promote amnesty and illegal immigration while attacking any leaders or groups that oppose the invasion, which shows that you are now heavily financially invested in continuing illegal immigration into America and amnesty for illegal immigrants! If illegal immigration were to stop or reverse, we would not need Spanish language news in America in a decade. Only through amnesty for illegals and further illegal immigration and non-assimilation will your investment in Fox News Latino pay off!

With Fox News jumping on board with MSNBC, CNN, CBS, the Associated Press, George Soros, the Saudis, the Mexicans, the Chinese, and Barack Obama, and now with Google and Facebook, you all have this Brave New 1984 Totalitarian World wrapped up for us all, don't you?

What recourse will American citizens or any groups and leaders who should oppose this nation burying Globalist agenda have to reach out and communicate with others when almost all major communications points are now part of the same cabal?

Perkins: 30 Percent of Characters on TV are Gay; Used to Shield 'Dangerous Lifestyle'

Tony Perkins must be watching a lot of LOGO, as the Family Research Council president appears to be under the impression that gays and lesbians represent close to one out of three characters on TV. “Homosexuals make up 4% of the population, but they’re a whopping 30% of TV characters and storylines,” Perkins maintained on his daily radio commentary today, even though according to GLAAD, “LGBT characters account for 4.4% of scripted series regulars in the 2012-2013 broadcast television schedule.”

The FRC based the commentary on an article in the conservative National Catholic Register criticizing “Hollywood’s powerful homosexual culture.” The 30% figure Perkins cited does not refer to gay characters on TV but to one Catholic screenwriter’s claim that “based on her own experience, [homosexuals] make up 30% of Hollywood’s entertainment industry.”

Not only did Perkins manufacture the “30%” figure, he also alleged that “lovable gay characters” on TV are “make-believe people” whose “dangerous lifestyle is just another funny footnote.” He warned that these gay characters are being used “to desensitize America.”

Perkins asserted that in reality, gays are typically “dying of AIDS” and “bullying kids.”

“Of course, producers don’t show you the reality of homosexuality: the men and women dying of AIDS, or the same-sex couples threatening Christian businesses,” Perkins said. “They don’t cast the Dan Savages bullying kids or the parents kicked out of school for opposing gay curriculum.”

Is marriage headed for a Hollywood ending? Hello, I’m Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. The debate over same-sex marriage has been perfectly scripted by Hollywood. Television shows are full of lovable gay characters, whose dangerous lifestyle is just another funny footnote. Unfortunately for America, those make-believe people are having a real-life impact. In a new survey, almost 20% of Americans credit television with changing their minds on same-sex marriage. And that’s no accident. Homosexuals make up 4% of the population, but they’re a whopping 30% of TV characters and storylines. Liberals are using this barrage to desensitize America and viewers are buying it. Of course, producers don’t show you the reality of homosexuality: the men and women dying of AIDS, or the same-sex couples threatening Christian businesses. They don’t cast the Dan Savages bullying kids or the parents kicked out of school for opposing gay curriculum. Like most everything else on TV, it’s fiction. And the only way to fight it is knowing your role in speaking truth!

President Obama Blasts GOP Obstruction, Nominates Three to Influential Court

Today, President Obama nominated three people – experienced appellate attorney Patricia Millet, Georgetown law professor and former civil rights attorney Cornelia “Nina” Pillard and D.C. District Court judge and former public defender Robert Wilkins – to the influential Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

All three have stellar qualifications. Yet, Senate Republicans were threatening to block all three even before they knew who the nominees would be.

In a Rose Garden speech introducing the nominees, President Obama blasted Republican obstruction and urged the Senate to quickly review and hold votes on all three. “The Constitution demands that I nominate qualified individuals to fill those seats,” he said. “What I am doing today is my job.  I need the Senate to do its job.”


So one of the most important responsibilities of a President is to nominate qualified men and women to serve as judges on the federal bench. 

And Congress has a responsibility, as well.  The Senate is tasked with providing advice and consent.  They can approve a President’s nominee or they can reject a President’s nominee.  But they have a constitutional duty to promptly consider judicial nominees for confirmation.

Now, throughout my first term as President, the Senate too often failed to do that.  Time and again, congressional Republicans cynically used Senate rules and procedures to delay and even block qualified nominees from coming to a full vote. 

As a result, my judicial nominees have waited three times longer to receive confirmation votes than those of my Republican predecessor.  Let me repeat that:  My nominees have taken three times longer to receive confirmation votes than those of my Republican predecessor.  These individuals that I nominate are qualified.  When they were given an up or down vote in the Senate -- when they were finally given an up or down vote in the Senate, every one of them was confirmed.  So this is not about principled opposition.  This is about political obstruction. 

Despite that, some Republicans recently have suggested that by nominating these three individuals, I’m somehow engaging in -- and I’m quoting here -- in “court-packing.”  (Laughter.)  No -- people laugh, but this is an argument I’ve made.  For those of you who are familiar with the history of court-packing, that involved Franklin Delano Roosevelt trying to add additional seats to the Supreme Court in order to water down and get more support for his political agenda.  We’re not adding seats here.  We’re trying to fill seats that are already existing.  Each of the past five Presidents has seen at least three of their nominees confirmed to the D.C. Circuit.  Since I’ve been President, obstruction has slowed that down to one. 

Right now, there are three open seats on a critical court.  I didn’t create these seats.  I didn’t just wake up one day and say, let’s add three seats to the District Court of Appeals.  These are open seats.  And the Constitution demands that I nominate qualified individuals to fill those seats.  What I am doing today is my job.  I need the Senate to do its job.

For more background on the D.C. Circuit, see PFAW’s Marge Baker’s piece in the Huffington Post yesterday, “Five Things Republicans Don’t Want You to Know About the D.C. Circuit.”

PFAW

More Truthiness From Sen. Grassley on the Courts

When the Senate unanimously confirmed Sri Srinivasan to the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit last month, Republicans patted themselves on the back for cooperating in a relatively efficient confirmation process. But, by any objective standard, Srinivasan’s confirmation process wasn’t that efficient at all. In fact, Republican obstruction of Srinivasan started when they delayed a hearing on his nomination for ten months, from June 2012 to April of this year.

But Sen. Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, is now pushing an alternate history of this delay on Srinivasan’s nomination. In a floor speech the day Srinivasan was confirmed, Grassley insisted that Sen. Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, “made no effort to schedule a hearing on this nominee until late last year.”

In a press release this week, Sen. Leahy explained why this argument is just plain false. In fact, he wrote, it was Senate Republicans who kept insisting that Srinivasan’s hearing be pushed back:

By July 19, 2012, I had determined that the paperwork on the Srinivasan nomination was complete and the nominee could be included in a hearing.  It has been my practice as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee to give the minority notice and allow consultation before scheduling a nomination for a hearing.  At that time, the next July hearing had been discussed as one devoted to the nominee to head the Antitrust Division at the Department of Justice, a nomination that itself had been delayed and to which there was Republican opposition.  During the August recess, my staff asked Senator Grassley’s about holding the hearing on the Srinivasan nomination in September.  They raised objections and concerns about proceeding with the D.C. Circuit nomination at that time but agreed to proceed with four district nominees and a Court of International Trade nominee.

In November, 2012, after the American people reelected President Obama, we raised the need for a hearing on the D.C. Circuit nomination anew.  Republicans objected, again, in spite of the precedent of holding a hearing for one of President Bush’s D.C. Circuit nominees during a similar lame duck session. Instead, they wanted to proceed only with district court nominees during the lame duck.  Republicans insisted that the Srinivasan hearing be put off until the new Congress and the new year.  In deference to the Republican minority, I held off.  They agreed that he would be included at the first nominations hearing of the 113th Congress.

Then, in early January of this year, when called upon to hold up their end of the bargain, Republicans balked.

This isn’t just a matter of settling a complicated Senate score. Instead, Sen. Leahy is pointing out yet another incident of Sen. Grassley’s twisting the truth about judicial nominees and the judicial nominations process in an attempt to cover for slowing down Senate business and ultimately the business of the federal courts. As Leahy says in his statement:

Those erroneous Record statements have me wondering whether I should be so accommodating to Republican scheduling demands given that they forget their demands in their efforts to avoid responsibility and blame others.   
 

PFAW

Religious Right Therapist Claims Crayon Drawings Prove Ex-Gay Therapy Works

During a program on the conservative Christian television network Daystar on homosexuality, ex-gay therapist Jerry Mungadze insisted that he can prove his sexual orientation conversion efforts work because he has observed in his patients that after therapy the “areas of the brain that were showing the homosexuality show heterosexuality…the brain is able to go back and fire the way it is supposed to be.”

But Mungadze – who only has degrees in Biblical Studies and counselor education — wasn’t talking about actual brain scans. In fact, Mungadze’s “evidence” of brain transformation relies on crayon drawings.

Warren Throckmorton reports:

Note that patients color in a map of the brain and Mungadze reads the map like a projective test. Apparently, pink relates to femininity, red to anger/aggression, and so on. He says he can tell gay people apart from straights; and when they revert to heterosexuality, he can tell by how they color between the lines.

Who needs brain scans when you have crayons?

                                 



As for the theory of the brain revealing itself via colors chosen by patients, I know of nothing to support it. Projective tests in general are not reliable and this one in particular looks like a method invented by Mungadze without reference to research or validation.

Rios Warns LGBT Rights Movement Is Transforming America into Soviet Russia

Sandy Rios of the American Family Association hosted Fox News correspondent Todd Starnes today where they discussed a brochure [PDF] from the group DOJPride, a group representing LGBT employees at the Department of Justice, which they said was a sign that the U.S. is turning into the Soviet Union.

The brochure was simply a list of tips on creating an LGBT-inclusive work environment and has no enforcement provisions, but those plain facts didn’t stop Starns from arguing that the DOJ now “require[s] managers to post a symbol, an emblem, showing that they are pro-gay in their office.”

“This makes it clear that it’s not enough to give so-called equality, any objections must be eradicated and this is our future if we allow this to continue,” Rios warned, while Starnes called the brochure “un-American.”

Rios even claimed the LGBT rights movement is transforming America into the USSR: “When I was a girl the Soviet Union was such a great threat to the world, the spread of Communism, and those of us that remember that era we have not forgotten, we just never thought it would happen in our country. I’ve had callers to the radio show who grew up in the Soviet Bloc countries, I’ve had them call weeping to see what’s happening to our loss of freedoms.”

Perkins: 'Investors Flock' to ExxonMobil Because They Aren't 'Fueling the Homosexual Agenda'

Last year, Tony Perkins made the unintentionally hilarious argument that Starbucks’ support for Washington state’s marriage equality bill cost the company $10.2 billion in lost market capitalization. Now, the Family Research Council president is arguing that the reason ExxonMobil’s “shares rose 2% last year” is because “more investors flock to an organization unafraid to take a stand” against gay rights.

Perkins was referring to an ExxonMobil shareholder vote last week that rejected a resolution protecting LGBT employees from job discrimination. By not “fueling the homosexual agenda,” Perkins said, ExxonMobil was able to have “its second-biggest profit year ever.”

Yep, we can’t think of any other reasons why ExxonMobil’s earnings are rising.

At ExxonMobil, shareholders put their stock in something other than political correctness. Hello, I’m Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. It won’t change the price of gas, but it may comfort you to know that at ExxonMobil, your business isn’t fueling the homosexual agenda. For the 14th straight year, ExxonMobil refused to add special protections for sexual orientation in its employment policy. And while the outcome wasn’t a surprise, the margin of victory certainly was. By a four-to-one ratio, shareholders said “no,” shocking liberals and bolstering other companies under pressure from corporate bullies. Liberals say these kinds of views can affect your bottom line — and they’d be right! ExxonMobil is coming off its second-biggest profit year ever. The company’s shares rose 2% last year, as more investors flock to an organization unafraid to take a stand. Maybe Exxon’s courage will help other companies drill down on their priorities. Until then, at least this gas company is keeping our values in the pipeline.

Gaffney: Immigration Reform May Give Citizenship to Terrorists

Frank Gaffney took to the Washington Times today to warn Sen. Marco Rubio that if he continues to support the Senate immigration reform bill, then he will be effectively helping terrorists gain citizenship.

While Gaffney alleged that “illegal immigration is up as untold numbers of aliens seek to take advantage of our still-too-porous border to get themselves placed on the ‘path to citizenship,’” in reality, the flow of unauthorized immigrants is at historic lows.

He writes that Rubio is pushing the “undoing” of laws which “thwart terrorists and dangerous criminals seeking to exploit our immigration system.”

“As Mr. Rubio surely knows,” Gaffney continues, immigrants crossing the border include people “associated with terrorist groups such as al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah.” “Does Mr. Rubio want to be responsible for helping their ilk not only continue to come here, but to obtain legal status to stay?”

Like Mr. Obama’s earlier amnesty initiative — the Dream Act — the Gang of Eight bill is already having the predictable effect: Illegal immigration is up as untold numbers of aliens seek to take advantage of our still-too-porous border to get themselves placed on the “path to citizenship.” As Mr. Rubio surely knows, a non-trivial percentage of those are dubbed OTMs — “other than Mexicans.” These include persons from what are euphemistically called “special-interest countries,” notably, Iran and other Islamist-ruled nations. Some are even associated with terrorist groups such as al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah — notwithstanding the Obama State Department’s preposterous announcement last week that there are “no known operational cells” of such groups in the Western Hemisphere.

Does Mr. Rubio want to be responsible for helping their ilk not only continue to come here, but to obtain legal status to stay? Is he OK with the extensive hamstringing of law enforcement this bill entails, which can only make it more difficult to protect us against such unwanted aliens?

Then there’s the screening process mandated by the gang’s legislation for the more than 11 million illegal immigrants already here. It seems designed to delude the innocent, not detect the dangerous. Its superficial, hands-off review bears no resemblance to the 14-hour interview the FBI conducted of Tamerlan Tsarnaev before the Boston Marathon bombings— and even that proved inadequate to the task of identifying and excluding a threat.

Mr. Rubio cannot finesse the hard choice before him. An amendment here or there will not fix the systemic problems with a bill that, at its core, ignores and subverts national security by undoing much of the law put in place after Sept. 11 to thwart terrorists and dangerous criminals seeking to exploit our immigration system. Will he enable it to become the devastating new law of the land?

Tell the Senate: No More Obstruction; Fill the D.C. Circuit!

BREAKING: President Obama Announces Nominees to Fill Critical Seats on D.C. Circuit. Tell the Senate to CONFIRM Cornelia Pillard, Patricia Ann Millet and Robert Leon Wilkins without delay.

PFAW Applauds Nomination of Three to DC Circuit Court

People For the American Way today applauded President Obama’s announcement that he would nominate Cornelia (Nina) Pillard, Patricia Ann Millett and Robert Leon Wilkins to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Today’s announcement is an important step toward filling the remaining vacancies on one of our nation’s highest courts,” said Marge Baker, Executive Vice President at People For the American Way. “These nominees all have accomplished records. They should receive prompt hearings and votes in the full Senate without delay.

“These nominations are a clear statement by the President that he won’t be held hostage by the relentless obstruction by Senate Republicans,” continued Baker. “Nearly five years after he was elected, President Obama has had only one nominee confirmed to the DC Circuit, but Republicans are insisting that fulfilling his constitutional obligation to nominate individuals to fill open seats on this Court is somehow ‘court packing.’ That’s ridiculous. Republican Senators should stop playing political games with the courts and end their mindless obstruction of President Obama’s nominees.”

###
 

College Republicans Tell GOP to Play Down Anti-Gay Views, Sponsor Anti-Gay Conference

A new report released by the College Republican National Committee has been making waves this week for its stern warning that the GOP’s appeal is foundering among young voters. Chris Moody notes that the group explicitly mentioned the party’s opposition to gay rights as a reason why young voters are repelled by the party:

"[T]he conventional wisdom is right," the study's authors write in a section on how Republicans should approach marriage policy for gay and lesbian couples. "Young people are unlikely to view homosexuality as morally wrong, and they lean toward legal recognition of same-sex relationships."



With the culture shifting away from the party's policies, here's what they recommend:

The best course of action for the party may be to promote the diversity of opinion on the issue within its ranks. (After all, for quite some time, former vice president Dick Cheney was to the left of President Obama on same-sex marriage) and to focus on acceptance and support for gay people as separate from the definition of marriage. Where the Republican Party will run into the most trouble over this issue is when it is not winning on any of the more prominent issues, either – the economy and spending. If a candidate is compelling enough on economic opportunity and spending, they may well be able to overcome a difference of opinion with young voters on same-sex marriage.

The authors conclude: "On the 'open-minded' issue, yes, we will face serious difficulty so long as the issue of gay marriage remains on the table. In the short term, the party ought to promote the diversity of thought within its ranks and make clear that we welcome healthy debate on the policy topic at hand. We should also strongly oppose the use of anti-gay rhetoric."

But it turns out the College Republican National Committee is sponsoring the “Road to the Majority Conference,” hosted by Ralph Reed’s far-right Faith & Freedom Coalition, along with other anti-gay groups like Concerned Women for America, the Manhattan Declaration, the American Civil Rights Union and televangelist Pat Robertson’s Regent University.

In fact, some of the GOP’s most stringently anti-gay leaders like Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum are scheduled to address the conference, and Robertson will receive Lifetime Achievement Award.

World Congress of Families Praises Russian Laws 'Preventing' Gays from 'Corrupting Children'

Last week, End Times radio host Rick Wiles spoke to Larry Jacobs of the World Congress of Families on TruNews about his organization’s summit in Moscow next year. The World Congress of Families is a US-based organization with an international focus, especially on stopping laws decriminalizing homosexuality, and so it was no surprise to learn that Jacobs cheered on Russian laws banning gay pride demonstrations and supposed “homosexual propaganda.” He called the ban a “great idea” and hailed officials for “preventing [gays] from corrupting children.” He even called the Russians the “Christian saviors to the world.”

Jacobs: The Russians might be the Christian saviors to the world; at the UN they really are the ones standing up for these traditional values of family and faith.

Wiles: Well look the city government of Moscow passed a 100 year ban on gay parades.

Jacobs: And the homosexual propaganda—the law in the Russian Duma it passed on first reading, it would ban propaganda to minors, preventing them from corrupting children. What a great idea and the rest of Europe is going the other way, legalizing LGBT propaganda.

Gay people regularly face violence and police harassment in Russia. In fact, even evangelicals in Russia increasingly encounter persecution and discrimination as the Russian Orthodox Church gains clout.

Jacobs also detailed how gay rights advocates, feminists and environmentalists are working together “to break the family apart” and introduce “totalitarianism.”

Wiles: We could do a 24 hour talkathon on the attack on families around the world; do you believe that there is a coordinated plan, attack, war on the basic concept of families?

Jacobs: Absolutely. Obviously there are some at high levels that are quite aware of the strategy, but even those that aren’t are implicitly participating in this strategy because everything that the far-left promotes from homosexual marriage to radical environmentalism to a socialist/communist approach to big government, all of these things require the breakdown of the family. The family, I think it was Chesterton that said that the family is the only natural unit that reproduces itself and therefore it is always a threat to the state, it is always a threat to freedom, to totalitarianism; it promotes freedom and liberty. Wherever you see radical leftists, radical environmentalists, radical feminists and radical LGBT groups all together it’s because they have an active agenda to break the family apart. Rabbi Daniel Lapin said this, it’s not just a Christian concept but it’s Judeo-Christian and it goes across various cultures. Rabbi Lapin said it’s not that they’re stupid and don’t understand what the family stands for, that’s the very reason that they’re against the family because it radically opposes their leftist agenda.

Wisconsin GOP Lawmaker Argues Income Limits on School Vouchers 'Penalize Married Couples'

Wisconsin state legislators are in the final days of negotiations on a plan that would expand private school vouchers statewide (they are currently only available in Milwaukee and Racine). The current deal on the program would cap voucher enrollment at one percent of a districts students, but Gov. Scott Walker and other lawmakers would like to expand them further. That includes Republican state Sen. Glenn Grothman, who told Jack Craver of The Capital Times today that not allowing wealthy families who can already afford to send their children to private school to participate in the program would “penalize married couples.”

One of the major concerns in recent years about school vouchers is that they often benefit families who already have the money to send their kids to private schools.

At the same time, the Legislature expanded the state-paid voucher program to Racine. And now, data show that nearly half of the students receiving vouchers in that city were already enrolled in private schools before the program was put in place.

But Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, an outspoken advocate for expanding vouchers to all people and all school districts, says he believes there’s a good side to higher-income families participating in the program: It promotes marriage.

“I think the major thing is we cannot allow the voucher program to penalize married couples,” he told me in a brief phone conversation Monday morning. “In Milwaukee, we raised (the limit) to 300 percent of the federal poverty line and we began to get more married couples in the program, and I don’t want to back off on that.”

The veteran legislator is worried that current negotiations over a further expansion of vouchers to other districts may result in lower income thresholds for voucher recipients and thus reduce the number of two-parent families participating in the program.

Grothman is the same state senator who authored a bill last year to label single parenthood as “a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect.”

Boykin: 'Sexualization of our Military with Social Engineering' Responsible for Assaults

Mike Huckabee hosted Family Research Council vice president Jerry Boykin today to discuss a report on the rise of sexual assault cases in the military between 2010 and 2012, which Boykin linked to the “sexualization of our military with social engineering” policies like the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell 

While Boykin correctly stated that “there are actually more men that have been sexually assaulted than women,” as we have noted, women represent a higher percentage of assault cases since there are only 200,000 women in the active-duty military.

He repeated the false claim that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is linked to the number of assaults on men. However, CNN reports the 2012 rate “remained unchanged for active duty men” from 2010, the year before the law was repealed.

The two also tied the rise in assaults to the end on the ban on women in combat, a decision that was made in 2013 — before the study’s release — and hasn’t even been fully implemented.

Huckabee: General, there has been such a rash of sexual assault in the military and it’s become virtually epidemic. I wanted your assessment, do you think this has anything to do with the fact that we’ve so liberalized the policies of everything from women in combat, the whole conception of the separation of the gender, as well as saying we’re not going to have any restrictions on homosexuals in the military? Does that have anything at all to do with this?

Boykin: Well I think it has everything to do with it, Governor. We have seen, if I may use this term, a sexualization of our military with social engineering. One of the things that most of the people don’t realize is in a recent survey there are actually more men that have been sexually assaulted than women. We are trying to violate the laws of nature, failing to recognize that these young men and women are at the peak of their sex drive when we try to mix the genders for reasons that to me are illogical and in doing so what we are doing is we are inviting this kind of behavior, it’s not acceptable and it has to be punished and dealt with. But I think that this social engineering has manifested in a number of ways and this is certainly one of the clearest.

Bill Federer: Clinton Used 'Alinsky Tactics' To Realize 'Global Goal of Establishing Sharia Law'

Religious Right historian Bill Federer stopped by the 700 Club today to discuss his column arguing that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was “using [Saul] Alinsky tactics” in her response to the attack on the US compound in Benghazi and hoped to engender a “hurried rush for Americans to give up their free speech rights.”

During the interview with Pat Robertson, Federer said “Hillary [was] pulling back defense troops” and suggested that a “stand down” order given to a four-person support team came from Obama administration officials in either the White House or State Department.

However, the order actually came from the military, specifically Special Operations Command Africa, and it was given because the team would not have been able to reach the compound in time and were needed to secure the airport for evacuation. Even a top Republican aide in the House confirmed that there was no way the special operations team could have changed the outcome.

But Federer won’t let these facts get in the way of his argument that Clinton deliberately allowed the Benghazi attack to occur (or botched the response) as part of an Alinsky-inspired plot to impose Sharia law around the world.

“So the question is was Benghazi just inept actions by our government, was it something to put down negative speech that could affect the President’s reelection campaign or was it an Alinsky tactic to push an agenda to forbid free speech insulting Islam,” Federer asked, “We’re talking about a global goal of establishing Sharia law and we came very, very close to it happening right after the Benghazi attempt with this effort to forbid free speech insulting Islam.”

Of course, weeks after the attack Obama used his address at the UN General Assembly to defend the freedom of speech and speak out against blasphemy laws…which must have been another Alinksy tactic!

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious