But that’s not all.
According to Wiles, people are having strange dreams where people eat a “fake manna” that represents “Lucifer trying to replicate what God did and feeding his people,” leading to a new demonic “spiritual transformation.”
Kincaid linked those dreams back to… Al Jazeera’s purchase of Current TV, which he claims proves that Al Gore is pushing a demonic Islamist force into America.
One of my columns about this was titled, ‘Al Gore, the Future and the Global Jihad.’ Whatever he is doing, he is certainly opening us up to domination by this global force, whether it’s spiritual or not or whether it’s demonic, that the international Islamic movement is part of it, clearly he is working with them but it could be even worse than that.
He argued that Al Jazeera should not even be allowed to broadcast in the U.S. because it is a “terrorist entity” that “is not protected by our First Amendment.” He even urged Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) to investigate the “treasonous” acquisition.
Al Jazeera is not protected by our First Amendment because it is a terrorist entity. It is the voice of the Muslim Brotherhood, which of course spawned Al Qaeda and Hamas, among other terrorist groups. It is the voice of Al Qaeda to this day. It was the voice of Osama bin Laden who was responsible for nearly 3,000 dead on 9/11. So this is a terrorist entity and under our law you cannot engage in criminal activity involving terrorism. So we have written to Congressman Michael McCaul of Texas who is the new chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee saying let’s have a hearing into this, let’s stop this deal, at least get all the facts out on the table because we believe this deal is illegal.
It’s not just dirty oil money it’s blood money because this is the terror channel, this is the Al Qaeda network. I’ve told people repeatedly that this would be the equivalent during World War II of inviting the German and Japanese fascists onto American soil and giving them access to American broadcast facilities so they could undermine the war effort. Remember if you will going back in time that Axis Sally and Tokyo Rose who were American propagandists for the enemy were picked up after the war and convicted and sentenced to prison for treason. By the same token, I think this deal is treasonous and it has to be stopped but we’ve got to get the Congress of their butts.
On his radio show Monday, the American Family Association’s Buster Wilson took a page from his colleague Bryan Fischer in warning that while President Obama is not the Antichrist, he and his administration are “part of the Antichrist spirit.” Wilson contradicted a caller who strongly suggested that the president is the Antichrist, but added that the actual Antichrist “is already in the world today” and that there is an “Antichrist spirit about both the Obama administration and a lot of what is going on in America today.”
I’m not ready to call the president the Antichrist. I still have a lot of biblical problems with assigning him that title. I do believe that there are some Antichrist spirit about both the Obama administration and a lot of what is going on in America today. John said in 1 John, ‘There are many Antichrists that are out there now in the world.’ The Antichrist, I believe, is already in the world today, I believe we are that close to his revelation. But I am one of the ones theologically who believes that we’re going to be out of here before the Antichrist is revealed. So I’m not looking for the Antichrist, I’m looking for Jesus Christ, but there are those that have clearly the Antichrist spirit about their work and decisions and there is much going on in America today that would classify being a part of the Antichrist spirit. But no, I’m not ready to call the president the Antichrist. But I appreciate your logic though.
Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy In Media appeared on TruNews with host Rick Wiles last week to discuss the nominations of Chuck Hagel and John Brennan. The two agreed that the U.S. would have arrested Barack Obama by now if only he weren’t the president.
Kincaid: We’ve got a President who couldn’t pass a background check, you know it’s not too surprising when we got a President like this putting into place people like Brennan, Hagel, we can go down the list, Van Jones, tick them off. It’s just that he gets away with it and the Republicans, I remember at our conference in Washington before the election, we had Congressman Lamar Smith there saying ‘well we’re not going to pursue impeachment because we hope the American people vote this guy out on November 6.’ Well, that didn’t work out so well, did it?
Wiles: No it didn’t. You know Barack Obama, if he wasn’t president, if he just worked into a government agency and said he wanted to apply for a job and he filled out an application, I think while he was sitting there and they were doing a background check on him I think agents would come out and handcuff him.
Kincaid: Yeah, yeah, you’re right. I mean, this is the guy—we don’t have to go through the whole history—this is the guy who Sarah Palin put it, ‘palled around with terrorists.’
Wiles also embraced John Guandolo’s conspiracy theory that Brennan is a Saudi secret agent while Kincaid claimed that Hagel is working for those “facilitating this global jihad against America.” Kincaid called Obama the “Marxist Muslim in the White House” and accused him of assisting the Muslim Brotherhood.
Wiles: [Guandolo] said, ‘his conversion to Islam was the culmination of a counterintelligence operation against him to recruit him.’ ‘As a Muslim,’ Mr. Guandolo, the FBI agent, said, ‘Mr. Brennan became friendly with members of Hamas.’ Last November, former CIA covert operations manager Claire Lopez was a guest on TruNews, she described the infiltration of Muslim Brotherhood members into U.S. government jobs as ‘massive.’ So is Mr. Obama quietly orchestrating an Islamic takeover of the American government? The two big appointments before the U.S. Senate, our CIA nominee John Brennan, accused by an FBI agent of secretly converting to Islam, and Secretary of Defense nominee Chuck Hagel, Cliff Kincaid has been on the trail of Chuck Hagel and he’s on the telephone from Washington to tell us wear the rabbit trail leads us…. So Cliff, when you went down the bunny trail following Chuck Hagel’s tracks, what did you discover?
Kincaid: Rick, everything leads back to the global jihad. All elements of Obama’s foreign policy involve support for the Muslim Brotherhood, including its mouthpiece, Al Jazeera. Chuck Hagel is part of the puzzle. Brennan, that you just mentioned, is another but of course ultimately, the buck so-to-speak stops with Obama, the Marxist Muslim in the White House.
Kincaid: Hagel goes before these Arab institutes and Arab audiences and basically badmouths Israel, attacks the United States, attacks the relationship with Israel and we’re just trying to get more information and evidence about what motivates this guy. Clearly, he’s in the pay of those who are part and parcel of facilitating this global jihad against America.
Retired Adm. James A. Lyons took to the Washington Times today to push the burgeoning Homeland-inspired conspiracy theory that John Brennan, President Obama’s nominee to lead the CIA, is a Saudi secret agent.
The theory was first cooked up by John Guandolo, a former FBI agent who resigned from his job after he was charged with having an affair with a star witness in the corruption trial of former congressman William Jefferson, among other improprieties. He has since made a career promoting anti-Muslim conspiracies.
In the Washington Times, Lyons writes that Saudi Arabia’s “recruitment of Mr. Brennan to the ideology of Islam” makes him a security risk.
“It’s interesting that no counterintelligence alarm was triggered at the time that this alleged conversion was occurring,” Lyons writes. This could, of course, be because there is no proof it ever happened. But Lyons supposes, “Most likely, that’s because at that time the sophisticated Islamic objectives driving the global jihad movement by the Muslim Brotherhood were not understood by those who witnessed his ‘conversion.’”
Lyons goes on to claim that Brennan has a “track record of empowering the Muslim Brotherhood both domestically and abroad” and “allowed the jihadist enemy access to the highest level of government,” such as in his meetings with “terrorists like Nihad Awad.”
For the record, Awad is the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Two key national security nominations by President Obama are up for confirmation following Congress‘ recess this week: former Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel to be secretary of defense, and John O. Brennan, the president’s key counterterrorism adviser, to be the director of the CIA. Both candidates have had to address issues based on their past and current activities and associations. Troublingly, a number of questions still remain unanswered.
One explosive issue is a report by John Guandolo that broke last week on Tom Trento’s “TrentoVision Show” and also was carried by Glenn Beck on Feb. 11. The report stated that Mr. Brennan was converted to Islam while CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia from 1996 to ‘99. Let’s be clear: In America, a man’s religion can never be a condition to his holding a government position. It is protected by both the First Amendment and Article 6 of the Constitution. Therefore, even if it is true that he converted, Mr. Brennan’s religion should not be an issue.
However, according to Mr. Guandolo — a former SWAT team leader at the FBI, counterterrorism and Muslim Brotherhood specialist and Marine platoon commander — what should be an issue was the Saudis’ targeted recruitment of Mr. Brennan to the ideology of Islam while he was serving as the CIA station chief in Riyadh. This was not just a conversion but a political act by a foreign intelligence service.
If verified, this would indicate Mr. Brennan’s susceptibility, whether witting or unwitting, to manipulation by a foreign intelligence entity. It’s interesting that no counterintelligence alarm was triggered at the time that this alleged conversion was occurring. Most likely, that’s because at that time the sophisticated Islamic objectives driving the global jihad movement by the Muslim Brotherhood were not understood by those who witnessed his “conversion.”
As Clare Lopez, from the Center for Security Policy, has pointed out, our counterintelligence defense system is broken. The Muslim Brotherhood’s core threat doctrine — the ideology of Islamic jihad and Shariah law — is seen as benign. Mr. Brennan’s activities as the president’s top counterterrorism adviser have been at the forefront in the Muslim Brotherhood effort in the United States. The Brotherhood has succeeded in convincing the U.S. government to remove from official documents and training curricula all references to Islamic doctrine, Shariah law and scriptures that relate them to terrorism. Further, scheduled lectures on the true threat from Islam have been canceled, and instructors have been barred from future presentations.
Mr. Brennan’s track record of empowering the Muslim Brotherhood both domestically and abroad allowed the jihadist enemy access to the highest level of government under the stealth guise of “nonviolent outreach partners.” For example, terrorists like Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations who has been linked to Hamas; and leaders from the Islamic Society of North America, unindicted co-conspirators from the Holy Land Foundation trial in 2008, work with national security staff providing input to U.S. counterterrorism strategies. That is hardly comforting.
It cannot be denied that U.S. policy on Islam, Shariah law and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular has undergone a sea change during the time Mr. Brennan has had influence on our national security. Certainly, Mr. Brennan cannot be confirmed until a full vetting has taken place.
American Life League founder Judie Brown says that the Roman Catholic Church must drive out pro-choice and pro-gay equality Catholics from the church because they are under “demonic deceit.”
She argues that Catholic Democrats such as the late Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Kathleen Sebelius advocate “anti-Christian” positions such as the decriminalization of abortion and “anti-family militant homosexuality and the destruction of marriage.”
“As the faithful watch the accelerated destruction of morality in America and the Henry the VIII style tactics of the attempted destruction of Catholicism in America by Obama and his ‘Catholic’ drones, one wonders where most of America’s bishops are,” Brown laments, “Why have these high-profile destructive Catholics not been publically rebuked?”
This nation’s moral decline is astounding not only because it has been a relatively swift slide, but more importantly because Catholics have taken leading roles in bringing about the decline.
Until the time of his death, Ted Kennedy was, for years, the most influential U.S. politician advocating an anti-Christian moral culture in America. While doing so he experienced good personal relations, if not admiration, from many American Catholic prelates.
Catholic vice president Joe Biden first took public office in 1972. Since the decriminalization of abortion in 1973, Mr. Biden has supported every major effort to protect and expand abortion in America. Most recently Mr. Biden has become a proponent of the destruction of the covenant of marriage by redefining it to suit the winds of the day which favor so-called same-sex marriage.
Nancy Pelosi, Catholic congresswoman and a graduate of Catholic Trinity Washington University, has been a consistently fierce opponent of life. She has worked doggedly to expand the “right” to abortion in America and to enshrine contraception and sterilization as the force de jure on America’s employers—including the Church. She is also a staunch advocate of forcing the acceptance of anti-family militant homosexuality and the destruction of marriage as “human rights” in America.
Catholic Kathleen Sebelius, as the head of Health and Human Services, is singularly responsible for wreaking upon the American Catholic faithful her Planned Parenthood “HHS” mandate that dictates that all employers pay for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilizations, and contraception for their employees. Kathleen Sebelius is also a graduate of Catholic Trinity Washington University.
As the faithful watch the accelerated destruction of morality in America and the Henry the VIII style tactics of the attempted destruction of Catholicism in America by Obama and his “Catholic” drones, one wonders where most of America’s bishops are.
Why have these high-profile destructive Catholics not been publically rebuked? In fact, why did this not happen years or even decades ago? To cut right to the heart of the matter, why haven’t each of these hypocrites been publically and unequivocally excommunicated?
This near total absence of effective rebuke and call to accountability from the shepherds has created a perception that “American Catholics” are free to support intrinsic evils as “civil rights” because Catholic teachings, in their view, are subjective and arbitrary.
How many millions of people have bought into this demonic deceit and, in the process, jeopardized their souls? And where are the bishops who should risk life and limb in the defense of our Church? Why haven’t they, in a united fashion, rebuked the deceivers and championed Christ and His truth at all costs?
With only a few exceptions, they are hardly to be found.
They have far too long allowed deception and deceit without consequence and at great cost to the faithful. Now the “Catholics” who have perpetrated great public scandal and harm are looking to devour the weak shepherds and their flocks through mandates, dictates, and the total deconstruction of morality in America.
This dire situation reminds me of the biblical account in the Gospel of Mark when Christ confronts an evil spirit that has possessed a man. He commands the spirit to depart, which it does with great violence and screeching. Witnessing this, Christ’s disciples ask why they could not drive out the demon. Christ responds: “This kind can only be driven out by prayer and fasting.”
I believe the current situation in America falls into the same category. A demon of despair and compromise has afflicted a majority of our Catholic bishops, and in response faithful Catholics must pray and fast.
Therefore, I am encouraging every faithful Catholic to pray and fast for our bishops. Pray that God raises up more heroic souls who will help defend and reclaim the truth of Christ through decisive action.
Pray that each bishop will be touched by the Holy Spirit, on fire with a renewal of commitment to Christ and an active desire to abandon everything else in order to defend Christ and His Church from sacrilege—even unto death if that be God’s will.
Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America once again compared President Obama to King George III during an interview with the UK’s Channel 4 News. He told reporter Matt Frei that Americans don’t accept the “statistical argument” that a lack of gun control is linked to higher levels of gun violence, arguing that the Second Amendment is meant to “keep the government at bay.”
“When the colonists said you’ve become a tyrant, stop it, and when he wouldn’t stop, we shot, and we got rid of your King,” Pratt said, who went on to liken Obama to King George III.
Pratt said that President Obama “should remember King George III’s experience” as he “seems to forget that he was democratically elected.”
Later in the interview, Pratt said that people are “already being encouraged by the President’s actions and his words to go and buy firearms” because Obama is “doing all he can to destroy” the Second Amendment.
He added that he is “not calling the President a tyrant yet, but the President certainly has indicated he has a low regard for the law and a low regard for the Constitution.”
They would be going door-to-door to see if you’ve registered your guns. That would be, I think, a very dangerous thing for them to do. I think they had better consider how it worked out for George III.
They don’t want to be told that they’ve crossed the line and become rebels against the Constitution. They have crossed the same line that George III did and they should consider how that ended for him. Actually, he ended up in a nut house, it was pretty stressful for him and he couldn’t handle it. That’s where I see this administration; they are just completely detached from the Constitution and from the law.
The American Family Association’s Buster Wilson is latching on to a new conspiracy theory that the government will eventually try to classify Christians as mentally ill in order to “get us out of the picture.” He said that the left uses terms like “right-wing fanatics” and “radicals” so that one day the government and the CDC can level “attacks against Christians based on some form of mental illness diagnosis” since they “hate” Christians.
Someday I believe that they are going to be attacks against Christians based on some form of mental illness diagnosis. I think it is not without reason that the left refers to people like us as those loony, right-wing fanatics or right-wing radicals, far-right-wing nut jobs. I think it is by design that they use those kinds of terminologies against us because one day I think there is going to be something in the hand of doctors, something in the hands of the CDC, something in the hands of the government that will be able to classify us a certain way and get us out of the picture. Again, who does the government hate? Who are they against? Who are they worried the most about? Those are the ones they are going to attack, you keep your eyes open to that.
Wilson’s bold stance against heated political rhetoric may come as a surprise since he frequently describes progressives as the “progressive-homo-left-Christian-Bible-conservative-traditional value-hating crowd,” a “hate filled, heterophobic, christiphobic, and conservaphobic group” and “Bible hating, Christian hating, conservative knocking, vile, foul mouthed name calling, socialist hetero/Christo-haters.”
Congressman Steve Scalise (R-LA) appeared on Washington Watch with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday to discuss the State of the Union address where he pushed the standard right-wing canards that President Obama is leading an attack on freedom and trying to exploit “tragedies that he uses to his own benefit.”
Perkins: There’s not been an administration that’s been more hostile to our first freedom, our fundamental right of the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion.
Scalise: Right, look, just go in order. Right after that, he’s gone after freedom of speech and religion, now in that same speech he is going after our second amendment rights, our freedom to defend ourselves by having the ability to own guns for law-abiding citizens. All of these things he talked about, these tragedies that he uses to his own benefit, none of them would have been prevented by his own gun control measures, it just takes away the rights of law-abiding citizens.
Responding to Rep. Steny Hoyer’s insistence that Congress let the Bush tax cuts expire, Scalise falsely claimed that the tax cuts raised revenue and led to an economic boom.
Scalise: You know they are just living in some kind of parallel universe that doesn’t mesh with reality. You know I’ll just give you one point that he mentioned there Tony right out the box, he said, ‘oh we didn’t pay for the Bush tax cuts.’ Maybe Steny Hoyer needs to go back and look at the history, back in 2003 when those tax cuts took full effect the federal government actually took in forty percent more revenue, it actually brought in more money to the federal treasury to cut taxes because people had more money in their pockets and the economy took off in 2003. Go look at the history of this.
Scalise’s assertion about tax revenues also reveals that the congressman himself hasn’t taken a “look at the history of this.”
Citing data from the Congressional Budget Office, the Annenberg Public Policy Center concluded that the Bush tax policy “had a total negative effect on revenue growth,” and former Bush economist Alan Viard of the right-wing American Enterprise Institute said that there is “no dispute” among economists that “federal revenue is lower today than it would have been without the tax cuts.”
Former Reagan economist Bruce Bartlett also determined that “revenue as a share of G.D.P. was lower every year of the Bush presidency than it was in 2000,” citing this helpful chart:
source: Congressional Budget Office.
“Perhaps the whole point of the apparent Republican disinformation effort to deny that the Bush tax cuts reduced federal revenue is to make the reverse argument next year,” Bartlett writes, “allowing them to expire will not raise revenue.”
Tea Party Nation head Judson Phillips sent an email to members today calling the National Jewish Democratic Council a Nazi group that, like other liberals, is “in love with totalitarian regimes” such as Hitler’s Germany. Phillips said their statement calling on Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) to denounce Phillips’ recent comparison of liberals to Nazis is akin to Nazi book burning and proves that liberals “want to allow no dissent or freedom to disagree.”
Of course, asking a public official to denounce a group’s outrageous claims doesn’t take away anyone’s First Amendment rights, but the Tea Party Nation never really understood the Constitution anyway.
Are liberals really like the Nazis of 1930’s and 1940’s era German? Are they really the kind of people who engage in that kind of behavior? Or this just some conservative hyperbole?
Do liberals really want to silence their critics? To liberals really believe in a one party state? Do liberals really want to deny those who disagree with them the ability and the opportunity to offer different opinions?
The answer is yes.
Like the book burning Nazis of the 1930’s, the left wants to suppress all dissenting opinion.
This is not true of all liberals, only the overwhelming majority. I appear occasionally on Thom Hartman’s show on RT. Thom is very far to the left but to his credit, he brings on people like me who do not agree with him and he lets us make our points.
The vast majority of liberals are represented by people like Aaron Keyak who is the interim director of the National Jewish Democratic Committee.
After I made my blog post yesterday comparing liberals to Nazis, he took to Twitter to demand that Republicans denounce me.
He actually proved my point. Liberals do not want to discuss or debate issues. They want to silence those who disagree with them.
So did the Nazis.
The left is in love with totalitarian regimes. Obama himself has wistfully admired the power dictators have to simply impose their will.
But the truism of all totalitarian regimes is that they cannot stand criticism. If you look at the history of tyranny, the first thing every tyrant does is to try and control the press and public opinion.
When tyrants take over, freedom of thought, freedom of expression and freedom of speech are always the first things to go.
Why must conservatives stand militantly against liberalism? Liberalism is not simply a policy disagreement. It is not simply a choice between higher taxes and lower taxes. The liberal movement wants more than just to win the policy debate. They want for there not to be a debate. They want to allow no dissent or freedom to disagree.
This is why liberalism is so dangerous to America.
This is why we conservatives must fight for America because if the left has its way, we will even be allowed to speak.
Yesterday the Missouri House of Representatives gave first-round approval to a proposal requiring voters to present valid, government-issued photo identification in order to vote. As it did in a failed attempt in 2012, it includes both a constitutional amendment permitting a requirement for voter identification (which would be placed on the 2014 ballot) and legislation restricting the types of identification that can be shown at the polls. This change would have a disproportionate impact on African Americans, the elderly, low-income people, people with disabilities, and students, who are twice as likely to lack the required ID.
Reverend Isaac McCullough of St. Louis, MO, a member of People For the American Way’s African American Ministers in Action, issued the following statement:
“Faith leaders in my state worked hard in the months leading up to November to get our communities to the polls. It is disheartening to see that some of our Representatives yet again want to discourage, rather than encourage, people from voting. Suppressive voter ID laws fall especially hard on people who are already marginalized, threatening to keep many Missourians from the polls in future elections. That’s not what our democracy is supposed to be about. As faith leaders, we have fought hard to protect the right to vote – and we are not about to give up that fight anytime soon.”
After losing his bid for a second term in Congress, despite a more favorable district, Allen West is continuing his work as a fulltime conservative blowhard (but without a taxpayer-funded salary). West is working at PJ Media and appeared yesterday on Washington Watch with Family Research Council leaders Tony Perkins and Jerry Boykin, where he criticized the lifting of the bans on women in combat and gays and lesbians in the military.
West told Boykin that “the liberal progressive left” is “coming at the military so viciously and vehemently because they want to tear down that ‘last bastion of strength, honor and moral fortitude,’ things that they really don’t understand,” lamenting that the generals haven’t stopped them.
The former congressman pointed to the election of Ashley Broadway, who is married to Army Lt. Col. Heather Mack, as Fort Bragg’s 2013 “Spouse of the Year” in a Military Spouse magazine poll. Broadway had previously been turned away from joining the base’s spouses club. West said Broadway’s story will undermine military’s resolve and strength.
He added that if he was an “enemy propagandist and I look at the lifting of this combat exclusion ban I’m going to turn that my benefit.”
West: The Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy and now this policy about lifting the exclusionary ban, people are starting to ask: what are the Generals in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps thinking about in not challenging to say, ‘this can’t be done.’
Boykin: I think your points are very well taken because I think one of the consequences of this will be a further erosion of the credibility of the General officer corps in the military and all services, as well an erosion of a confidence of the Americans in our military. You know the military has always been sort of the keepers of the keys of traditional American values and I think people are starting to question it and I think that’s what you were saying.
West: You are absolutely right and you know that from firsthand experience. I believe that is a reason why the liberal progressive left are coming at the military so viciously and vehemently because they want to tear down that ‘last bastion of strength, honor and moral fortitude,’ things that they really don’t understand. Look at just recently happened at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where the ‘Military Spouse of the Year’ for Fort Bragg, North Carolina is a lesbian partner to an Army Lt. Colonel or a Colonel. These are the type of things that are starting to happen which is going to question people’s resolve as far as, what are we doing to our military? Are we focused so much on winning social engineering points for special interest points or are we supposedly focused on what we should be doing which is going out there and fighting this very strong, very vicious, very determined radical Islamist enemy. If I’m an enemy propagandist and I look at the lifting of this combat exclusion ban I’m going to turn that my benefit and my messaging is going to be: the American men don’t want to fight us so they’re turning to their women.
Meanwhile, Perkins once again said that the “social engineering that has gone on in the military” and “tampering with the military environment” under President Obama “could very well lead to a draft.”
Perkins: What you have seen since you left the military but in particular under the four years of the Obama administration, I don’t think anybody could argue with the social engineering that has gone on in the military. My concern here in part is with all this tampering with the military environment that it’s going to have an effect—might be ten years until we see the total effect—it’s going to have an effect on retention, recruitment and this could very well lead to a draft once again because the volunteers are not going to be there in this environment which has been so damaged by these policies.
DOMA’s Days Are Over
This piece is the third in a series of guest blog posts on “Why It’s Time to Dump DOMA.” In the weeks leading up to the Supreme Court arguments on the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act, we’re asking friends of PFAW to share why dumping DOMA matters to them. Be sure to check back soon for the latest post in the series.
All Americans deserve equal treatment under the law. The President has acknowledged that, as have the nine states (plus the District of Columbia) that allow gays and lesbians to marry. A number of other states offer some form of relationship recognition status. But thanks to DOMA, the federal government doesn’t recognize all legally married couples, and states can refuse to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. And in Montana, same-sex couples can’t get married to begin with. That's why I care about dumping DOMA.
I'm queer and would like the chance to marry the person I love someday. Heck, I've got a master's degree and was elected to the City Council at age 28, but I'm not to be trusted with a lifelong commitment? All loving couples should have access to the legal protections they need to take care of each other, and I don't feel like I should have to move to a city to be myself and have the kind of life I want.
I'm a fourth generation Idahoan and now a proud Montanan, and I want to raise my kid in a place where they can hike, climb, backpack, fish, and hunt just a few minutes from home. Most Montanans value fairness and dignity. They judge you more by how you treat your neighbor than what you do in the privacy of your own bedroom. They believe in following the law. I think my fellow Montanans will come around when they see the sky doesn't fall when committed same-sex couples tie the knot.
So let's do it. Let's dump DOMA, and allow all Americans to pursue happiness by marrying the person they love.
Caitlin Copple, Missoula, MT City Councilmember
Member of affiliate People For the American Way Foundation’s Young Elected Officials Network
This morning the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to approve Caitlin Halligan to be a U.S. Circuit Judge for the D.C. Circuit and Patty Shwartz to be a U.S. Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit. The Committee also approved nine District Court nominees and two nominees for the U.S. Court of International Trade.
Since 2003 Shwartz has served as a Magistrate Judge on the New Jersey U.S. District Court and includes among her supporters New Jersey governor Chris Christie. Halligan, an accomplished appellate litigator who has practiced in front of the Supreme Court, is currently General Counsel of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and has strong support from the law enforcement community in New York and around the country. She was first nominated for the seat on the D.C. Circuit in 2010 and has faced ongoing Republican obstruction despite the Court’s pressing vacancies. The D.C. Circuit Court, the nation’s second most important court, currently has four vacancies (out of only eleven judgeships). This has serious ramifications for the caseloads for each of the remaining active judges, which have continued to rise steeply in recent years.
“The need to fill vacancies has never been more pressing,” said Marge Baker, Executive Vice President of People For the American Way. “We are heartened that two highly qualified women have been approved by the Committee for the Circuit Courts. Halligan and Shwartz both deserve prompt votes.”
Of the thirteen judicial nominees voted on this morning, eight are women, six are minorities, and one is openly gay.
“These highly capable nominees come from diverse backgrounds,” Baker continued. “It is encouraging to see a list of judicial nominees who look like America.”