Reproductive choice is a central issue for women who otherwise might not vote in the Virginia gubernatorial election, a new NARAL survey finds. This is not good news for Republican candidate Ken Cuccinelli, who once described himself as “the most aggressive pro-life leader in the Virginia Senate.”
In a survey of 600 largely Democratic “drop-off” women in the state – those who have voted in presidential years but not in other years – choice was a make-or-break issue among pro-choice women, with 57% saying they “would never vote for anyone running for president who opposes a woman's right to have a legal abortion, no matter how much I agree with them on other issues.” It was such an important issue, in fact, that after hearing choice-based messaging about the race between Terry McAuliffe and Ken Cuccinelli, pro-choice drop-off women became significantly more interested in turning out to cast a vote in the election.
“They found that statements about Cuccinelli’s position on abortion had a bigger effect among this group than any other issue in generating both the level of support and intensity for Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe. ‘Protecting a woman’s right to choose’ trumped health care, guns, transportation, spending and college affordability.”
And Cuccinelli’s track record on abortion rights is indeed bleak. He pressured the Virginia Board of Health to pass a set of unnecessarily burdensome building regulations that threaten to close the majority of the state’s abortion clinics. He supports the passage of radical “personhood” legislation giving fertilized eggs rights. He attempted to defund Planned Parenthood in Virginia. He has stated that his “ultimate goal” is to “make abortion disappear in America.”
Although Cuccinelli has tried to convince voters this year that his focus as governor would not be on social issues, he cannot hide his regressive, anti-choice beliefs from Virginia women who, according to the new data, will take their concern for protecting reproductive choice to the ballot box.
Larry Klayman is angry at President Obama for dismissing the “phony scandals” that are distracting attention away from meaningful policy debates, charging that Obama “is not merely a disgrace, but a dangerous man whose allegiance to Islam, disdain of Jews and Christians, and favoritism toward all things black have cast him into the role of a very cheap, bigoted and hateful man.”
He warns that Obama is a “Muslim through and through” and “a Hitler-like figure, finding scapegoats such as whites, Christians and Jews to use to rally the shock troops for his black-Muslim crusade.”
Indeed, “Obama is even more of a dangerous tyrant than King George III,” Klayman argues, since at least King George III wasn’t “a racist Muslim socialist” who sought to “reduce the United States to the equivalent of a socialist, African-Muslim nation.”
“Remove him from office,” the totally-not-dramatic Klayman writes, “before all is lost.”
Plain and simple, Obama is the most despicable, criminally minded fraud to have ever occupied the Oval Office. He is not merely a disgrace, but a dangerous man whose allegiance to Islam, disdain of Jews and Christians, and favoritism toward all things black have cast him into the role of a very cheap, bigoted and hateful man. In contrast, Obama makes the felonious former President Bill Clinton look like a Boy Scout.
Second, coming on the heels of the Trayvon statement, this week also brought yet another indication that Obama is a Muslim through and through, which not coincidentally was the "faith" of his revered Kenyan father. Trying to resurrect his "brothers" of the Muslim Brotherhood who were just ousted from power by the Egyptian military, Obama suspended military aid to this largest of Middle Eastern nations, obviously to send a signal to this granddaddy of Islamic terrorist groups that he supported its return to power. A return of the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt would be a blow to the Jewish state of Israel, not coincidentally also the birthplace of Jesus Christ and the rest of the Western world.
The primary aspect these two events have in common is that they show that Obama has a clear mindset to further what he perceives to be the interests of "his" people, meaning blacks and Muslims, at the expense of everyone else. He is thus a Hitler-like figure, finding scapegoats such as whites, Christians and Jews to use to rally the shock troops for his black-Muslim crusade. These words may sound harsh, but not in the context of the "fraudster in chief's" actions during his first five years in office. Coupled with his words, the nation is on its way to destruction unless this dangerous man is legally stopped in his slimy, prejudiced and hateful tracks.
And, this is why I have said on many occasions that Obama is even more of a dangerous tyrant than King George III. The king may have wanted to rape the colonies of their wealth and exert his monarchical control over their populace, but he was never a racist Muslim socialist bent on remaking our Judeo-Christian culture and roots and furthering an agenda that seeks to destroy our Anglo-American heritage. It is now clear that Obama will use whatever means are at his disposal to reduce the United States to the equivalent of a socialist, African-Muslim nation.
Time is short before this man succeeds at this mission. And, that is why the so-called phony scandals to which he refers must be used as a means to remove him from office, before all is lost.
I am doing my part through lawsuits and a citizens' grand jury in Ocala, Fla. But now is the time for others to also seriously step up to the plate, in what has become a "life and death" struggle for the heart and soul of the nation. We have seen the eyes of the enemy, and they are clearly focused on the destruction of the inspired vision of our Founding Fathers and our way of life as one nation under a Judeo-Christian God.
One of the small joys of our day is receiving the Family Research Council’s daily “Washington Update” email, which is frequently accompanied by an ambitious pun related to the day’s news. (Recent examples: “Florist Won't Back-Petal on Marriage,” “Hawaii Leis It on the Line for Marriage,” “Muffins Signal Bran New Day at Justice” and an all-time favorite, the St. Patrick’s Day-themed “Defending DOMA: Pros and Leprechauns”).
But, as we were reminded today, sometimes the FRC can take its commitment to punny-ness just a little bit too far. Here are ten of the FRC’s most truly tasteless subject line puns along with excerpts from the emails they accompanied.
Sandy Rios of the American Family Association dedicated part of her radio show today to criticizing the National Education Association for its strong stance in favor of LGBT equality and gay-inclusive curricula. “I think that we can lay at the feet of the National Education Association the reason why this culture has been slouching toward Gomorrah,” Rios told her listeners. “The NEA has been for the last twenty years indoctrinating our children.”
One of her guests, a South Carolina teacher and pastor named Ira Thomas, attended the recent NEA convention in Atlanta and lamented that he is “accused of hating” because he opposes the NEA’s pro-gay “indoctrination plans.” “To me it’s like teaching people about how to use crack. It’s a dangerous game to play on,” Thomas said.
The Heritage Foundation has been trying to position itself at the center of the opposition to the Senate’s bipartisan immigration proposal, an effort that got off to a rocky start when the group issued a deeply flawed report on immigration reform’s costs that was co-written by an enthusiastic racist.
Like most opponents of meaningful immigration reform, Heritage opposes creating a roadmap to citizenship for the undocumented immigrants who are currently living and working in the United States. But, like its allies in the GOP, the group doesn’t really have an idea of how else to respond to the undocumented population. In an interview with the Latino news site Voxxi last week, Heritage policy analyst Jessica Zuckerman admitted that the group doesn’t have any suggested plan when it comes to undocumented immigrants. “That is the big question,” she said, “and I wish somebody actually had an answer on that.”
What should be done with undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States?
That is the big question, and I wish somebody actually had an answer on that, which is why I say this dialogue we are having on immigration reform is important so that we keep discussing this and trying to reach an answer that folks agree on. We haven’t gotten there yet, but it’s important that we’re having this conversation to get to that point.
Following CBN reporter Paul Strand’s heavily slanted report where he claimed that gay rights may be “biggest threat to religious liberty in all of America’s history,” Pat Robertson went on to argue that the gay community is on a mission to “destroy the church if need be, then to destroy the military if need be, then to destroy marriage if need be, then to destroy businesses if they need be.” He said that the gay rights advocates won’t stop until “the way they perform sex acts is acceptable” in society and turn America into Ancient Rome, “where sexual morality had gone out the window.”
He asked: “If there are 100 million Christians in America, maximum two percent of the population are homosexual and one percent are lesbian, is that minority going to destroy all of the foundations of the morality of the majority?”
Robertson said that Christians may soon be imprisoned over their “loving” anti-gay stance.
“If you see somebody who is not going to go to Heaven and you really love him you want to do what it takes to get him into Heaven, if you don’t care about him you let him go to Hell,” Robertson continued. “We are a people who love and yet now your love is going to put you in jail because the people who are going to Hell feel their lifestyle—think, ‘well, we want to be affirmed.’”
Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) has joined two far-right groups led by White Nationalists in filing an amicus brief in a case involving gun crimes. Stockman’s brief in United States v. Abramski seeks to weaken the power of the government to prosecute cases dealing with “straw purchases” of guns and false statements made on required forms for gun purchases.
Peroutka is a board member of the white supremacist and secessionist League of the South and denounces the Union’s victory in what he calls the “War Between the States.” He even pledged to use the Institute on the Constitution to aid the League of the South and advance the cause of imposing biblical law.
Pratt’s ties to White Nationalist and anti-Semitic groups are also well documented, and he joined Peroutka at a July 4 event hosted by an anti-Semitic rock band. Pratt also fears that the Obama administration may be building a black paramilitary force that will target straight, Christian white people.
We wonder how a Republican congressman’s decision to team up with White Nationalist-linked groups will mesh with the GOP’s new minority outreach campaign….
Brooke Goldstein of the Lawfare Project is trying to use the attention surrounding the Anthony Weiner sexting scandal to warn that his wife and Clinton aide Huma Abedin is a secret Muslim Brotherhood operative. While on Fox News, Sean Hannity and Monica Crowley eagerly agreed with Goldstein’s claim that that Huma Abedin is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda.
However, Goldstein didn’t get such a favorable response on Fox’s Red Eye, where host Greg Gutfeld and other panelists laughed at her attempt to resuscitate the discredited smear campaign against Abedin.
“Why is Weiner so un-attracted to Huma Abedin? Perhaps it’s because she is connected with Islamists who want to kill us!” Goldstein said, before alleging that Abedin “poses one of the greatest national security threats of this administration.”
Goldstein then alleged that Abedin “knows” about her husband’s sexting ways but won’t leave him because of her Muslim Brotherhood ties, or something.
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul spoke, along with Ted Cruz, at this week’s Religious Right summit in Iowa, organized by Christian-nation advocate David Lane. Echoing themes from his speech last year to the Faith and Freedom Coalition, Paul gave his audience what they wanted, calling for a “revival” and comparing current times to the leadup to the Civil War.
“America is in a full-blown crisis, I think a spiritual crisis,” he said. Quoting Lincoln, Paul declared that we have “arrived at a day of reckoning” similar to the “tumultuous time when the country was being torn apart” before the Civil War.
“What America needs is a revival,” Paul says. “A war is being waged between those who understand and embrace America’s exceptional founding and those who simply want to divide.”
He closes his remarks with a quotation from Thomas Paine, a noted critic of Christianity.
Clips from the speech were originally posted by CBN’s David Brody.
The Religious Right publication Charisma today published a column by ex-gay activist Janet Boynes arguing that the devil is behind the gay community’s alleged plan “to indoctrinate an entire generation of American children with pro-homosexual propaganda and eliminate traditional values from American society.”
She praises the American Family Association affiliate One Million Moms for their campaign against “Good Luck Charlie” for featuring a same-sex couple, warning that the gay “game plan” is to “get into our schools and change the mindset of our children” and “create a new America based on sexual promiscuity in which the values you and I cherish are long forgotten.”
After arguing that the devil is responsible for such “gay propaganda,” Boynes writes that “One Million Moms should push for Disney and many other shows to air a show with a person that has left the life of homosexuality.”
As we sit and watch TV, all we see is the homosexual community taking over the airwaves. Why? because they are moving forward and not looking back. They have a game plan, and that plan is to get into our schools and change the mindset of our children, and in turn they, the children, will change the culture. Let me say this in plain English: The gay community wants to indoctrinate an entire generation of American children with pro-homosexual propaganda and eliminate traditional values from American society. Their ultimate dream is to create a new America based on sexual promiscuity in which the values you and I cherish are long forgotten.
As I read what those amazing One Million Moms did by calling Disney to shut down the airing of lesbian moms on the show Good Luck Charlie, I felt relieved to know we are still fighting for what is valuable. That was a bold move, and I commend them for taking a stand.
Really? Don't you see what's happening here, church? The gay community is getting its message across—that change in sexual orientation is not possible—only because they have been given airtime on many TV shows and movies, and the media has had a voice in telling us what is right and true in their eyes. On Thursday, for example, Good Morning America aired a story of a high school coach from Yonkers, N.Y., who came out to his basketball players.
Nothing has changed. The devil is still trying to deceive many today, and we as the church have taken the bait, hook, line and sinker. Eve said in Genesis 3:13, "The serpent deceived me" (NKJV). I'm not even going to discuss the repercussions of that choice and how it has affected humanity today.
The Bible clearly says in Revelation 12:9 that the devil will deceive the whole world. Anything contrary to the truth of God's Word is a lie. Are you being deceived by the gay propaganda?
One Million Moms should push for Disney and many other shows to air a show with a person that has left the life of homosexuality. When have we seen this kind of lifestyle being shown in a positive light on Lifetime movies, in secular media, on Capitol Hill, at the White House or on any other television show, for that matter?
The Christian Broadcasting Network has released more footage from the recent Religious Right summit in Iowa organized by David Lane and featuring speakers like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. Cruz, who told CBN in an interview that gay rights advocates intend to dispose of the First Amendment and pass hate speech laws, won plaudits from the audience of conservative activists for his attacks on gay rights advocates and “judicial activism.”
“On marriage there is no issue in which we need to be more on our knees because the momentum is with the opponents of traditional marriage,” Cruz said. “We’re facing an assault on marriage.”
He scolded “unelected judges” who think “we know better” on marriage, and urged pastors to “to speak to your congregations and to mobilize the people, and mobilize them more than anything to pray.”
On marriage there is no issue in which we need to be more on our knees because the momentum is with the opponents of traditional marriage. We saw a decision from the US Supreme Court, a decision that some have herald, even some conservatives have herald, I think that decision was an abject demonstration of judicial activism. Five unelected judges saying we are going to set aside the policy preference of the state of California, the citizens not of some crazy right-wing state—California. The citizens of California went to vote and they voted and said in the state of California we want marriage to be the traditional union of one man and one woman, and the US Supreme Court, as a result of its decision said you have no right to define marriage in your state, we know better. We’re facing an assault on marriage. As pastors, each of you has a special responsibility and a special ability to speak to your congregations and to mobilize the people, and mobilize them more than anything to pray.
Amazingly, Jerry Newcombe of Truth In Action Ministries disproves the entire theory of evolution every day when he logs into his computer. In a column arguing that the “Cambrian explosion” debunks evolution (actually, it doesn’t), Newcombe begins by saying that logging into a computer and entering a password makes it clear “how impossible evolution is”:
Every time I log into a computer and have to enter my password, I'm reminded of how impossible evolution is.
One little mistake on the keypad, and I can't log in. There's even a website where I seem to be in permanent "log-in purgatory." I can't login ever. Granted, it's operator error. But still...
How does this tie to evolution? Because if evolution were true, then we are to believe a whole series of complex sequences managed to get everything right---repeatedly.
Well, there you have it. Take that, science!
Count Don Feder out of the growing movement of evangelicals who are championing immigration reform. The World Congress of Families spokesman writes today that undocumented immigrants shouldn’t be treated with compassion, but instead like violent pagan forces: “The illegal immigrants swarming over our southern border are more akin to the pagan armies which regularly invaded the land of Israel and were repulsed by military force. The Bible is a guide for living, not a suicide pact.”
“Securing our borders with an amnesty is like promoting chastity with condoms,” Feder continues. “Political compassion has resulted in most of the horrors of modernity,” such as communism and “the destruction of the black family.”
He warns that an immigration reform law “will end up electing a lot of pro-abortion, anti-marriage leftists” as “illegals will elect a host of welfare-state Democrats.” “This is a constituency that yearns to breathe free stuff,” he writes.
Feder even makes the false claim that immigrants tend to be criminals: “Apparently, murder, rape and vehicular homicide are jobs Americans won't do.”
Securing our borders with an amnesty is like promoting chastity with condoms. In 1986, we amnestied 2.7 million to fix our "broken immigration system." Now we have at least 11.1 million. In the mid-1980s, they were coming at a rate of 500,000 a year. Now we're getting a million annually. If this amnesty passes, how many will we be dealing with in another 20 years?
"Appropriate penalties" and earned citizenship are a smoke screen. The penalties assessed will never be collected. (It's in the left's interest to remove any impediments to citizenship/voting.) Citizenship won't be earned. (How, by memorizing the Gettysburg Address?) It will be bestowed.
The alien or foreigner did not receive permission to live in the land. The illegal immigrants swarming over our southern border are more akin to the pagan armies which regularly invaded the land of Israel and were repulsed by military force. The Bible is a guide for living, not a suicide pact.
Based on his misreading of Scriptures, Rev. [Samuel] Rodriguez calls for compassion toward "the least among us," which apparently does not include the citizens preyed on by criminal aliens, or the unskilled worker who loses his job because he can't compete with cheap labor imported from Tijuana.
Compassion and politics are a volatile mix. In the guise of fighting poverty, 1960s Great Society programs destroyed the black family and gave us an 80% out-of-wedlock birth rate in the inner city.
Currently, anti-family ideologues are playing the compassion card against those of us who resist the deconstruction of marriage. In his majority opinion overruling DOMA, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said defenders of the natural family are telling gays that their unions are inferior to ours. No wonder homosexuals think Republicans are mean.
This is a constituency that yearns to breathe free stuff. An April 2012 Pew Hispanic Center poll showed a staggering 75% want more government services, compared to 41% of the general public. Among the public at large, 45% want smaller government, against 19% of Hispanics.
Ultimately, it's all academic. Hispanics don't vote on social issues. Only one House member whose district borders Mexico voted against Obamacare. In pursuit of government deluxe, newly enfranchised illegals will elect a host of welfare-state Democrats, who will vote predictably on abortion, marriage and judicial nominations. In the name of caring for the least-among-us, evangelicals will end up electing a lot of pro-abortion, anti-marriage leftists.
The strangers among us include a quarter of all inmates in the federal prison system. With another 297,000 in state prisons and jails, they comprise 16.4% of the country's total prison population. Apparently, murder, rape and vehicular homicide are jobs Americans won't do.
Political compassion has resulted in most of the horrors of modernity – from the French Revolution (liberty, equality and fraternity aren't bad things) to communism (to each according to his need), to the destruction of the black family (in the name of a war on poverty) to the war on the family (in the name of equality).
What the left never learned some on the right are quickly forgetting.
Pat Buchanan dedicates his latest syndicated column to New York mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner’s most recent sexting scandal, which he attempts to put into context by pointing to the moral failings of every other major New York politician. After all, Buchanan writes, one of Weiner’s main opponents in the mayoral race is Christine Quinn, “a lesbian about to marry another lesbian” (Quinn is in fact already married) and “the sitting mayor and governor are divorced and living with women not their wives.” Not only that, Buchanan says, but former mayor Rudolph Giuliani and former senator Hillary Clinton both marched in New York City gay pride parades.
Buchanan concludes that these New York political leaders, along with the decriminalization of homosexuality, indicate that Weiner is “a mainstream liberal” and that we have become “a mentally and morally sick society.”
And Weiner's conduct does seem weird, creepy, crazy.
But it was not illegal. And as it was between consenting adults, was it immoral -- by the standards of modern liberalism?
In 1973, the "Humanist Manifesto II," a moral foundation for much of American law, declared: "The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered 'evil.' ... Individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire."
Is this not what Anthony was up to? Why then the indignation?
Consider how far we are along the path that liberalism equates with social and moral progress. Ronald Reagan was the first and is the only divorced and remarried man elected president.
But the front-runner in the New York mayor's race today quit Congress as a serial texter of lewd photos to anonymous women. The front-runner in the city comptroller's race was "Client No. 9" in the prostitution ring of the convicted madam who is running against him.
Weiner's strongest challenger for mayor is a lesbian about to marry another lesbian. The sitting mayor and governor are divorced and living with women not their wives. The former mayor's second wife had to go to court to stop his girlfriend from showing up at Gracie Mansion.
Weiner looks like a mainstream liberal.
Are we, possibly, a mentally and morally sick society?
Thirty year ago, homosexual acts were crimes. The Supreme Court has since discovered sodomy to be a constitutional right. State courts are discovering another new right -- of homosexuals to marry.
To call homosexuality unnatural, immoral or a mental disorder will soon constitute a hate crime in America.
Once we cast aside morality rooted in religion -- as the "Humanist Manifesto II" insists we do -- who draws the line on what is tolerable in the new dispensation.
Upon what moral ground do we stand to deny a man many wives, should he wish to leave behind many children, and the wives all consent to the arrangement? Biblically and historically, polygamy was more acceptable than homosexuality.
The second is now a constitutional right. Why not the first?
Are we not indeed headed "inevitably to utter irrationality and eventually political, as well as moral, chaos"?
Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Hillary Clinton marched in gay pride parades with the North American Man/Boy Love Association. Anyone doubt that NAMBLA will one day succeed in having the age of consent for sex between men and boys dropped into the middle or low teens?
WorldNetDaily’s Diana West is out with a new column entitled “Huma Abedin: Muslim Brotherhood Princess.”
Of course, since this is WorldNetDaily after all, she somehow managed to link this to Obamacare.
West maintains that the health care reform law means that the Communists were the real winners of the Cold War as the “totalitarian” law creates a “super-state” that will destroy the Republic.
She argues that the “cover-up” of Huma Abedin’s status as “a veritable Muslim Brotherhood princess” is part of a plan to shield Americans from the “Muslim Brotherhood penetration of the federal policy-making chain”: “[Michele] Bachmann was crucified, by Democrats and Republicans alike for asking urgently important questions about national security.”
With our guards down to the Marxist-Muslim conspiracy, Americans will become complacent to the supposed Islamic infiltration of government and the dangers of Obamacare: “don’t worry. We ‘won’ the Cold War. Obamacare, here we come. At this rate, we’ll declare ‘victory’ in the so-called war on terror and, before you know it, become a leading outpost of the caliphate.”
Nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks after they seized power in 1917. Nearly a century later, the U.S. enacted “Obamacare.”
Who won the Cold War again? This is one of the questions I work over in my new book, “American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character” (St. Martin’s Press). Can we realistically claim liberty and free markets triumphed over collectivism when today there is only a thin Senate line trying to fend off Obamacare’s totalitarian intrusions into citizens’ lives? We see perhaps a dozen or so patriots led by conservative ace Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, gallantly mustering forces to defund further enforcement of this government behemoth aborning. (Call your senators and ask them to join – or tell you why they didn’t at the next town hall.) How can we maintain that the republic endured when a centralized super-state has taken its place?
So, once more, who really won the Cold War? The question is better framed when we realize that the battleground where the Free World met Marx was also psychological. Consciously or not, we struggled against an insidious Marxist ideology that was always, at root, an assault on our nation’s character.
The most recent manifestation of victory over the American character shows through the Anthony Weiner-Huma Abedin scandal. This scandal is a paradoxical double whammy of both exposure and cover-up.
True, the barbs of Huma’s ambition – as naked as her husband’s dirty pics – have broken through the gauzy chatter. But cut off from context, they, too, end up perpetuating what is, in fact, the great Huma Abedin cover-up.
It is not enough to analyze Huma Abedin as a “political wife.” Abedin is also a veritable Muslim Brotherhood princess. As such, the ideological implications of her actions – plus her long and privileged access to U.S. policy-making through Hillary Clinton – must be considered, particularly in the context of national security.
If the Abedin-Muslim Brotherhood story rings any bells, it is probably because of Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. Last summer, Bachmann, along with four other House Republicans, raised the issue of Huma Abedin among other examples of possible Muslim Brotherhood penetration of the federal policy-making chain. They asked inspectors general at five departments, including the State Department, to investigate their concerns, but nothing happened – nothing, that is, except that Bachmann was crucified, by Democrats and Republicans alike for asking urgently important questions about national security.
This made the entire subject, already taboo, positively radioactive – with Huma Abedin becoming the poster victim of this supposed “McCarthyism” redux.
End of story. Never mind facts. Never mind also that in his day, Sen. Joseph McCarthy was asking urgently important questions about national security, too.
But don’t worry. We “won” the Cold War. Obamacare, here we come. At this rate, we’ll declare “victory” in the so-called war on terror and, before you know it, become a leading outpost of the caliphate.
Rep. Steve King has taken plenty of heat from both the left and the right over the past few days for his assertion that for every valedictorian DREAMer there are “another hundred” who “weigh 130 pounds and they’ve got calves the size of cantaloupes because they’ve been hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert.”
Faced with criticism from House Speaker John Boehner and other fellow Republicans, King has refused to back down, saying “it’s not something that I’m making up,” and that his comments were “objective” and “might be the best informed in the entire U.S. Congress.” He wrapped up his case on the House floor yesterday, declaring that his critics would cause the downfall of the United States and of Western Civilization.
In an interview with Iowa talk radio host Simon Conway on Wednesday, King offered a similar tirade, accusing his critics of making “unrestrained, undisciplined, divisive remarks” and warning that if his opponents are allowed to have their way “this nation will eventually fail because we’ll completely lose our objectivity and we’ll be driven by our emotions instead of our reason.”
If we can’t discuss objective truth among people that are elected representatives in the United States Congress, if it has to turn personal, if they have to make these kind of remarks, these unrestrained, undisciplined, divisive remarks, at first I’d say, how could they have listened to the tape that you’ve run and come to such a conclusion? But second is, if there’s no objective discussion, if we can’t bring up the other side of the coin, then this nation will eventually fail because we’ll completely lose our objectivity and we’ll be driven by our emotions instead of our reason.
In an interview with Steve Deace yesterday, Frank Schubert, the top campaign strategist for anti-gay groups including the National Organization for Marriage, accused the Supreme Court of “shredding of the Constitution” with its “horrendous” court decision on Prop 8. Schubert was upset that the ruling cleared the way for attorneys general not to defend certain laws.
However, administrations from those of Harry Truman to George W. Bush (including Ronald Reagan) have refused to defend laws they believe are unconstitutional. “It’s going to come back I think and wreak havoc in lots of other areas,” Schubert continued.
He also called the Windsor decision “preposterous” and claimed it “calls into question the integrity of the governmental process itself. These judges have now put themselves as our supreme overlords, the overseers of our conduct.”