C4

RNC Member Dave Agema: Obama Is Only '6.26% Black'

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 of making absurd and bigoted statements, 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.”

McConnell Should Let Senate Confirm Judges

There is no reason to keep delaying judicial confirmation votes, especially when Texas in particular needs its vacancies filled.
PFAW

LaBarbera: GOP Will Fall If It Stops Talking About Gay Kisses On TV

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s Peter LaBarbera joined Janet Mefferd on Friday to discuss the Supreme Court brief filed by a number of prominent conservatives in favor of marriage equality, along with a Buzzfeed article labeling Jeb Bush “2016’s gay-friendly Republican.”

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.

Larry Pratt: Immigrants Don't Love Freedom Enough To Protect Themselves From Murderers

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.

Ted Cruz Touts Anti-Gay Bona Fides To Extremist Group

Religious Right activist David Lane has been organizing a series of meetings in early primary states between pastors and GOP presidential candidates, who seem to be not at all bothered by the far-right record of the ardent Christian Nationalist who believes gay rights will lead to a wave of car bombings and divine punishment against America.

Sen. Ted Cruz has benefited enormously from these gatherings, addressing Lane-sponsored summits around the country and recording get-out-the-vote advertisements with Lane’s American Renewal Project.

The Des Moines Register reports today that Cruz told a recent Lane event in Iowa, which included an appearance by his right-wing activist father, Rafael Cruz, that President Obama is “an apologist for radical Islamic terrorism” and railed against gay marriage as part of an “unrelenting assault on traditional marriage.”

Judges who strike down bans on same-sex marriage, Cruz said, are “ignoring their oaths, ignoring the Constitution and legislating from the bench.”

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz cast himself as a leading Republican opponent of same-sex marriage during an appearance before a crowd of evangelical Christians in Des Moines on Monday.

Cruz, R-Texas, described the ongoing shift toward legal recognition for gay couples as an "unrelenting assault on traditional marriage," and castigated judges who have struck down prohibitions for "ignoring their oaths, ignoring the Constitution and legislating from the bench."

The issue is one that Cruz said distinguishes him from other potential candidates in what looks to be a crowded 2016 presidential field. While others have de-emphasized or dropped altogether their opposition to same-sex marriage, he said, he would continue to make it a priority.

Cruz delivered his speech to a crowd of about 200 Iowa religious leaders and their spouses behind closed doors in a hotel ballroom in Des Moines. Although the American Renewal Project's "Pastors and Pews" event was closed to the press, reporters were able to hear and record Cruz's remarks from the corridor outside.

His remarks also emphasized his opposition to Iran and support for Israel and sharp criticism of President Barack Obama, whom he called "an apologist for radical Islamic terrorism."

The event also featured Cruz's father, evangelical pastor Rafael Cruz. The senator's appearance before the group culminated with attendees laying hands on him in an extended prayer.



Just down the hall from U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz's speech to conservative evangelicals in Des Moines on Monday, a group of liberal religious leaders offered a different view.

The Interfaith Alliance of Iowa held a press conference seeking to clarify that political views and policy prescriptions offered by conservative Christians are not universally shared in Iowa.

"Many faiths live by one version or another of the Golden Rule, the guiding principle to treat others as you would be treated," said Connie Ryan Terrell, executive director of the interfaith alliance. "We wish that the American Renewal Project, David Lane, Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal and all the clergy in attendance today would not just speak those words, but live by them."

League Of The South: Selma March Was An 'Orgy Of Sex, Alcohol And Drugs'

The League of the South marked the 50th anniversary of the Selma to Montgomery civil rights march by criticizing the liberal media for refusing to tell the “great untold story” of “the orgy of sex, alcohol, and drugs that took place between Selma and Montgomery in the spring of 1965.”

The city of Selma, League president Michael Hill wrote on the group’s website, is now “a few short steps from Third World status” as a result of federal intervention into the Southern state.

The neo-Confederate group also praised the posting of a billboard honoring Nathan Bedford Forrest, the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, near the Edmund Pettus Bridge, saying that it “is nice to have a bit of civilization on what us rednecks sometimes refer to as Little Harare on the Alabammy! Keep the skeer on ‘em indeed!”

The weekend of 7-8 March 2015 marked the 50th anniversary of what the US “civil rights” establishment calls “Bloody Sunday.” In 1965, marchers–local and regional negro leaders and outsider leftists of all stripes (Jew and Gentile alike)–descended on the quiet and quaint central Alabama river town of Selma to begin a 50-mile “voting rights” march to the Alabama State Capitol in Montgomery. The first march plummeted like a lead balloon, as local and State law enforcement officials turned back the marches before they could cross the now-famous (0r [sic] infamous) Edmund Pettus Bridge. After the national news media showed the encounter between the marchers and Alabama officers, public pressure from outside the South got the feds involved and the march finally took place. The great untold story by the anti-South media was the orgy of sex, alcohol, and drugs that took place between Selma and Montgomery in the spring of 1965. But to deal honestly with these event and personalities would not have advanced the agenda of the evil South and the righteous left.

The rest, as they say, is history. Today Selma has lost fully one-third of its population of 30,000 in 1965, along with most of its tax base. Far from being a prosperous Southern river town, Selma sometimes, at least according to some of the residents, cannot even collect the garbage on a regular basis. The town is an economic and social basket case, dependent on federal largesse to function. It is but a few short steps from Third World status.



Well, we in The League of the South salute Miss Patricia and General Forrest. It is nice to have a bit of civilization on what us rednecks sometimes refer to as Little Harare on the Alabammy! Keep the skeer on ‘em indeed!

Discrimination Masked as Religious Freedom? Not in My Name.

This op-ed by Rev. Timothy McDonald III, co-chair of People For the American Way's African American Ministers in Action, was originally published at The Huffington Post.

Last week, a bill disguised as a "religious liberty" measure that would give a green light to discrimination was passed by the Georgia Senate and will now go to the House.

As a Baptist pastor, I feel called to weigh in on a proposal that is supposedly designed to protect religious rights in my state. I fully support every person's constitutionally-protected right of the free exercise of religion. The right to pray to whatever God you believe in and freely practice your religion is a fundamental one, and one that must be protected.

But I do not support this bill, which is not a true effort to protect First Amendment rights. And the fact that supporters in the state Senate quickly and unexpectedly brought it up in committee when no Democrats were present makes me wonder if even proponents aren't so sure of its merit.

The proposed bill is modeled on a national religious freedom bill that passed in 1993, and supporters claim that it would shield people of all religions from government intrusion. In reality, this is a bill that threatens to allow businesses and individuals to simply flout the laws they don't like. It threatens to turn "religious liberty" law from a shield to guard individual liberties into a sword to bring harm to others.

For example, what happens if medical workers, citing religious beliefs, decide that they won't treat gay or transgender people? If business owners decide that they won't serve Muslims or interracial couples? If landlords decide they won't rent to single women? Beyond anti-discrimination protections, what happens if individuals or business owners claim they are exempt from any number of laws they disagree with? What happens, for example, if employers decide that paying their workers a minimum wage goes against their religious beliefs? Do we want to live in a society where your legal rights depend on the religious beliefs of others in the community?

Basic rights and equality should never yield to discrimination.

Other religious leaders here in Georgia aren't fooled, either. Working with a group of more than 160 clergy across the state, we have been asking our elected officials to abandon this misguided project, urging them not to pass any so-called "religious freedom" legislation that could lead to widespread discrimination. Handing people the "right" to use the mantle of religious liberty to harm others? Not in our name.

It's clear that rather than fixing a problem, as good public policy should, this bill would create problems, and often for those most vulnerable among us.

Even former state attorney general Michael Bowers, who once fought in favor of anti-gay "sodomy" laws, has called the bill "nothing but an excuse to discriminate," saying it is "ill-conceived, unnecessary, mean-spirited, and deserving of a swift death in the General Assembly."

I agree. My faith tells me that I should stand up for the marginalized. That I should speak out against proposals that could deny basic rights to others -- especially when it's being done in the name of religion.

PFAW

Sandy Rios: Obama Wouldn't Have Marched In Selma Because He's Too Privileged

Sandy Rios of the American Family Association took to her radio show today to blast President Obama for making remarks in favor of gay rights in his speech at the event marking the 50th anniversary of the Selma civil rights march. Rios said Obama, along with Attorney General Eric Holder and Rev. Al Sharpton, would never have marched in the Selma protests because they are too comfortable with their wealth and power.

“I can’t imagine the president and Eric Holder marching, knowing on that bridge that they might be giving their lives,” Rios said. “I find myself thinking that there is way too much privilege and pleasure and wealth in this new generation of black leaders to understand the sacrifices of their founding fathers of the Civil Rights Movement like Dr. Martin Luther King.”

Rios claimed Obama and Holder simply don’t understand the civil rights struggle since they have “gotten wealthy complaining about things they’ve never experienced” and are “privileged men who have been to great universities, accumulating great wealth, great privilege.”

“They do very well and yet they complain,” Rios said. “They stoke at the sores of the real grievances, the real legitimate grievances of black Americans and they make money off of it, they get rich off of it, they upset people over it in order to take power over them, to make them think that they actually care and they actually want to do something when all they really want is their vote and their massive support so that they can do other things that really and truly will undermine and destroy the black community.”

Rafael Cruz: Nondiscrimination Measures Let Football Teams 'Decide That They Want To Shower With The Girls'

Rafael Cruz, the Religious Right activist and father of Sen. Ted Cruz, told an Oklahoma church last week that LGBT-inclusive nondiscrimination ordinances allow entire high school boys football teams to decide “that they want to shower with the girls.”

Cruz told the Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, Oklahoma, that the Supreme Court’s striking down of part of the Defense of Marriage Act has wreaked havoc in municipalities, including Houston, which “has a lesbian for a mayor”:

In Houston, Texas, in the heart of the Bible Belt, that city has a lesbian for a mayor. Well, a few months ago that mayor and that city council passed an ordinance that if a man, today, feels like a woman, he has the right to walk into a women’s bathroom. And if a woman is in there and she complains, she can be sued for that man because she is violating his civil rights.

As a matter of fact, according to that ordinance, if the football team in the high school decides that they want to shower with the girls and the girls complain, they can be sued. This is an abomination!

Cruz made a similar claim last month , telling fellow anti-LGBT activists that “God will hold you accountable” for failing to stop such ordinances.

Rand Paul: The GOP's 'Principled' Flip-Flopper

Following his upset victory in the 2010 Republican U.S. Senate primary in Kentucky, Rand Paul told the country that he had “a message from the Tea Party.” That message has turned out to be a mix of anti-establishment libertarianism in the mold of his father and tired GOP ideas repackaged under the brand of the Tea Party.

Roy Moore: SCOTUS Gay Marriage Ruling Paves Way For Government To 'Take Your Children'

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore told the audience at the Family Research Council’s “Faith and Family Summit” on Friday that if the Supreme Court rules that states don’t have the right to impose bans on same-sex marriage, it would give immense power to the federal government. If marriage and family life become federal issues, Moore warned, “they’re going to be taking your children simply by the same logic they’re following.”

“They’re going to define who your children can be and who they answer to,” Moore said. “People will say, ‘oh we couldn’t go there, ‘well we’re going somewhere else right now that we didn’t think we would be going.”

Moore told FRC President Tony Perkins that “Christians need to stand up and do their duty to God as their duty to their country” by fighting gay rights. He declared that the issue of marriage rights is much more important than foreign affairs, immigration, economics or the national debt: “This is the most critical issue that faces this country. And I want to disagree a little bit with what I’ve heard about asking our presidential candidates [about marriage rights]. We should not have to ask them, Tony. If they haven’t come up and said it, they should not even be considered.”

If the court introduces the “redefinition of a word that existed for thousands of years before this country came into existence, and if we go there, then we’ve ruined the definition of the family and we’ll go to parent-and-child [marriage] next.”

Craig James: Satan Pushing Gay Rights In Pro Sports

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins broadcast his “Washington Watch” radio program live from FRC’s “Faith and Family Summit” on Friday where the major topic was, predictably, the supposed persecution of conservative Christians at the hands of the LGBT rights movement.

Perkins invited Craig James, the former pro football player who joined FRC after being fired as a Fox Sports commentator, to discuss the decision of several professional sports teams to join a brief on behalf of gay marriage at the Supreme Court.

James worried that the decision by the New England Patriots, the Tampa Bay Rays and the San Francisco Giants to join the marriage brief could cause an “implosion” in team locker rooms and intimidate players who oppose marriage equality from speaking their minds.

“If I were a current player in that locker room and my livelihood depended on me being quiet or losing it because of my belief system, I worry, I wonder,” he said. “So, that’s Satan working on us.”

Later in the interview, Perkins warned of a coming clash between LGBT rights and religious liberty, saying, “There’s no avoiding this conflict, it’s coming, as we redefine marriage and with it everything else in society. “

“It’s not so much about the marriage altar, this redefinition of marriage, it’s about altering all of society,” he added.

James agreed, adding that he had recently been studying the book of Genesis and found that the story of Adam and Eve proves that if you support gay marriage, you “have a problem with God.”

Right-Wing Activist: Flee America Before Gay Marriage Causes God To Destroy Us

On Thursday, End Times broadcaster Rick Wiles invited John Price, a onetime failed Republican Senate candidate from Indiana and author of “The End of America,” to discuss his decision to move to Costa Rica three years ago in order to follow God’s call to “flee from the daughter of Babylon and not stay and participant in her sins and not be around when the nation is destroyed.”

Price told Wiles that other Americans should consider leaving the U.S., which he said is “truly is the daughter of Babylon” as a result of the upcoming Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage.

“For Christians, there’s a really major troublesome thing coming and it’s going to be set loose on the country sometime between now and the end of June,” he said, predicting that the Supreme Court will “prohibit any state from establishing the parameters of marriage” and make “same-sex marriage the law of the land.”

Price said that same-sex couples will use the Supreme Court case to sue churches that decline to perform same-sex weddings, which he said was prophesied by the Bible. Eventually, Price predicted, “there will even be blood in the church and blood of the martyrs in Babylon and violence in the land.”

The two Religious Right activists agreed that once the Supreme Court strikes down bans on same-sex marriage, God will unleash His wrath upon America in the form of an “old fashioned paddling.”

“I honestly believe this is going to be the ruling that America crosses the line,” Wiles said. “What would a human father do with a son or daughter that had been blessed, had been a fairly good child most of his or her life and then suddenly just goes off the rails and becomes evil, wicked, rebellious, defiant? What would that father do? He would strip away that child’s blessings, and that’s exactly what our heavenly father is going to do to the United States of America. We’re about to get an old-fashioned paddling that is going to be extremely painful for this nation. 

He recommended that “people who don’t want to be paddled” choose to “flee” the country.

Price concluded that God will permit widespread “persecution of the church, pastors being arrested” in order to encourage Christians to flee: “He’s a loving God and he would allow persecution for a good purpose.”

Mark Regnerus Defends Flawed Research On Same-Sex Parenting

Back in 2012, University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus published a study claiming that children raised by same-sex couples are more likely to be molested, abuse drugs and alcohol, do poorly in school, and experience any number of other maladies. The study quickly made its way into anti-LGBT talking points around the world, even as Regnerus’ fellow academics began to find serious problems with his methodology.

The main issue with Regnerus’ work was that he based his conclusions on same-sex parenting on respondents who said their parent had been in a same-sex relationship at some point when they were a child – not necessarily adults who had been raised by a same-sex couple. Ultimately, only two of the people he studied were actually raised by same-sex couples. He also failed to control for destabilizing childhood events like divorce. Sociologist Darren Sherkat summarized the problems with the Regnerus study in a 2013 interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center:

The key measure of gay and lesbian parenting is simply a farce. The study includes a retrospective question asking if people knew if their mother or father had a “romantic” relationship with someone of the same sex when the respondent was under age 18. This measure is problematic on many levels.

Regnerus admits that just two of his respondents were actually raised by a same-sex couple, though I doubt that he can even know that, given his limited data. Since only two respondents were actually raised in gay or lesbian households, this study has absolutely nothing to say about gay parenting outcomes. Indeed, because it is a non-random sample, this study has nothing to say about anything.

It failed to take into account normal family effects on wellbeing, to control for known​ sources of positive or negative outcomes. Indeed, since he only had two stable lesbian “couples” (or at least a young adult who said that, retrospectively, in a non-random, convenience sample), he instead just constructed differences from a group of people who were raised in unstable environments. Sexuality has nothing to do with that.

Then, earlier this year, Catholic University professor Paul Sullins published a paper with conclusions similar to those put forth by Regnerus...and similar methodological flaws.

As Emma Green wrote in “The Atlantic” recently, most social science “suggests that there are no differences between kids raised in stable households by gay or straight parents” — in other words, most scientists are finding that it’s the stability of their household, not their gender of the parents, that most affects the wellbeing of kids.

But now Regnerus is defending the findings of his and Sullins’ studies by arguing essentially that families headed by same-sex couples are inherently unstable — so there is no need to control for stability in studying the wellbeing of children raised in by same-sex parents. Regnerus told World Magazine this week that divorce is “still, so far as I can tell, the primary means by which a child comes to be in a same-sex household,” so “I think we should evaluate reality as it exists, not complain about the ideal data situation that does not”:

Critics of Sullins’ study claim it can’t tell us anything meaningful about same-sex parenting because it includes children of divorce, who are themselves more likely to suffer from emotional, behavioral, and academic problems. In order to fairly represent gay parents, critics seem to suggest, surveys should only include children who did not experience divorce and were raised from infancy by stable gay couples. In other words, the childhoods Lopez and Barwick experienced should be tossed out of the data pool.

But such “ideal” same-sex parent situations are rare and would be difficult to measure using a random representative survey. Besides, is it fair to ignore the very factor that often precedes same-sex parenting situations: divorce?

“[Divorce] is still, so far as I can tell, the primary means by which a child comes to be in a same-sex household,” said Mark Regnerus, a University of Texas at Austin sociologist whose own survey of same-sex households in 2012 found children of gay parents were more likely to be unemployed, depressed, unhealthy, promiscuous, and to have a negative view of their childhood. “I think we should evaluate reality as it exists, not complain about the ideal data situation that does not.”

It’s not surprising that since same-sex marriage — and the child custody rights that come with that marriage status — is a relatively new development there isn’t a huge pool of data on children raised by married same-sex couples. But that doesn’t mean, as Regnerus suggests, that sociologists should simply conflate same-sex parenting with household instability.

David Lane: Gay People Imposing 'Reign Of Terror'

David Lane, the conservative political activist who organizes meetings and trips to connect evangelical voters with GOP presidential candidates, most recently Ted Cruz and Bobby Jindal, is out with a new column attacking gay rights in the far-far-right outlet BarbWire today.

Lane writes that while what “homosexuals do in their home is none of my business,” he is worried that they now seek to “impose” their “reign of terror” on “anyone who will not celebrate their sexual lifestyle.”

What homosexuals do in their home is none of my business. What does concern me is the reign of terror, now becoming old hat, that they impose on anyone who will not celebrate their sexual lifestyle. They evidently intend their worldview to be forced upon all others. When the coming storm arrives, Christian pastors will have to make a choice. Either capitulate on the Gospel by giving approval to the homosexual lifestyle, or—go to jail.

Through His Word, God fully declared His mind regarding sexual sin—whether it is fornication, heterosexual adultery, homosexuality, or any other form proscribed in the Bible. God defines sin, not the U.S. Supreme Court, “vice stalking in virtue’s garb”.



The commodity which we Christians in America stand in need of is mercy and pardon. We have allowed spiritual calamity to come to a nation founded by Christians—men and women who were giants of the faith.

Such remarks shouldn’t come as a surprise, as Lane has previously alleged that gay rights will lead to the destruction of America and a series of car bomb attacks throughout the country.

Pamela Geller Names Jon Stewart The 'Most Disgusting Jew on the Planet'

In a WorldNetDaily column today about how the U.S. suffers from “an absence of the good” and “an abundance of poo,” conservative pundit Pamela Geller claims that modern American culture is best illustrated by “the popular emoticon found on phones today, of a happily smiling pile of excrement.”

Geller is especially angry with Jon Stewart, blaming him for the rise of America’s “poo generation.” Stewart, Geller writes, “should have given the ‘Most Disgusting Jew on the Planet Award’” at the Oscars last month.

“This vicious traitor, smug and self-righteous, has long been working for the other side under the guise of comedy” she writes. “Vile. Jon Stewart defines self-loathing Jew. But that’s not enough. He means to take us down with him.”

In every generation, there are icons that sum up its core values – not official ones, but symbols that really mean something to people: Rosie the Riveter, the American flag, Elvis Presley, the motorcycle jacket, the defeatist “peace sign” and now the tyrannical “Coexist” bumper sticker. There are symbols that sum up the zeitgeist of a time, a generation.

The popular emoticon found on phones today, of a happily smiling pile of excrement, is just that. It best exemplifies the low state of the world, of the culture, and of America itself in the age of the primitive. It signifies America’s rapid decay in the wake of the left’s decades-long war on Americanism, freedom and individual rights. The absence of morality – and by morality, I mean a code of values – has led to an absence of the good. And an abundance of poo.



The culture is ugly. Ugly as poo. The music is ugly, violent and misogynistic. Every crime drama and suspense series is rife with the most unimaginable gore. “Game of Thrones,” “Law and Order (Sex Crimes),” “American Horror Story” – they’re all devoid of humanity and morality. Devoid of goodness. It’s a cultural rout. It’s not that the line between good and evil has been blurred – it’s nonexistent. We are living in a cultural free-for-all, or more accurately, a free fall.



American traitor Edward Snowden got an Oscar; American hero Chris Kyle got the middle finger. Even the traitorous far-left journalist Glenn Greenwald got an Oscars shout-out. Of course Hollywood would reward vicious traitors. There was no way the Hollywood establishment was going to give an Oscar to Clint Eastwood after he so delightfully skewered Obama’s empty chair. And their disdain for Americanism and the military is infused in everything they churn out.

Sharing their disdain for America is Jon Stewart, to whom they should have given the “Most Disgusting Jew on the Planet Award.” No contest. After Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ground-breaking speech to Congress last week, Stewart scoffed at the many standing ovations Netanyahu received as the “longest bl-wjob a Jewish man has ever received.”

This vicious traitor, smug and self-righteous, has long been working for the other side under the guise of comedy. Vile. Jon Stewart defines self-loathing Jew. But that’s not enough. He means to take us down with him.

He is leaving Comedy Central, thankfully. But don’t get too happy; they’ll turn the show over to another leftist radical. When does Dennis Miller or someone like that get an HBO or Comedy Central gig? The cultural landscape is under siege by these killers.

And what’s next for Stewart? Politics, I fear.

As if Israel didn’t have enough problems …

Ayn Rand said, “There are two aspects of man’s existence which are the special province and expression of his sense of life: love and art.” Both of which have all but been extinguished in the era of amoralism – reflected in cultural rot and the exaltation of the crank.

This is where we are now. In the poo generation.

Ken Cuccinelli: 'We're Being Invaded…One Person At A Time'

Former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who now heads up the Senate Conservatives Fund, told talk show host Steve Deace in an interview yesterday that America is being “invaded” by immigrants “one person at a time” and that President Obama is guilty of “encouraging the invasion” with his executive actions.

Discussing the decision of Republican leaders in Congress to ally with Democrats to pass a Department of Homeland Security funding bill, Deace asked Cuccinelli: “Is there any affront to the Constitution this president could commit that would cause the current Republican leaders in Congress to really, substantively attempt to do something about it and stop it? Is there anything he could do? Anything?”

“I can’t think of one,” Cuccinelli responded. “I mean, other than surrendering to everybody — I mean, we’re being invaded. We’re being invaded, right? One person at a time, we’re being invaded. And the president isn’t protecting us from invasion, he’s encouraging the invasion, and he’s doing it unconstitutionally."

“He’s assumed power after power that’s allocated to Congress and they’ve supinely rolled over under the Republican surrendership of Mitch McConnell and John Boehner and Steve Scalise and Kevin McCarthy, and there’s no reason to expect that’s going to change," he continued.

“I mean, what’s more important that’s coming up than what we’ve seen in the last week or two months?" he asked. "Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Not to say that the other things we’re going to deal with in coming months aren’t important, Steve. It’s just that clearly what we’ve been through both constitutionally, in terms of our sovereignty and the rule of law, you’re never going to top that.”

Cuccinelli used similar rhetoric in a Facebook post last year in support of then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s questionable decision to send the Texas National Guard to the southern border to confront Central American child migrants. “The border states that are being directly invaded by illegal immigrants – Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico – may constitutionally deal with the invasion themselves, at least as it relates to attempting to stop the flow across their own borders,” Cuccinelli wrote at the time. “And there is nothing President Obama or those in Washington can do to stop any of these states, if they are determined to act.”

Republicans Stop at Nothing to Attack Immigrants

This op-ed by Michael Keegan, President, People For the American Way was originally published at The Huffington Post.

On March 3, the House of Representatives finally voted for a clean DHS funding bill. Much of the media reported that Republicans saw the irresponsibility of their threats to shut down Homeland Security and passed a clean bill. But they didn't, and no one should lose sight of that.

After trying every trick in the book to scuttle the bill, their leadership allowed the vote to happen, but Republicans never caved. Republicans voted over two to one (167-75)against the bill. It only passed because of full Democratic support.

It's clear that Republicans will stop at nothing to attack immigrants. The fact that national security was on the line was immaterial: Republicans saw an opportunity to display their animus toward all immigrants, and Latinos in particular, and they took it.

This publicity stunt gave Republicans the chance to pander yet again to the most virulent anti-immigrant members of their party. Take, for instance, William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration and his comments during the heat of the DHS fight in mid-February:

[I] wouldn't put anything past [the administration, because] the people who are supporting the organized and well-funded illegal alien invasion of our homeland have the blood of many thousands of Americans on their hands that have been killed, injured raped and robbed by illegal immigrants.

Sure, Gheen is a fringe extremist. But what he's saying is strikingly similar to what we're hearing from the Republican Party.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the architect of Mitt Romney's "self-deportation" strategy, entertained the suggestion that Obama's executive actions could eventually result in Latinos conducting an "ethnic cleansing" of their fellow Americans. Sen. Tom Coburn, Rep. Mike Kelly, and Rep. Louie Gohmert have also warned that the president's immigration policies could lead to violence.

While some in the GOP tried to tell a different narrative -- that this was just about reining in presidential excess and not about their being anti-immigrant -- the fact is that the entire Republican Party is at fault. Not one House Republican signed the discharge petition to allow even a vote on the Senate's bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill. And Senate Republicans who backed that bill, including Sen. Marco Rubio, now say they no longer support it. At this very minute, House Republicans are bringing up even more anti-immigrant legislation, including deportation-only legislation and a bill that would drastically change U.S. asylum and humanitarian protections to put domestic violence survivors and victims of human trafficking at serious risk.

Ultimately, it was Ann Coulter who summed up the Republican position on the DHS debate: Undocumented immigrants (she calls them "illegal aliens [who] have killed, raped and maimed thousands of Americans") pose a greater threat to our nation than does ISIS." While not all Republicans used language as biting as that, it was crystal-clear that Republicans believe that attacking immigrants, not funding DHS, should be the top priority.

Who would have imagined that a national party, never mind the Republican Party, would be so opposed to finding any solution for the almost 12 million undocumented people already here that they would risk our national security during the dangerous time we are in now? Yet that's the reality of the GOP today, and it's our responsibility to hold them accountable.

PFAW

Paranoia-Rama: Muslim Infiltration, Gay End Times And Liberal Killers

Now that gay people and the Muslim Brotherhood have taken over the government, conservative pundits have a lot of thoughts that they want to share — scary thoughts about anti-Christian persecution and a (non-existent) Egyptian court case that may throw two American leaders behind bars.

Steve King: Boehner Threw A 'Tantrum' About DHS Vote, Kicked Foes Off 'Very Important Diplomatic Mission'

In an interview with Iowa-based radio host Simon Conway on Wednesday, Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King revealed that House Speaker John Boehner kicked him and fellow anti-immigration Republicans off a “high-profile diplomatic mission” in “retribution” for their votes against a clean funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security.

Conway told King that he was surprised the speaker didn’t step down from his post after a revolt from Republican members handed him an embarrassing defeat, ultimately forcing him to pass a DHS spending bill with the support of just 75 members of his caucus in alliance with Democrats.

“In times gone past, other speakers would have said, ‘That is a vote of no confidence in my leadership from my own caucus, I have to step down,'” Conway said. “I know he’s not going to step down and I don’t think there’s an appetite to challenge him.”

“Well, that appetite is growing here in this conference,” King responded, “and you can tell it by just the dialogue and discussion that’s taking place.”

He added that the speaker is “currently throwing tantrums” and seeking “retribution” against members who bucked him on the DHS votes.

“In the last 30 minutes, I have learned that a very important diplomatic mission that I was scheduled to go on that had been signed off on, certified, authorized, everything all booked, the order came down from the speaker’s office, ‘that shall be rescinded.’ And the people who he most objects to for disagreeing with him are now grounded to the United States of America by order of the speaker,” King told Conway.

That on top of the ads being run against Republicans by the American Action Network, King said, “is retribution on the highest scale that I’ve ever heard of.”

Later in the interview, King complained that undocumented immigrants covered by President Obama’s executive actions would be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit (despite the fact that the actions are projected to increase tax revenues) and that it provides a way for some immigrants to embark on a path to citizenship, which King said meant that “illegal aliens can go to vote and choose the next leader of the free world.”

“And when I say he eviscerated the Constitution, I think everyone who’s listening now understands what that means,” he concluded.

The president has waived the application of the law, he’s made up laws of his own, and now he as an administration that will be sending checks to illegals knowingly and willfully without even a breath of saying that want to try to reverse that. You know, a president who can make up law on his own, as he has done a number of times and gotten away with it, you would think he could also just simply issue an executive edict that they would not be issuing those kind of, writing checks to illegals who have filed under the Earned Income Tax Credit.

So, here’s your driver’s license mandated by the federal government, here’s your Earned Income Tax Credit, here’s your child tax credit that billions of dollars go out of the country every year for people who are living in the United States illegally, and now he’s created a path to citizenship so illegal aliens can go to vote and choose the next leader of the free world. Who would have thought, even three years ago, that this country would have been drug this far. And when I say he eviscerated the Constitution, I think everyone who’s listening now understands what that means.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious