Jindal said that while President Obama is destroying the economy with “$18 trillion of debt, Obamacare and EPA regulations,” the greatest threat to America is Obama’s push for “secularization.”
Such “secularization,” Jindal warned, will eliminate religious freedom and “without religious liberty there is no freedom of speech, there is no freedom of association, it is worse than this president is bankrupting our country financially, morally, as well as our foreign policy standing. All of that is true but it’s worse than that. He’s trying to change the idea of America.”
He lamented that “we have never before had a president this ideologically extreme, who does not believe in American exceptionalism, does not believe in the American dream that you and I were taught, does not believe in religious liberty and has effectively, for six years, done everything he could to change our culture on all three of those areas to become a new country, a new American dream, a new conception of liberty.”
Deace said he hoped Religious Right events like Lane’s would help evangelicals find a “general” to lead them to save America from destruction.
Pat Robertson made it clear today that he shares the right-wing media’s crush on Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying on “The 700 Club” today that if Netanyahu “ran in the United States, he’d probably be elected president.”
Introducing a report that suggested that Netanyahu is facing a foreign plot to oust him from his post, Robertson said that the Israeli prime minister may have trouble forming “a coalition of various party together in order to win in the Likud,” mistaking the name of Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, with the name of Netanyahu’s political party.
Televangelist Pat Robertson, who once told viewers to destroy statues of Buddha, said today that he strongly condemns ISIS’s efforts to destroy historical treasures, even though a “700 Club” viewer pointed out that the Old Testament instructs people to destroy idols to deities.
While ISIS claims that it is destroying idols, Robertson said that they were actually smashing works of art. However, if they were destroying idols, that would be acceptable, he said: “This isn’t some heathen idol. By all means, if they were having some heathen deity and this was some mount where they were offering sacrifices, by all means destroy it, but the other I think is just art.”
“The Taliban was destroying statues of Buddha that they thought were — but Buddha’s a different religion,” he added.
A coalition of anti-gay groups is onceagain urging parents to keep their children out of school on the annual anti-bullying “Day of Silence.” The Illinois Family Institute published the call to action on its website today, signed by activists including Matt Barber, Concerned Women for America’s Penny Nance, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s Peter LaBarbera, Scott Lively, Linda Harvey, Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver, and MassResistance’s Brian Camenker.
Calling the GLSEN-sponsored event “the queen of all the numerous homosexuality-affirming activities that take place in public schools,” the activists allege that it is meant to “indoctrinate 16-year-olds.”
“We must demonstrate the boldness and perseverance of the Left if we hope to stop the relentless appropriation of public education for the promotion of homosexuality,” they exhort.
The Day of Silence has long been a target of anti-gay group’ efforts to crack down on anti-bullying efforts in schools.
The Day of Silence is the queen of all the numerous homosexuality-affirming activities that take place in public schools. It started in one university and then like a cancer metastasized to thousands of high schools, and then into middle schools. Before long it will take place in elementary schools. Leftists know that it’s easier to indoctrinate 16-year-olds than 36-year-olds and easier still to indoctrinate 6-year-olds.
GLSEN promotes the Day of Silence as an “anti-bullying” effort. If it were solely about eradicating bullying, everyone—liberals and conservatives alike—would support it. But it’s not.
The Day of Silence exploits government schools, captive audiences, and anti-bullying sentiment to advance the Left’s social, moral, and political beliefs and goals. GLSEN seeks to advance the belief that all public expressions of moral disapproval of homosexual activity are bullying.
A coalition of pro-family organizations is once again urging parents to keep their children home from school on the Day of Silence if their school administrations will be allowing students to politicize instructional time by refusing to speak. This is the only organized national effort to oppose any pro-homosexual activity or event in public schools.
The absence of conservative influence within the culture on issues related to homosexuality is to some extent the fault of conservatives. Ignorance, fear, and an astounding lack of perseverance on the parts of conservatives have turned our cultural institutions—including public education—into the playground of “progressives.” Our passivity has enabled homosexual activists and their ideological allies to become social, political, and pedagogical bullies. Evidence of that is everywhere, including in schools on the GLSEN’s annual April school event, the Day of Silence.
We must demonstrate the boldness and perseverance of the Left if we hope to stop the relentless appropriation of public education for the promotion of homosexuality.
Matt Barber , Founder and Editor-in-Chief, BarbWire
Carson uses his WND platform today to declare that the U.S. should use “every military apparatus we have: banking facilities, sanctions, you name it,” against ISIS, adding that he “would not hesitate to put boots on the ground, because nothing should be off the table.”
Carson, who once said that he would allow U.S. troops to commit war crimes, suggested that President Obama should launch an anti-ISIS coalition: “We need to be the leader and take serious action. I am extraordinarily concerned about the fact that we are not responding to the barbaric acts that are taking place, as there is a tremendous leadership void. A coalition will form if it has a leader.”
As the United States works to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, we are also dealing with ISIS as a formidable enemy that threatens our way of life. Every resource available should be used to eradicate the threat of ISIS while it is still in its adolescent stage. That means using every military apparatus we have: banking facilities, sanctions, you name it. And I would not hesitate to put boots on the ground, because nothing should be off the table.
This whole concept of “no boots on the ground because of what happened in Iraq” is silly. The threat Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida posed at that time was on a completely different level from what we are looking at now. It is immature to equate the two in terms of reactions. ISIS wants to destroy our way of life and us. We have two choices: We can sit back and wait for them, or we can use the resources we have to destroy them.
We need to be the leader and take serious action. I am extraordinarily concerned about the fact that we are not responding to the barbaric acts that are taking place, as there is a tremendous leadership void. A coalition will form if it has a leader.
I would commit everything to eliminating ISIS right now. We have to make sure that our military, which is extremely talented and maintains very good leadership, is not put into a compromised position where we are trying to micromanage things. Otherwise, we will be exposing many people to a state of grave danger.
After years of promoting the birther myth, WorldNetDaily is now embracingtheconspiracy theory that President Obama will illegally remain in power after the end of his second term. WND editor Joseph Farah writes today that since Obama was “pampered” in his youth and “never sacrificed or wanted for anything material in his life,” he and his family have been “living it up” in the White House by going on glamorous, taxpayer-funded vacations.
Citing Obama’s alleged love of vacationing, laziness and “immense satisfaction from ignoring the rule of law or placing himself and his office above it,” Farah concludes that there may be “a strong incentive for him to make the White House a more permanent home” rather than leave office.
“Do you really think Obama wants to give up the most powerful position in the world and one that affords him this kind of unimaginable, excessive, non-replicable luxury?” Farah asks.
The 2013 17-day vacation in Hawaii for the president, his family, and staff and security was estimated to cost over $4 million. Even that seems low ball to me.
And, as the story goes, they have two more years left.
Or, do they?
These folks are living it up.
Do you really think Obama wants to give up the most powerful position in the world and one that affords him this kind of unimaginable, excessive, non-replicable luxury?
Might this provide a strong incentive for him to make the White House a more permanent home?
Yes, there I go again.
It’s been a theme lately.
Last week, I dropped the suggestion that Obama might not actually vacate the office when his second term is up. Why should he? Just because it’s constitutional law? When has that ever stopped him from doing something? The answer is never.
Obama seems to derive immense satisfaction from ignoring the rule of law or placing himself and his office above it.
So let’s just consider the fact that Obama has never had it better – not even close. That’s not to say he hasn’t experienced the better things in life. He has. He got the best schooling. He’s been pampered. He never had to get his hands dirty. He never served in the military. He never sacrificed or wanted for anything material in his life.
Usually, people raised like that have high expectations for the future.
No doubt Obama will be in a position to make lots of money after the presidency, whenever he decides to end it. But it’s hard to imagine him enjoying six all-expense-paid vacations every year at his venue of choice. Not too many people live that kind of life – even with the “endowments” recent past presidents often get from their oil baron friends in the Middle East.
Do you think Obama’s about to give that up and move out of the White House to make room for Hillary Clinton?
I don’t know. The more I think about it, the less convinced I am.
WorldNetDaily hasbecomeinfatuated with a bizarre conspiracy theory that President Obama will remain in office after his second term expires, and today the far-right outlet, best known for promoting birther claims, decided to ask likely GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson the question on everyone’s minds: “Who would stop Obama from remaining in office past his second term?”
Rather than just dismiss the absurd statement outright, Carson said that the people will rise up to defend the Constitution’s limitation on a president serving more than two terms in office against Obama.
President Obama leaves office on Jan. 20, 2017 – or does he? The Internet’s abuzz with talk about the myriad of ways Obama might seek to extend his White House role – sparked in part by radio conjecture from conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh – and now at least one likely presidential candidate, Ben Carson, has weighed in to say: Don’t worry, Obama will leave.
First, the question from WND to Carson: “Who would stop Obama from remaining in office past his second term?”
And Carson’s reply, via email: “We the people would oppose it through our Constitution, the 22nd Amendment of which forbids more than two terms. Even some of the timid people in the other two branches of government would be willing to stand behind the fortified walls of our Constitution.”
The Family Research Council announced today that its president, Tony Perkins, has been invited to testify at a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing tomorrow on “protecting religious freedom abroad.”
The inclusion of Perkins threatens to turn a hearing about a critically important issue into a political sideshow. Perkins has consistently used the persecution of Christians abroad as a political bludgeon at home, claiming that LGBT rights in the U.S. are fueling religious persecution worldwide and falsely asserting that President Obama has done nothing to stop the oppression of Christians because he secretly sympathizes with Islamic radicals.
And, even as he accuses the Obama administration of ignoring the plight of Christians, Perkins has attacked international human rights efforts aimed at combating violence against and government oppression of LGBT people.
Perkins routinely trots out the claim that conservative Christians are being persecuted in America to blame the Obama administration and the LGBT rights movement for very real anti-Christian persecution throughout the world. In an interview with Rick Santorum in November, Perkins insisted that there is a “correlation” between the supposed persecution of Christians in America and violent attacks on Christians and churches in the Middle East and elsewhere. “They feel like if it’s not a priority for us to have religious freedom here at home, then certainly it’s not going to be a priority for us to speak out for the persecuted peoples abroad,” he said.
Claiming that nondiscrimination laws protecting LGBT people are in fact discriminatory against Christians, Perkins said in November that combating such laws “will give hope to far-away places around the world” where Christians are being oppressed by tyrannical governments.
He similarly blamed advances in LGBT rights in the U.S. for encouraging religious persecution in Iran and North Korea, citing the case of an Atlanta fire chief who lost his job after distributing an anti-gay book to claim that “tyrants abroad see an administration that is not only not interested in protecting religious freedom but actually persecuting.” At another point, he warned of “deadly consequences” for Christians abroad if marriage equality succeeds in the United States.
Last year, Perkins linked the case of Meriam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman who was imprisoned for converting to Christianity, to an effort to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, saying “we keep our freedom of religion by working to keep our freedom of speech, and political speech is actually what’s under attack here.”
Perkins frequently brushes aside the evidence he is presented with to suggest that President Obama is ignoring the plight of Christians throughout the world. Throughout Ibrahim’s plight, Perkins insisted that the Obama administration had “done nothing” for her…even after sources including Fox News and a conservative Republican congressman told him that the administration had been working diligently to set her free. Even after diplomatic pressure led to Ibrahim’s release and she was granted asylum in the United States, Perkins claimed in a fundraising letter that there was “no evidence that the Obama State Department did anything to intervene.”
Also during Ibrahim’s ordeal, Perkins used his false claims about Obama’s indifference to advance whispered conspiracy theories that the President is secretly aMuslim radical.
Similarly, when the administration secured the release of Kenneth Bae, a Christian pastor held in a North Korean prison camp, Perkins used the opportunity to falsely claim that the administration was doing nothing to help another Christian political prisoner, Saeed Abedini, in Iran.
Perkins hasn’t just exploited the cases of persecuted Christians to attack Obama — he has also used them in an effort to lend legitimacy to his fight against LGBT rights in the United States.
He frequently portrays protecting LGBT people from violence and protecting Christians from religious persecution as an either-or choice…and, unsurprisingly, claims that Obama has chosen the former. In a direct mail piece in August, for instance, Perkins vowed to fight the administration’s “devotion to the cause of sexual immorality and their simultaneous indifference toward Christians suffering persecution for their faith.”
Perkins may portray the issues as mutually exclusive because he vehemently opposes any U.S. efforts to protect LGBT people from violence and persecution from their governments. Back in 2010, he defended a Uganda bill that would have imposed life imprisonment for consensual sex with someone of the same sex and the death penalty for so-called “aggravated homosexuality,” saying it was an effort to “uphold moral conduct.” When then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton launched an initiative to promote LGBT rights throughout the world, he accused her of promoting a “radical social agenda” including “special rights for homosexuals and homosexuality”… while claiming that she had remained “silent” on anti-Christian persecution.
Religious persecution around the world is certainly a worthy topic for the Senate to address. But including Tony Perkins in such a hearing is not the way for a committee to convey that it is taking this issue seriously.
End Times preacher Jonathan Cahn believes that if the Supreme Court strikes down the remaining state bans on same-sex marriage, America will experience tremendous calamities.
Cahn, a messianic rabbi who has linked gay rights to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, fascism and the End Times, told WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah in an interview at the National Religious Broadcasters convention posted online today that the court could usher in a series of divine punishments just as it did with the 1973 ruling on abortion rights, Roe v. Wade.
“Within one month of Roe v. Wade, that Supreme Court decision with abortion, the financial realm collapsed, led to a global recession, the same year America lost its first war in modern history or ever in Vietnam,” he said.
He added that the upcoming marriage case is “a very cataclysmic, moral, spiritual thing. What’s that going to do in the rest of the realm? Well I believe it is all coming together.”
As the GOP embraces the reactionary politics and anti-government zealotry of the Tea Party, it is steadily purging “moderates” and empowering extremists. Nothing shows this trend more clearly than the lineup of potential Republican presidential candidates. In this new series, we’ll be looking at the records and promises of the Republican Party’s leading presidential prospects. Next up is Ben Carson:
Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon Ben Carson became an overnight conservative celebrity in 2013, when he delivered a National Prayer Breakfast speech criticizing President Obama — who was sitting beside him while he spoke from the podium — for his handling of the deficit, the national debt, taxes and health care.
As a black conservative, Carson quickly emerged as a favorite speaker among Tea Party activists who relish his assurance that criticism of President Obama is never motivated by racism, while criticism of Ben Carson most certainly is.
Carson has expanded on his views in speeches to conservative gatherings and a timely book tour, revealing himself to be a politician adept at dishing out conservative talking points and playing into right-wing fears about government persecution.
Carson has inserted himself directly into popular Tea Party martyrdom narratives, claiming that he is the victim of liberal media bias and IRS targeting. Carson, a former Fox News contributor, also alleges that the Obama administration is trying to “shut down” the conservative network. Without Fox News, Carson said, Obama would have successfully introduced communism and “we would already be Cuba.”
Fox News pundit Todd Starnes dedicated his news bulletin today to discussing the case of University of Oklahoma students who reportedly led a racist chant for their fraternity, Sigma Alpha Epsilon: “There will never be a ni**** SAE. You can hang him from a tree, but he can never sign with me. There will never be a ni**** SAE.”
Starnes said that while the fraternity’s chant was “disgusting and racist” and clearly inappropriate, he believes that the university’s leadership is enforcing a double standard: “Oklahoma’s president says that ‘those who have misused their free speech in such a reprehensible way’ are ‘disgraceful’ and I agree. And I hope he applies the same standard the next time a student plays racially offensive rap music. The same standard should apply to all.”
Mike Huckabee, who once vowed to fight the purported secular theocracy running America, spoke yesterday to American Family Association President Tim Wildmon about how the left seeks to “impose” its “secular values” on conservative Christians, who Huckabee insisted do not want to impose their views on anybody.
He added that liberals simply cannot and will not understand the intellectual principles found in his book “God, Guns, Grits and Gravy.”
“We’re never going to be fully understood by people on the secular left,” Huckabee said. “They don’t want to understand us, they want to ridicule us, they want to hold us in contempt, they want to hold us up to scorn and so they’re going to because we represent a direct threat to their worldview. If there really is an alternative to the secularist’s mind and we can articulate it, defend it and do it in a way that even can be intellectually defensible, then that’s a direct threat to their worldview.”
Huckabee said people on the left resist such views because “their version of diversity is really uniformity; they don’t want diversity, they don’t want a different point of view, they want everyone to agree with their point of view.”
The potential GOP presidential candidate went on to rail against groups like Right Wing Watch for quoting remarks he makes on conservative media: “Every time I’ve come on this radio show, as you know your show is monitored by the secular left, they listen to every word that is uttered on AFA…. Every time I’m on this show there is something I say that will just end up getting picked up by the secularists and they’ll blow it up and it will go viral.”
“So let me go ahead and give them one just so they’ll have something that they can write down and Twitter out right now,” Huckabee continued. “The second reason that a lot of this reaction comes against believers is because of the New Testament principle of ‘don’t cast your pearls before the swine.’ I’m going to let them look that up, they’ll get the context, they won’t use the context, they won’t understand the context but it’s a metaphorical device that Jesus used to explain why people can’t see the obvious.”
“The point is that for many of us we’re accused of wanting to impose our religious values on someone else; the fact is we just don’t want someone’s secular values imposed upon us,” he said.
Sen. Ted Cruz told Iowa talk radio host Jan Mickelson yesterday that he plans to introduce a constitutional amendment to allow states to ban gay and lesbian couples from marrying because court decisions in favor of marriage equality present “a real danger to our liberty.”
The Texas Republican deflected Mickelson’s questions on whether states could simply ignore a Supreme Court decision in favor of marriage equality, saying he preferred his constitutional amendment as a solution. “If the courts were following the Constitution, we shouldn’t need a new amendment, but they are, as you put it quite rightly, making it up right now and it’s a real danger to our liberty,” he said.
Cruz told a group of Iowa pastors yesterday that judges who have made decisions in favor of marriage equality are “ignoring their oaths, ignoring the Constitution and legislating from the bench.”
In a winding and grammatically challenged Facebook post yesterday, Michigan Republican National Committee member Dave Agema lashed out at President Obama for his speech commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Selma civil rights march, suggesting that Obama was unqualified to give the speech because he is only “6,26% [sic]” black.
The GOP figure, who has a long history ofmakingabsurdandbigotedstatements, said that while Obama’s “genealogy shows his ancestors owned slaves,” it was the GOP that “obolished [sic] slavery.”
Concerning Obama's recent march in Selma, I think a little clarification is necessary. The Republican Party is the party of anti- racism. The Republicans obolished [sic] slavery, gave equal rights and the right to vote to blacks ( 13th, 14th and 15th amendment) not the democrats. During the same period the Republicans fought against polygamy that was being pushed by the Mormons. So in both cases the Republicans fought for Biblical morality and civil rights for all. In 1964 18 of the 19 Congressman were democrats that filibustered the Civil Rights Act to prevent it from passing. Al Gore's dad was against anti-segregation. Obama is 50% white, 43.75% Arabic and 6,26% black. Obama does not have a history of overcoming discrimination and slavery like many others, yet he leads us to believe otherwise. In fact, his genealogy shows his ancestors owned slaves. His father was a Muslim and communist, his step father was a Muslim and a comminist [sic] and he went to a Muslim school in Indonesia. It's time Republicans dispel the lies that the democrats are the ones that freed the slaves. Democrats fought to keep it, yet the lack of historical knowledge is being lost in the "SPIN" of politics. Welfare programs don't make one free, they make one dependant [sic] and a slave to their government and a guranteed [sic] life of poverty. Some welfare is necessary, but not to the extent that even illegals get what our citizens deserve. This is just plan [sic] wrong! Truth is difficult to find in the political realm of "SPIN."
In an interview with MLive.com, Agema stood by his post and said that people who take issue with it should “search for ‘what percentage of white, black and Arab is Obama,’ look that up. ... You can get them off Snopes and Yahoo.”
Needless to say, LaBarbera and Mefferd were not pleased with these developments, and speculated that Christians will start to leave the Republican Party if support for gay rights begins to gain a foothold in the party.
LaBarbera warned that Republicans need to not only hold onto their opposition to marriage equality, but also start speaking out against things like a kiss between two teenage boys on a recent episode of the TV show “The Fosters.”
“In my mind, if the Republican Party can’t even talk about something as fundamental to morality and our nation’s future as whether it’s okay to push young people into homosexuality and to model that as a positive thing, if Republicans can’t even handle that issue, then I think there’s not a good prospect long term for the Republican Party,” he said.
Earlier in the interview, LaBarbera said it was impossible for “a real, faithful conservative” to support LGBT rights and blamed the GOP’s very slight feints toward LGBT rights on libertarians, whom he lamented “end up supporting a lot of the homosexual agenda, even though much of the homosexual agenda is against liberty”:
If you’re endorsing the idea of marriage between two people of the same sex, an act which God calls an abomination, which is decidedly against nature — our Declaration talks about “nature and nature’s God,” homosexuality is decidedly against both — I can’t see how a real, faithful conservative could support that.
In the case of homosexuality, you’re seeing pro-homosexual arguments, the idea of attaching the perversion of homosexuality to the noble institution of marriage, being advanced as a conservative idea. And I think we can take the libertarians for that. The libertarians, I believe, are going to end up causing a lot of trouble in the Republican Party, because they end up supporting a lot of the homosexual agenda, even though much of the homosexual agenda is against liberty.
Gun Owners of America head Larry Pratt was a guest on Armed America Radio two weeks ago, where he told host Mark Walters that Obama’s executive actions on immigration will destroy the Second Amendment because immigrants are part of a “dependent class” that’s “not generally of a mind to be able to protect itself” or to take care of “staying alive from one moment to the next in case some dirtbag wants to try to terminate you.”
Walters prompted Pratt to discuss why the president’s immigration actions are “a threat to gun owners” because “he’s going to create an underclass, handout, ‘gimme, gimme, gimme’ dependency class” of Democratic votes.
“First of all, we’ve seen that survey data indicates that some 85 percent of the illegals, were they to vote, would vote Democrat,” Pratt agreed. “And on the national level, really without exception anymore, that means anti-Second Amendment.”
“And you actually kind of sketched the larger picture,” he continued. “A dependent class that depends on the government for their income, for all kinds of financial and other assistance, is not generally of a mind to be able to protect itself, which is after all the most important part about living, is staying alive from one moment to the next in case some dirtbag wants to try to terminate you.
“And if you don’t think enough of your own freedom to take charge of that aspect of your existence, then of course you’re likely to expect handouts and ‘more, more, more’ because you have a dependent mentality.”
Earlier in the interview, Pratt predicted that Obama’s last two years in office will bring “an unimaginable assault on all kinds of liberties of Americans” in Obama’s effort to turn the U.S. into a communist country:
We’re going to see, I think, just an unimaginable assault on all kinds of liberties of Americans, be it the mining of coal, the manufacture of ammunition, financing of the firearms industry and their need for loans or whatever. This guy is now going to be in a serious assault mode against so many freedoms that we thought were kind of established here in the United States. Now we’re going to see that no, not according to our Dear Leader, our Dear Leader thinks this has been injurious to the world.
He thinks just the way every communist thinks, that the only reason the United States is prosperous is because we stole our wealth. He doesn’t have the first notion of how the free market works, how it encourages people to produce, how it has actually created wealth. Freedom means prosperity. Socialism has always meant drudgery.