C4

Huma Abedin Conspiracies Get Weirder

The conspiracy theories about Huma Abedin’s marriage to former congressman Anthony Weiner keep getting weirder. Walid Shoebat, who according to the Center for American Progress [pdf] is a “former purported Islamic terrorist turned apocalyptic Christian,” recently told David Horowitz’s FrontPageMag that Abedin’s marriage to Weiner, who is Jewish, is either part of her Muslim Brotherhood espionage or shows that Weiner converted to Islam, or both:

It is extremely rare to have Muslim women marry non-Muslims, much less to have conservative Muslims look the other way, unless Huma has a “higher calling” and a unique exception was made for her, since she is an ear into top U.S. sensitive information, or Anthony Weiner has converted to Islam or even both.

On Monday, Shoebat told the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios that the rise of Muslim Brotherhood is all part of biblical prophecy and we are witnessing the birth pangs of the End Times:

He also claimed that Obama is assisting the Muslim Brotherhood and is “in bed with terrorists,” and that Michele Bachmann and Louie Gohmert, two of the five Republican congressmen who have accused Abedin of cooperating with the Muslim Brotherhood, are acting like modern day John the Baptist fighting today’s Herod:

Rios: Did you have any idea, even ten years ago or right after 9/11 that things would come to this dangerous state where we do have, and we’re going to talk about this, this incredible infiltration at the highest levels and no one would listen? Did you ever foresee this?

Shoebat: Yes, yes, of course I expected this. Americans had a test when the elections happened and the results were Obama. We’ve seen anybody, you know, who looks at Obama’s record, he was in bed with terrorists. People need to confront this issue once and for all, President Obama doesn’t have a clean record.



Rios: Should we be worried about Michele Bachmann and Louie Gohmert and all these letters? Should we defend them, what’s the point?

Shoebat: Well, I mean, if you look at the story of John the Baptist, John the Baptist was doing what? He was a symbol of the church. He was fighting against Herod, Herod was a symbol of the Antichrist, a symbol of the evil one. So what happened? He exposed Herod and he got his head chopped off. So there is a danger in fighting this but the church’s position is to expose and to fight for what is right.

Phyllis Schlafly Says Obama Talks About Religion Too Much and Too Little

Phyllis Schlafly is out with a new book which Kyle noted last week is a “catalog of the Religious Right's various complaints and allegations about President Obama's supposed hatred of Christianity and Christian values” and relies on false accusations, conspiracy theories and claims that Obama is trying to push religion out of public life. But after attacking Obama for supposedly not discussing religion enough in office, on The Mark Levin Show yesterday Schlafly claimed that Obama actually does use religious rhetoric rather frequently, but that it is all part of a nefarious, Alinskyite political strategy. So there you have it, it is bad when Obama talks about religion, and it is bad when Obama doesn’t talk about religion.

Levin: Is there, as you write in your book, an Alinsky angle to the way Obama approaches religion?

Schlafly: Oh yes. You’ve read Saul Alinsky, the famous Chicago radical and you can get a good idea of his approach to religion that he dedicated his book ‘Rules for Radicals’ to Lucifer. Then he said ‘you got to know all this religious lingo and you’ve got to wrap your plans to take over the country in religious arguments.’ So he taught him how to use it and taught him how to use middle class language but the whole purpose was to teach people that we live in an oppressive, unjust, racist society and we got to take it over. I think, you know, Obama said Alinsky was a better education than he ever got at Harvard and Columbia and he taught him out to do it!

Levin: They taught him how to do it and they do use the language, every now and then he blows it, every now and then he shows a little ankle.

PFAW Applauds Hearings on Constitutional Amendments to Reverse Citizens United

 People For the American Way today applauded hearings held in the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights, chaired by Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, exploring ways to reverse Citizens United by amending the Constitution and other means.

“Today’s hearing is an important step towards reclaiming our democracy for the people, not deep pocketed special interests,” said Michael Keegan. “Since the Supreme Court handed down its decision in early 2010, we’ve seen hundreds of millions of dollars contaminate our electoral system and profoundly distort our democratic process. I’m proud of the work done across the country by PFAW’s members and activists to reverse the decision. Today’s hearing is a testament to the grassroots efforts of the millions of Americans who want our country to be of, by and for the people.”

Since the Court handed down its decision, a growing movement has coalesced behind amending the Constitution to limit corporate power in our elections.

  • More than 1.9 million Americans have signed a petition calling on Congress to amend the Constitution to reverse Citizens United.
  • 1,854 public officials are on record in support, including 92 Representatives in Congress and 28 U.S. Senators.
  • Over 275 towns and cities have passed resolutions supporting an amendment, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Santa Fe, Missoula (ballot initiative), Madison (ballot initiative), Boulder (ballot initiative), New York City, Albany, Pittsburgh, Boston, South Miami, Philadelphia and Kansas City, MO.
  • The legislatures of six states have urged Congress to propose an amendment to overturn Citizens United via amendment.
  • 2,007 business leaders have spoken out in favor of an amendment.
  • 14 House and Senate amendment resolutions have been introduced in the 112th Congress.

“This is a movement moment,” said Marge Baker, Executive Vice President of People For the American Way. “Americans across the political spectrum support amending the Constitution to ensure that people, not special interests, hold the power in our democracy. Today’s hearing is an important step in the right direction. I’m grateful for the support we’ve received from members of the Sub-Committee as well as from their colleagues in the House and Senate. I’m eager to continue the fight to make Citizens United a thing of the past.”

###

Who Would Be on the Romney Court?

Romney's supporters have a familiar wish list of far-right ideologues they want to see on the Supreme Court.
PFAW

Right Wing Leftovers - 7/24/12

  • Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) calls John McCain “numb nuts” for defending Huma Abedin.
  • Elaine Donnelly says permission for service members to wear their uniform in a San Diego pride parade was “very inappropriate” and among the “manifestations of a San Francisco military.”
  • National Organization for Marriage launches its boycott against General Mills to protest its move to “endorse a controversial political issue”…i.e. opposing a Minnesota amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Fischer: 'Big Gay' Wants 'To Go Ahmadinejad on Chick-fil-A'

Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association is warning that “the bullies at ‘Big Gay,’” the term he is now using to describe gay rights advocates, are “trying to go Ahmadinejad on Chick-fil-A, they want them wiped off the face of the map.” While comparing gay rights supporters to the Iranian president who wants to see Israel “wiped off the map,” Fischer said that gays don’t face discrimination but are actually oppressive, intolerant bullies.

Championing Mike Huckabee’s effort to encourage people to eat at Chick-fil-A restaurants as a way to reward the company for their long-standing anti-gay politics, he called on potential customers “to buy out every chicken sandwich that Chick-Fil-A makes on August 1, let’s have them run out of chickens, let’s send them out behind the restaurant with an ax to cut the heads off of more chickens to feed people because they are selling so many chicken sandwiches.”

Watch:

And they’re trying to present themselves as these innocent little victims, helpless and hapless, being picked on across the fruited plain. And they’re not. They are bullies. They are intolerant, they are vicious, they are mean, and they are after people of faith. There’s no ‘live and let live’ with the bullies at Big Gay. They don’t know anything about tolerance. Tolerance is not in their vocabulary. They have no tolerance for those who support the institution of the natural family. None, zip, zero. They have no room in their so-called ‘diversity world’ for people who believe in natural marriage. They claim to be all about diversity, but there is no room in their world for anybody that believes in traditional moral values. They’re absolutely intolerant and they have no room, they’re anti-diversity. So I’m talking about this with regard specifically to Chick-fil-A. And I am pointing out specifically that the bullies at Big Gay are coming after Chick-fil-A. They’re trying to take them out, they’re trying to obliterate them, they’re trying to go Ahmadinejad on Chick-fil-A, they want them wiped off the face of the map.



Let’s make it our goal to buy out every chicken sandwich that Chick-fil-A makes on August 1. Let’s have them run out of chickens, let’s send them out behind the restaurant with an ax to cut the heads off of more chickens to feed people because they’re selling so many chicken sandwiches.

Scarborough: Colorado Shooting occurred because God's 'Hedge of Protection is Lowered'

Vision America’s Rick Scarborough explained today that the movie theatre massacre in Aurora, Colorado, was a result of God lowering His hand of protection, adding that the shooter “only killed 12 because of God's intervention.” “The fact is that, as a culture, we have sown the wind and are now reaping the whirlwind,” Scarborough explained, “If people of good will and conscience do not stand up and demand that God be acknowledged once again in the public square, we are destined to continue our slide toward Gomorrah.”

"Many in our society, and especially many liberals, refuse to recognize the existence of evil," Scarborough explained. "Since they believe individuals aren't responsible for their actions -- that everything is determined by heredity or environment -- they flail about for explanations to mass murder, like 'easy access to firearms, or impoverished environment, including lack of education or access to opportunity.' But in Aurora, like Columbine more than a decade ago, the shooter had every opportunity and was well-educated. Still, he chose to shoot innocent men, women and children, and only killed 12 because of God's intervention. A fact no one seems willing to acknowledge."

Scarborough continued: "Rick Warren stated the obvious when he tweeted within hours of the tragedy, 'When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it.' Congressman Louie Gohmert essentially agreed when he stated: 'People say... where was God in all of this? We've threatened high school graduation participations, if they use God's name, they're going to be jailed... I mean that kind of stuff. Where was God? What have we done with God? We don't want him around. I kind of like his protective hand being present.'"

"How did the mainstream media react to such truth?," Scarborough asked. "Both men are being maligned and lesser men are refusing to speak up. The fact is that, as a culture, we have sown the wind and are now reaping the whirlwind. If people of good will and conscience do not stand up and demand that God be acknowledged once again in the public square, we are destined to continue our slide toward Gomorrah."

Scarborough disclosed: "We know the man in custody for these horrendous crimes was, until quite recently, a student in the prestigious neuroscience doctoral program at the University of Colorado. But intelligence isn't a safeguard against evil. Some of the brightest men in Germany conceived and carried out the Holocaust."

"Christians understand that there is evil in the world, and that -- as society turns its back on God -- His hedge of protection is lowered and evil grows stronger," Scarborough explained.

"As our society has become more corrupt -- as Americans have rejected Biblical truth -- evil has flourished. The spate of these seemingly senseless mass murders -- Columbine, Fort Hood, Virginia Tech, and Tucson -- are committed against a backdrop of 1.2 million abortions a year, 40% of all children in this country born out-of-wedlock and the ongoing war against our Judeo-Christian heritage."

Romney Adviser John Bolton Defends Michele Bachmann's Anti-Muslim Witch Hunt

Mitt Romney hasn’t yet publicly stated his view on the witch hunt against Muslim-Americans  in the Obama administration supported by Michele Bachmann. But today his foreign policy adviser, former Bush administration official John Bolton, defended Bachmann and her allies in an appearance on anti-Muslim, anti-Obama conspiracy theorist Frank Gaffney’s radio show. Bolton told Gaffney, a birther who helped stoke the witch hunt, that he was “mystified” by the criticism of Bachmann and that she was “simply raising the question.” Bachmann, for her part, is beyond raising questions: last week she declared that “there has been deep penetration in the halls of our United States government by the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Gaffney: John Bolton, one of the hot house issues in Washington at the moment that speaks to this point you just made about American decline and aiding and abetting our enemies under the Obama administration involves the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s not just that we’ve helped bring them to power in Egypt and are otherwise emboldening them, you mentioned that they are a likely successor to Bashar Assad in Syria. But here at home as well, five congresspeople including Michele Bachmann have been pressing for investigations into the extent to which some of these policies that we’ve been adopting, both abroad and here, might have something to do with influence operations aimed at and actually successfully inside the wire in our government. What do you make of this controversy and particularly the criticisms, the vicious criticisms, that have been mounted against these folks for their warnings from within their own ranks?

Bolton: I’ve been subject to how many security clearance procedures and I must say as irritating as some people may find them I think they are absolutely essential to making sure that people who work in sensitive positions in the national security field in our government are entirely loyal to the United States. I just think that’s an absolute, fundamental prerequisite. Now people find them intrusive, they find them inconvenient, my response is, that’s just too bad. What I think these members of Congress have done is simply raise the question, to a variety of inspectors general in key agencies, are your departments following their own security clearance guidelines, are they adhering to the standards that presumably everybody who seeks a security clearance should have to go through, are they making special exemptions? What is wrong with raising the question? Why is even asking whether we are living up to our standards a legitimate area of congressional oversight, why has that generated this criticism? I’m just mystified by it.

Gaffney: I think it has a lot to do with both shooting the messenger and trying to deflect attention from what is a huge, yawning and very serious vulnerability of this president, especially now as this election gets down to the clinches.

This leaves Bolton opposed to Republicans including John McCain, Marco Rubio, Scott Brown, John Boehner, Mike Rogers, Jim Sensenbrenner, and even Bachmann’s former campaign manager, all of whom have spoken out against Bachmann’s McCarthyism.

Earlier in the program, Bolton suggested that Obama’s speeches that have been “patriotic and laudatory of our troops” are only a campaign tactic. The president, he says, is “comfortable with the decline of American influence in the world.”

Bolton: He’s realized he is in the middle of a very closely fought election campaign and suddenly the rhetoric is patriotic and laudatory of our troops. But the fact is his policies have cost the United States around the world, he has withdrawn combat forces from Iraq, he plans to do it from Afghanistan, the rest of the world sees an American retreat, the budget sequestration mechanism on top of the nearly a trillion dollars of cuts and defense spending that Obama himself imposed, I think even his own defense secretary said would cripple our military. We are in very grave shape and yet the president, as he has done consistently on economic or foreign policy, talks about doing the exact opposite of what his policies are and of course the media give him a free pass on it. Nobody should be under any illusions, this is a president comfortable with the decline of American influence in the world and he is watching it happen.

Gaffney: Well, I would argue he is accelerating it at every turn.

David Barton likens Same-Sex Marriage to Horse, Dog Marriage

Right-wing pseudo-historian David Barton, who compares homosexuality to smoking and celebrates the fact that there isn’t a cure for AIDS, said today on WallBuilders Live! with co-host Rick Green that same-sex marriage is much like letting people marry horses or dogs. Discussing the Defense of Marriage Act, Barton warned that marriage equality proponents may try to “evangelize” their belief that “marriage shouldn’t be between a man and a woman” since “that’s unfair for two men who want to be together, or two women, or a horse and a dog, or whatever it is.”

Barton: Other courts, other areas started saying ‘well you know we can’t really justify this position anymore, marriage shouldn’t be between a man and a woman, that’s unfair for two men who want to be together, or two women, or a horse and a dog, or whatever it is,’ so at that point as it looked like the states were starting to mess around the problem you have is the contracts in one state are supposed to be honored by another. So if I make a business contract with you in Texas and we move to Oklahoma, that contract is going to be recognized in Oklahoma. Well on marriage, that’s a contract. So if one state suddenly says we want same-sex marriage and in Texas we say we don’t, just because you got married in Vermont and moved to Texas doesn’t mean we have to recognize your contract.

So that ability of saying one contract is going to be forced on another caused Congress to act in 1996 and say look the federal government and the states both have to deal with marriage, now here’s what we’re doing, on the federal level we are telling you marriage is a man and a woman and everything that deals with marriage on the federal level is going to be considered a man and a woman. They said as far as the states, you states are not going to be bound by the marriage decision of another state. Green: You do it the way you want to do it and don’t expect to be able to export that to another state.

Barton: Don’t use that to try to evangelize the other forty-nine states.

Green: And we won’t let the other states force it on you.

Barton: That’s right.

Ed Meese, who served as attorney general under Ronald Reagan, told Barton and Green that the legalization of same-sex marriage in several states “just shows how the culture has deteriorated over two centuries,” and asserted that same-sex marriage is an attempt to “defy nature.”

Green: It’s almost like they are making it up on the fly, the actual language of the Constitution doesn’t matter; it’s what these judges that happen to be on the bench at the time think it should mean.

Meese: The founders, we go back to the founders, the reason that they didn’t put something in the Constitution to say that marriage is the union of a man and a woman is nobody would have even thought at that time that there could be any other. It just shows how the culture has deteriorated over two centuries.



Green: You also mention that the Defense of Marriage Act should control what’s happening on the military side of things. How have they managed to push through so much with the military in the Obama administration on this issue working around DOMA?

Meese: Well that’s still an open issue and that’s why DOMA is very important. For example, whether chaplains should be required to participate in a homosexual marriage ceremony; whether that would be required as part of their duties, that’s where DOMA is a very important statute. This idea that somehow there is some obscure right in the Constitution to defy nature, as they do in homosexual marriage, is just ludicrous.

Anti-Gay Groups Praise the Boy Scouts for Banning 'Individuals who Flaunt Unnatural Vice'

The Religious Right continues to applaud the Boy Scouts of America’s decision to reaffirm their ban on openly gay members. Today, Tradition, Family, Property Student Action director John Ritchie emailed members today to thank the Boy scouts for “resisting the encroachments of the pro-homosexual lobby” and “the ‘rainbow’ revolution” in order to “respect moral values and protect minors from potential abuse” and “exclude individuals who flaunt unnatural vice”:

Why is the homosexual movement targeting the Boy Scouts?

Here's the reason:

Because the Boy Scout Oath talks about honor, duty to God, and moral uprightness, which necessarily excludes sinful lifestyles.

You see, just last week the Boy Scouts of America confirmed a long-standing policy barring open homosexuality from its membership ranks. As a private organization serving 2.7 million boys, they have the RIGHT to make sound policies that respect moral values and protect minors from potential abuse.

Click here to thank the Boy Scouts for standing strong

Even the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Boy Scouts' right to exclude individuals who flaunt unnatural vice.

But the "rainbow" revolution – aided by the liberal mass media – unleashed a barrage of pressure against the Boy Scouts, as if it were a crime to stand firm on moral values and do what is best for our youth.



Thank you for standing strong! I applaud the Boy Scouts of America for resisting the encroachments of the pro-homosexual lobby. Please continue to hold fast to the virtues expressed in the Scout Oath: Honor, duty to God, and moral uprightness.

Gary Bauer of the Campaign for Working Families warned that the “militant homosexual movement” has revealed itself to be “extremely intolerant”:

I want to close today with a tip of my hat to the Boy Scouts of America. They have been quietly reviewing their policy over the years that bans homosexuals from serving as scoutmasters for obvious reasons. The organization has faced unrelenting pressure from the militant homosexual movement, left-wing politicians, Hollywood and even corporate elites to change the policy.

Yesterday a BSA spokesman told the Associated Press that an 11-member committee unanimously reaffirmed the ban as "absolutely the best policy for the Boy Scouts."

Not surprisingly, the so-called tolerant left is having fits, and is extremely intolerant of the Scout's decision to maintain their values. Please take a moment to encourage the Boy Scouts of America for standing firm.

Janet Porter of Faith 2 Action in her radio bulletin today also hailed the BSA for “protecting the boys”:

The decision is final.

Homosexuals will still not be allowed to serve as leaders in the Boy Scouts. That was the good news coming from the offices of the Boy Scouts of America last week. An 11-member special committee, formed by top Boy Scout officials two years ago, concluded that it would be best to reaffirm their longstanding policy of protecting the boys from leaders who favor or engage in same-sex relationships.

You may recall that an earlier challenge of their policy went the whole way to the Supreme Court, resulting in a decision twelve years ago affirming the exclusion of homosexuals from positions of leadership.

Please call the Scouts today at 972-580-2000 to express your support for a very good decision!

Linda Harvey: 'Diabolical' LGBT-Inclusive Education Leads to 'Abuse'

Mission America president Linda Harvey hosted Brian Camenker of MassResistance on her radio show this weekend, where the two lamented the growing number of schools that offer LGBT-inclusive clubs and curriculum. Camenker said that in Massachusetts LGBT rights advocates are “targeting school children,” even with lessons about sadomasochism, while Harvey claimed their “diabolical” programs are fostering “tragedies” and “abuse.”

Listen:

Camenker: The homosexual activism in schools, targeting school children, started in Massachusetts in the late 80s and early 90s.

Harvey: With Kevin Jennings and GLSEN.

Camenker: Kevin Jennings, the first gay clubs in the schools were done by him in the late 80s and the early 90s, he was the one who was brought in by then-Republican Gov. Bill Weld to design the plans, to push this in the public schools and force it into schools across the state. That’s been the blueprint for bringing it around the country. Massachusetts, I believe, puts more money into pushing homosexuality into the schools than probably the rest of the country combined.

But if you want to see where your future is, this is the place. It’s very, very troubling; it’s not pretty at all. We are doing a multi-part series on what we’ve exposed and what we’ve seen, and it ranges from topics from sadomasochism—sadomasochism!—and transgenderism, telling kids that they can change their sex, it’s an absurd idea anyway, this whole range of things and people need to see.



Camenker: There’s no stopping with what these people want to do with your kids, there is an obsession there and it is very, very troubling.

Harvey: It is very troubling and it’s really diabolical, it really is. Our neglect and our benign acceptance of how they position it, ‘that this is just the way kids are, they are born that way and this is identity,’ is allowing all of these tragedies and this abuse to happen to our kids.

Camenker: Yes, absolutely.

Frank Gaffney Gushes over Bachmann, 'America's Iron Lady'

Apparently, pushing a McCarthyite witch hunt against Muslim-Americans serving in the Obama administration is an act of great courage and valor, at least according to the anti-Muslim activist who helped push Michele Bachmann and four Republican allies to send letters to inspectors general — which were rejected — demanding investigations into a number of administration staffers. The Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney, who yesterday warned about “an effort to demonize and take down” Bachmann, took to the Washington Times to praise the Minnesota congresswoman as “America’s Iron Lady,” akin to Margaret Thatcher.

Gaffney also criticized those who called Bachmann’s assertions “dangerous or baseless,” saying, “their authority on the matter must be questioned.” He must therefore question the authority of Speaker John Boehner, House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Rogers, House Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee Chair Jim Sensenbrenner, and the many other Republicans who have denounced Bachmann’s accusations.

Lady Thatcher’s partner in dispatching that toxic ideology to the “ash heap of history,” Ronald Reagan, famously declared in 1961 — at a time when the USSR was still very much a going concern — that “freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” Today, it is threatened by another totalitarian ideology that some have aptly described as “communism with a god”: the supremacist Islamic doctrine known as Shariah.

Fortunately, it turns out that as we confront our time’s most imminent threat to freedom, we have found America’s Iron Lady: Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. Her Thatcheresque qualities are evident in the fearless and visionary leadership she is providing in opposing Shariah’s most formidable champions, the Muslim Brotherhood.

In particular, Mrs. Bachmann’s training as a tax attorney has prepared her well for the painstaking business of studying and mastering arcane organizational, financial and other relationships that are at the core of the stealthy subversion the Muslim Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad.” Her experience raising 28 kids, counting her own and foster children, has steeled her against the name-calling and worse that have met her efforts to bring those skills to bear to expose and defeat the jihadists, wherever they may be.



With respect to efforts to dismiss as dangerous or baseless concerns about a possible, far larger problem with individuals who have connections to the Muslim Brotherhood shaping U.S. policy toward that organization and enabling its rising power, what can one say? There is abundant evidence that indicates such concerns are warranted. Until the critics — on Capitol Hill, in the media and elsewhere — perform the sort of due diligence that has characterized the approach taken by Mrs. Bachmann and her colleagues, their authority on the matter must be questioned.

R. Emmett Tyrrell: 'Brain Dead' Liberals are to Blame for Colorado Shooting

Yesterday, Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association blamed liberals for the movie theatre shooting in Colorado:

But Fischer is not alone in assigning blame to the left.

R. Emmett Tyrrell, the founder and editor of The American Spectator, spoke to Fischer yesterday about the Colorado shooting and told the Religious Right talk show host that “a country that is being forced to turn away from God because of the liberals gets things like the Colorado massacre in abundance.” Tyrrell described liberals as “bloodless,” “cold-blooded” and “brain dead,” while Fischer said that “they cannot be reasoned with” and only rely on “very strong feelings” instead of facts or logic.

Watch:

Tyrrell: These liberals are bloodless, they are just cold-blooded people. They ought to open their hearts to conservatives, frankly. In writing this book, ‘The Death of Liberalism,’ I came to the conclusion that they are dead—they are brain dead—they simply can’t look at anything that contravenes their value system, they turn their back on it…

Fischer: It’s been interesting to me in talking to liberals, and I’m sure you’ve had this same experience, the conclusion I’ve come to is that they cannot be reasoned with because logic means nothing to them, facts mean nothing to them, history means nothing to them, reason means nothing to them. They just have these very strong feelings and the strength of those feelings in their minds is all they need to validate the positions they take. So I’ve just come to the conclusion that liberals cannot be reasoned with they can only be defeated.



Tyrrell: A country that is being forced to turn away from God because of the liberals gets things like the Colorado massacre in abundance, and we will have more of them if we don’t return to God.

Activists Deliver 1.9 Million Petitions Calling for Constitutional Amendment to Protect Democracy

Today, concerned citizens and organizations delivered 1,959,063 signatures calling for overturning Citizens United and related cases by amending the Constitution. The petitions were delivered in connection with hearings held by the Constitution Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee to examine the impact of Citizens United, Speech Now and related cases and the need for constitutional remedies to restore the democratic promise of America. The millions of Americans whose names appear on these petitions reflect the deep-seated public concern about the state of our democracy and the growing grassroots movement to restore government, of, by, and for the people.

Marge Baker, Executive Vice President of People For the American Way:

“The interests of the American people should be front and center in our elections, and today, 1.9 million Americans made that point loud and clear. But despite the message we sent Congress today, all over the country, our voices are being drowned out by the powerful corporations and the super wealthy. Short of changing who sits on the Supreme Court, amending the Constitution is the only way to undo the damage done to our democracy by Citizens United. The American people overwhelmingly support that idea, and by holding these hearings, our elected representatives are honoring the millions of Americans who are calling for a Constitution that ensures that “We the People” means all the people, not just the privileged few.”

Leslie Watson Malachi, Director of African American Ministers in Action, a program of People For the American Way:

“This petition drive proves that our collective voice can be the spark of change. Because millions of people have signed their names to proclaim that our democracy is not for sale, this grassroots movement has the power to take back our elections and ensure government by people through fair and transparent elections. We’ve made it clear to our elected representatives that a constitutional amendment is necessary to uphold that ideal. These hearings show how far this movement has come.”

Robert Weissman, President of Public Citizen:

“The choice is simple: We can have a working democracy, in which the people rule, or we can have a Citizens United-facilitated plutocracy, in which giant corporations and the super-rich dominate elections. Rescuing our democracy requires that we overturn Citizens United and other decisions that constitutionalize the “right” of corporations and the super-rich to buy elections. With no prospect of the Court revisiting the damaging decisions it has inflicted, we need a constitutional amendment to reestablish the simple principle that Democracy is for People.”

Justin Ruben, Executive Director of MoveOn.org Political Action:

“We've seen this summer how a handful of billionaires are trying to buy the election. That's one of the reasons nearly 700,000 MoveOn members have spoken out in favor of overturning Citizens United, getting big money out of our elections, and preventing our democracy from being sold to the highest bidder.”

Becky Bond, Political Director of CREDO Action:

“How can the American people have an equal voice in our democracy when corporations are flooding the political system with millions in secret campaign donations? We must pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, end corporate personhood and help get shadowy money out of politics for good.”

Bob Edgar, President & CEO of Common Cause:

“Super PACs have transformed our elections into the sport of kings. Billionaires and corporations are pooling unlimited sums of money into joint accounts, pledging astronomical sums in support of or opposition to candidates, and recklessly drowning out the voices of the American people. These corporations and mega donors are motivated by an expectation of influence and access, often at the expense of the public interest. We cannot afford to auction off our vibrant democracy to the highest bidder.”

Lisa Graves, the Executive Director of the Center for Media and Democracy/ ALECexposed.org:

"While billionaires are openly writing million-dollar checks to Super PACs, millions more is being secretly funneled to front groups whose ads may affect who wins and wields power over people and policy. Deceptively named nonprofit groups are becoming the Swiss bank accounts of elections, receiving secret multi-million dollar gifts that buy ads to influence how Americans vote. We may never know the true identity of those attempting to buy our elections through such shadowy groups -- whether they are corporations or people, domestic or foreign -- but we do know American democracy is increasingly for sale and that's why We the People are demanding that the Constitution be amended to fight this corruption."

Peter Schurman, Campaign Director at Free Speech For People:

“For a campaign we all knew would be difficult, the Senate hearing today is a major milestone: it shows that the growing movement for a constitutional amendment is starting to make a dent in Washington. It's time for Congress and the states to overrule the Supreme Court and make it clear that we the people, not we the corporations, are in charge of American democracy.”

Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, National Field Organizing Director, Move to Amend

"In community after community citizens are making clear through ballot initiatives and resolutions that they want their elected representatives to pass an amendment to overrule the Court by abolishing corporate personhood and the doctrine of money as free speech. These hearings are one step toward achieving that amendment, and we won't stop our efforts until the majority of the members of Congress are behind us and show that they understand that their job is to serve the people, not corporations or the privileged few."

David Levine, American Small Business Council CEO and Co-Founder:

“Business leaders would rather invest their money to create jobs than have to compete with big business bank accounts to be heard, and they are fighting back. More than 2,000 business leaders have joined the American Sustainable Business Council's (ASBC) Business for Democracy campaign to fight for a constitutional amendment that overturns the Citizens United decision.”

Eric Byler, President of the Coffee Party Board of Directors:

“Public awareness about money in politics is growing rapidly and crossing all cultural and political divides. Just like the founders of this nation, we are responding to an abuse of power by elite profiteers who feel entitled to govern over people. The task before us is to finish what our founders started — not to start a revolution but to complete one — by amending the Constitution and reestablishing the right to self-governance for people; not profiteers.”

Blair Bowie of U.S. PIRG:

“For nearly forty years, the Supreme Court has been driving us down a road that will inevitably dead end in the demise of American democracy. In equating money with speech the Court rejected the notion that in a democracy the size of your wallet should not determine the volume of your voice. Instead it enshrined the rights of artificial entities and ultra-wealthy individuals to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens in a flood of often secret cash. Ultimately, we can only get out of this judicial rut by amending the U.S. Constitution to clarify to the Supreme Court that the first amendment was never meant to be used as a tool for special interests to co-opt our democratic process. Today’s hearing and the massive citizen mobilization across the country since Citizens United show that the American people are ready to turn this car around.”

Stephanie Taylor, Co-Founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee:

"An unprecedented amount of secret money is already surging through our political system because of the Citizens United ruling. As we’re demonstrating today, there is huge public support for passing a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. Americans want to take our democracy back from big corporations and billionaires. Passing this amendment is a critical first step.”

Bob Fertik, President of Democrats.com:

“The Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United was catastrophic for American democracy. The American people now see the results in the form of endless TV attack ads, most of which are aimed at destroying President Obama. The Super PAC Billionaires who bought these ads remain largely anonymous, like hidden puppeteers pulling on strings. One million members of Democrats.com are united in our determination to pass a Constitutional Amendment to overturn Citizens United and replace Super PACs and other corrupt election money with clean public funds. Money out, voters in!”

Christopher Campbell, Wolf PAC:

"Our democracy is in serious trouble. It's time to change that. It's time we end the corporate takeover of our government. The only way to do that is to bypass the corporate-owned Congress and Supreme Court – and pass a constitutional amendment. We must pass a 28th Amendment saying that corporations are not people and they do not have the right to buy our elections."

Larry Cohen, President of Communications Workers of America:

“Our electoral process should be about the rights of individuals to participate in our nation's politics. That's what democracy looks like. The Communications Workers of America commends elected officials at every level of government who are fighting to restore fairness to our political process. The role of money in politics must be completely overhauled. Today it dwarfs everything else and is distorting our democracy. Working with other progressive organizations, CWA is committed to stopping the flow of secret cash to political campaigns and making it clear to all dollars are not speech. This effort will require constitutional changes and other measures to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which opened the floodgates for secret spending and today enables billionaires to buy our nation’s elections. We also will work for the public financing of elections, because without these very real changes, the one percent will continue to control our politics.”

Natalie Foster, CEO of Rebuild the Dream:

"Throughout U.S. history, whenever something in our democracy hasn’t been working, we’ve amended the Constitution. We’ve amended the Constitution to protect and extend the right to vote. Even basic rights we take for granted, like freedom of speech, are from amendments. Now, we must get big money out of our politics. This is another moment to make history and form a more perfect union together. "

 

The vast majority of Americans oppose Citizens United and related cases, and a grassroots movement calling on public officials to take action is growing stronger. This year, 51 organizations submitted a letter to congressional leaders calling for these very hearings, and more than 1,800 public officials from 41 states are already on record in support of constitutional remedies. More information on the effort to amend the Constitution can be found at www.united4thepeople.org.

###

Right Wing Round-Up - 7/23/12

  • PFAW: PFAW Calls on Speaker Boehner to Remove Michele Bachmann from Intelligence Committee.
  • Towleroad: Mike Huckabee Announces ‘Chick-fil-A’ Appreciateion Day’ in Response to ‘Intolerant Bigotry from the Left.’

Right Wing Leftovers - 7/23/12

  • Herman Cain rises to the defense of the persecuted and oppressed rich: “Being rich is cool.”
  • Huma Abedin, the Clinton aide who is the focus of Michele Bachmann’s witch hunt, is now under police protection after receiving a threat.
  • Peter LaBarbera demands an Illinois judge “recuse herself from the homosexual 'marriage' case due to her personal conflict-of-interest”…just as black judges should refuse themselves from cases involving black people?
  • Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber says that legal abortion is at least partly responsible for the Aurora shooting.
  • Tony Perkins is upset that service members in uniform marched in pride parades, complaining that “the administration is now ordering its military to yield, not just to the special rights--but demands--of homosexual activists.”
  • Tweet of the day comes from Bryan Fischer, who wishes gay soldiers would be held in a military brig:

Fischer: 'We've Tried It the Liberals' Way for Sixty Years Now and What Do We Got? We Have Massacres in Aurora'

On Friday, American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer attempted to link the end of public school organized prayer to the Aurora, Colorado movie theater massacre, arguing that state-sponsored religious education would have prevented the shooting (even though James Holmes belonged to a San Diego church for 10 years). Similarly, AFA News Director Fred Jackson connected the media and progressive, gay-affirming churches to the massacre. Today on Focal Point, Fischer specifically blamed liberals and opposition to posting the Ten Commandments in public schools for the shooting, lamenting, “we’ve tried it the liberals’ way for sixty years now and what do we got? We have massacres in Aurora.”

Watch:

POLITICO: Supreme Court a Critical 2012 Issue

A POLITICO article out today reaffirms that the 2012 election is of “Supreme importance” to the future of the nation’s highest court.

The piece takes note of the critical role the court will play in the upcoming elections and reminds readers that the next presidential term will be particularly important in determining the composition of the court for decades to come.

Four Supreme Court justices enter the next term in their 70s, and any changes during the next presidential term could tip the balance of the court on some of the nation’s hottest social issues, including same-sex marriage, civil rights and abortion.

There’s also the often-overlooked aspect that the president nominates judges to fill the nation’s appellate and district courts, which produce some of the country’s most lasting decisions.

POLITICO also notes that due to widespread GOP efforts at voter suppression, there is a possibility that the court may have a hand in determining the outcome of the presidential race.

Mitt Romney’s top judicial adviser, the far-right former judge Robert Bork, weighed in as well:

Few see the Supreme Court actually becoming a prominent attack line when the candidates are speaking to the general public. “It should be, but the economic issues will far outweigh other questions,” Robert Bork, the former Reagan Supreme Court nominee now serving as a top Romney legal adviser, wrote in an email to POLITICO.

As the decision in Citizens United and other cases clearly demonstrates, the current Supreme Court is one of the most conservative in American history. It’s hard to imagine a court even further to the right, and yet that is exactly what a Romney presidency would ensure.

For more on the Supreme Court and Robert Bork, See PFAW’s report “Borking America” and visit RomneyCourt.com.

PFAW

Bachmann Backers Play Victim Card in Wake of Backlash

It was only a matter of time before Michele Bachmann’s allies tried to play the victim following the backlash against her latest conspiratorial witch hunt, this time focusing on Muslim-Americans serving in the Obama administration. Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, who helped launch the attacks on Sec. Hillary Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin and whose report Bachmann and four other Republican members cite in their letters to the inspectors general, spoke today with David Bossie of the right-wing group Citizens United to defend the witch hunt.

Bossie said that Bachmann’s main problem was naming Abedin in the State Department letter, which was rebuffed by the inspector general, when she should have tried to “name her without naming her.” He claimed that people are attacking Bachmann because she tries “to defend our freedoms” and represents a “danger” to their nefarious plans. Gaffney, who has made a career disparaging people like Abedin and even conservatives such as Grover Norquist, lamented that there is “an effort to demonize and take down” Bachmann.

Bossie: These five members of Congress led by Michele Bachmann, because they just hate her so, because they just have this natural desire to attack her at every turn because she’s decided to pick up a weapon and stand a post, she decided that she was going to defend our freedoms at every turn for many years. So certainly if I was in her camp, would I have said ‘hey let’s ask these questions, let’s do all this without putting a staffer’s name in it,’ because as a former staffer, as a guy who was the chief investigator for Congress during the ’90s and somebody who investigated the Clinton’s relentlessly and whose name was in letters like this all the time from the left, Republicans stood tall for me at every turn because members didn’t like members picking on staffers, at least how it’s presumed. So you could see how that could be perceived. I would have probably said, ‘let’s name her without naming her,’ that’s one way to solve what potentially happened.

But they want to attack Michele Bachmann for what is really an oversight in my opinion by naming her, but they want to attack her because she’s been a leader against the Muslim Brotherhood, against radical Islam, for the last four years that she has been in the House of Representatives and they see her as a danger, as a leader who is dangerous in their pursuits.

Gaffney: That’s the point. It’s really an effort to demonize and take down, if they can, a formidable political adversary in Michele Bachmann.

If Bachmann really was the courageous leader that Bossie and Gaffney described, it’s hard to see why she literally ran away from a CNN reporter who was asking her questions about the letters, and if people are only criticizing Bachmann because they detest her attempts to “defend our freedoms,” then leading Republicans like John McCain, Marco Rubio, John Boehner and Mike Rogers must be included on that list.

Bossie also took to Politico to defend the congresswoman and her Republican allies, saying they “should be applauded for their letter and be regarded as patriots”:

The inspectors general should absolutely investigate whether individuals with associations with the Muslim Brotherhood are contributing to the adoption of policies that favor an organization that poses a threat to national security. The Muslim Brotherhood is the driving force behind the effort to impose a totalitarian ideology it calls “shariah.” During the Obama presidency, the Brotherhood has made huge strides towards achieving its goal in the Middle East.

Unfortunately, as is made clear in their own documents – specifically a strategic plan introduced into evidence in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism financing prosecution in our nation’s history – the Muslim Brotherhood also has as its goal “destroying Western civilization from within.” This goal is being pursued via what the Brothers call a stealthy “civilization jihad” that involves, among other techniques, gaining access to and influencing government agencies.

It is not McCarthyism to state these irrefutable facts. Neither are requests by members of Congress seeking, through the appropriate formal channels, to establish whether the Muslim Brotherhood has gained a foothold and legitimacy – especially in light of the adoption of Brotherhood-friendly policies by the Obama Administration. These are absolutely legitimate and necessary questions because of the stakes for our national security.

Far from being criticized or suppressed by America’s elites and politically correct police, Reps. Bachmann, Gohmert, Franks, Westmoreland and Rooney should be applauded for their letter and be regarded as patriots.

Boykin: Obama Undermining Military because it's the 'Last Bastion of Morality and Ethics'

Jerry Boykin talked about his new job as the executive vice president of the Family Research Council with FRC president Tony Perkins on Friday’s Washington Watch Weekly, where he said he will work to stop the Obama administration’s plans to “to penetrate this last bastion of morality and ethics, and that being the institution of the military, with its social experiments.” “If we allow the penetration of our military to continue,” Boykin added, “not only will our national security suffer but our culture as a whole will be in great jeopardy.” Boykin and Perkins later agreed that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell will have devastating long term effects (despite all existing evidence) and that it undermined the sense of fellowship and camaraderie among service members.

Boykin: The administration has been on a campaign, I think, to penetrate this last bastion of morality and ethics, and that being the institution of the military, with its social experiments. So I’m very concerned and obviously as you and I have talked, one of my main focuses here will be trying to protect and defend and work with our military to try and maintain the values that our military has always had. I think it’s a warning to America that if we allow the penetration of our military to continue, not only will our national security suffer but our culture as a whole will be in great jeopardy.



Perkins: The history that we, you and I, have developed really goes back to when the administration wanted to overturn the policy that prohibited open homosexuality in the military and we pulled together a number of retired generals and there was some active duty individuals in there as well that were part of just advising and consulting. But that is so significant in terms of something that’s inconsistent with military service, readiness; the seeds have now been planted, while some are saying ‘it’s been almost a year and the military hasn’t imploded,’ that’s unrealistic, the effects of this are a number of years down the road, we’re already, however, seeing the erosion of religious liberty and religious freedom. Those are issues that folks who serve can’t speak to so they need a voice on the outside.

Boykin: Well, that’s right. People need to understand that when you are a member of the military service you do lose certain First Amendment rights and I don’t disagree with that, I lived with it for thirty six and a half years, but somebody has to speak for them. Tony, I think it’s important for us to remember, I don’t care and I know you don’t what people do behind closed doors in the privacy of their own bedroom, but as an institution the military is based on brotherhood, it’s based on camaraderie, it’s based on the strength and the character of the individual organizations that make up our military. No one has demonstrated that this in anyway is going to enhance the camaraderie, the fellowship, the brotherhood, nor is it going to enhance the war fighting capabilities. At the end of the day, the military’s only mission is going to fight and win the nation’s wars, and no one can show that this is going to help us.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious