C4

WND: Black History Month Should Be About The Knockout Game, Anti-White Segregation

WorldNetDaily columnist Mychal Massie thinks Black History Month should be sent “to the ash heaps of history,” but since it is still around, he has devised his own way to mark the month.

Massie suggests that Black History Month should focus on the media-hyped “knockout game” as proof that black people “are able to get away” with anything and blames groups such as the Congressional Black Caucus for segregation.

The one thing you won’t hear during Black History Month is what blacks are able to get away with today, which, if taken in context, shows the tolerance of America that they won’t be talking about in classrooms during Black History Month.

They won’t be talking about the fact that blacks aren’t shot on sight in areas where “Knockout” is taking place. For those unfamiliar, the Knockout game is what black thugs play where they suddenly and unexpectedly punch unsuspecting white persons in the face for sport.



I’m tired of the lies – charlatans posing as eruditionists and parroting myths and distortions about what slavery was or wasn’t. Jim Crow is over, and the only overt segregation taking place today is perpetrated by black groups such as the Congressional Black Caucus, the Nation of Islam and the New Black Panthers.

Slavery has become a crutch for blacks. It is the excuse used for retreating from modernity. Slavery happened; the United States had the good sense and decency to move beyond it. Now it’s time blacks got over it and moved forward.

It’s time to send Black History Month to the ash heaps of history. It’s time to teach all children factual history, not just a manufactured history used to force guilt on white students and victim status on black students. It’s time we teach students that blacks do not own the market on past suffering and injustice. It’s time we teach that every population group who arrived here had extremely difficult times at first, but, unlike the majority of blacks, they rose above it. And, specific to that point, we should teach that those blacks who are not rising above same are those who embrace bitterness, victimology and immiseration as a means of life.
 

Larry Pratt Wants 'Happy' Africans to Mentor 'Surly' African Americans; Warns Obama Building Private Militia

Gun Owners of America director Larry Pratt invited Selwyn Duke, a writer for The American Thinker , to be his guest on Gun Owners News Hour last month to discuss the death of Nelson Mandela and race relations in the United States.

The discussion was just as thoughtful as you might expect coming from the author of such columns as “Obama’s America: Why Black Grievance Will Never End” and the activist who has ties to white supremacists and thinks it’s very possible that President Obama is instigating a race war.

The two started off by discussing a column in which Duke hypothesizes that President Obama may be “creating a martial law ready military” by “promoting minorities and women -- and, I believe, homosexuals and lesbians -- at the expense of white men.”

“I’m not saying there’s anything nefarious going on here for sure,” Duke told Pratt. But, he said, if you “wanted to have the military on your side…you would do it by implementing the exact same policies that Barack Obama has been implementing.” Pratt added his pet conspiracy theory that the president is “building up a civilian defense force, not for defending the country but defending the president.”

Later in the program, Duke twisted Neera Tanden’s remark that the president “doesn’t like people” – by which she meant he is a “private person” – to claim that the president is a “misanthrope.”

“You know what kinds of leaders didn’t like people?” he mused. “People like Joseph Stalin. People like Ivan the Terrible,” adding, “I’m reminded of Hitler here.”

The two moved on to talking about what they perceive as the differences between Africans and African Americans, which, as you can probably imagine, went great.

“Generally, the African from Africa is a very pro-American person, a very happy person,” Pratt said. “I know several, and they’re always happy with a joke, a pleasant smile on their face, and they clearly don’t identify with the surliness that’s all too frequently the attitude of their fellow African Americans here.”

Duke responded by informing Pratt that that may be true but “the Africans who come here in the first place, I would say, tend to be of a better stripe."

Pratt conceded the point, saying, “These are folks who really stand apart, and maybe they can approach some of their fellow blacks and say, ‘Hey, buddy, you’ve got this all wrong, let me explain to you the way the world really works.’”

The two also touched on the issue of apartheid in South Africa, which both claimed wasn’t all that bad. Pratt lamented that Dutch and English settlers “neglected to evangelize the blacks,” so that now “there aren’t common values, there is certainly no Christian ethos in that country.”

Duke, for his part, equated the “supposedly racist” apartheid regime with George Zimmerman. “South Africa was sort of the George Zimmerman of the geopolitical stage,” he said. “It was a situation where you had black on black crimes that were rampant and brutal that the media ignored, but this white-on-black so-called crime was disseminated far and wide…simply because it accorded with the politically correct agenda.”

We will mention, yet again, that Larry Pratt is an actually influential lobbyist in Washington who has an especially close relationship with Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.

Wisconsin Marriage Equality Lawsuit and the Judicial Vacancy Crisis

In the Western District of Wisconsin, one of the two active federal judgeships has been vacant for five years.
PFAW

Farah: God Hardening Obama's Heart Like The Pharaoh's

In a column today, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah takes issue with Bill O’Reilly for telling President Obama that his “heart is in the right place.” Farah writes that it is “entirely possible God is hardening the heart of Obama,” just as “God hardened the heart of Pharaoh to serve His purposes” in Exodus, in order to “deliver His people from bondage once again.”

He goes on to say that Obama isn’t a Christian but an evildoer who is trying to “make government our god the way the children of Israel made one of a golden calf.”

Do you agree with Bill O’Reilly that Barack Obama’s heart is in the right place?

How does Bill O’Reilly know?



Can Bill O’Reilly know it? What special training and insight might he have?

Everything about Obama’s actions suggests neither his heart nor his soul is in the right place.



In Egypt, God hardened the heart of Pharaoh to serve His purposes. God sought to deliver His people from bondage in Egypt. Is it entirely possible God is hardening the heart of Obama today to deliver His people from bondage once again?

The Hebrew people were not excited about leaving bondage in Egypt. As bad as conditions were, the unknown frightened them. Even after the Red Sea was parted, saving them from annihilation by the Egyptian army, many sought to return to Egypt from the safety of the wilderness.

In a similar way, I believe Obama’s role is to force Americans to make a decision about their future:

Will we continue down the road toward bondage or reverse course and seek liberty in the ways of God?

Will we accept government’s handouts and control over our lives or depend on God and the work of our own minds and hands?

Will we follow God or will we make government our god the way the children of Israel made one of a golden calf?

I will believe Barack Obama’s heart is in the right place when he vows that he is a follower of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and will take no actions and make no pronouncements that he cannot square with His Holy Word. I will believe Barack Obama’s heart is in the right place when he repents of all the evil he has wrought since assuming office five years ago. I will believe Barack Obama’s heart is in the right place when he turns from his wicked ways, scrupulously follows the law of the land and listens not only for the voice of God but for the voice of the people he is sworn to serve.

Morse: Professional Women 'Victimized' By 'Totalitarian' Sexual Revolution

Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute – a former wing the National Organization for Marriage dedicated to “making marriage cool” – is preparing for a conference this month that will bring together “victims” of the sexual revolution. She discussed the event in an interview with the National Catholic Register yesterday, in which she claimed that the sexual revolution is a “totalitarian” movement pushed by “hipsters” and “radical feminists” that victimizes professional women who build their lives “around the lies.”

As an example of this “totalitarianism,” Morse points to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage mandate, which she claims is a government effort to “ control people’s behavior and even people’s thoughts.” By requiring that insurance plans cover contraception, Morse argues, the government is” stifling dissent by essentially saying: ‘This society will be built around contraception, and there will be no dissent from that.’”

Which groups have been pushing this sexual revolution?

A mix of people have promoted it: population controllers (who think there are too many poor people); hipsters (who just want to be libertines); radical feminists who think babies are keeping women from being “equal.” All these groups have one thing in common: They’re controlled by elites, people who want to re-create the world in their own image.

The sexual revolution promised freedom and fun. Yet you say it was — and is — a totalitarian movement. Why?

Because its goal — to separate sex from reproduction and both from marriage — is impossible. When men and women have sex, babies have a way of appearing. So the government has to step in and control people’s behavior and even people’s thoughts about what’s possible, desirable and realistic. The HHS mandate is just one example of the government stifling dissent by essentially saying: “This society will be built around contraception, and there will be no dissent from that.” That’s one example of totalitarianism coming straight from the government and literally shutting down people who disagree.

You call another group of sexual-revolution victims, who bought into the sexual revolution only to discover its promises of fun and freedom are false, “the heartbroken career women.”

These women are also all around us, but we simply don’t see them. [Culture says] the entry fee into the professions for women is that you chemically neuter yourself during your peak childbearing years in your 20s — and if you have an “accident,” you get an abortion.

By the time a woman figures out, “If I have no children, that’s going to be terrible for me,” she’s 35. The in vitro fertilization industry is making huge profits off people’s infertility problems, which often happen because women put off having kids for so long they can’t do it naturally anymore.

And yet when that woman is a lawyer, college professor, TV news anchor or some other professional, she’s going to dig in her heels and defend the sexual revolution, because her life is literally built around it. We want to help this type of woman “connect the dots” and see that she has been victimized because she built her life around the lies.

Tony Perkins Rails Against Disney For Including Same-Sex Couple On 'Good Luck Charlie'

Family Research Council head Tony Perkins is joining other anti-gay activists in blasting the Disney Channel show “Good Luck Charlie” for daring to include a same-sex couple in one episode. “Good Luck Charlie” came under fire from One Million Moms, a wing of the American Family Association, which warned members that Disney will “corrupt the children’s network with LGBT content.”

Perkins declared victory over Disney, insisting without any evidence that “One Million Moms is flooding the channel with complaints.”

The FRC leader even made the baseless claim that “research says” same-sex parenting is harmful to kids.

He adds: “So it’s a little ironic that the show's called, ‘Good luck, Charlie.’ Without a dad, he'll need it.”

Perkins seems to have been so blinded by outrage in watching the show that he missed the fact that it is Charlie’s friend, and not Charlie herself, who has same-sex parents. And that Charlie is a girl.

When liberals took over the Disney Channel, they were hoping for a happy ending for their agenda. What they're getting is anything but. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. If you're looking for conservative values at Disney, it really is a small world after all. Producers made that clear when they introduced the channel's first same-sex couple to kids. After a year of planning, Disney finally made good on its promise, using the show "Good Luck Charlie" to give Taylor two moms. A spokesman says the show "was developed under the [advice] of child development experts..." But if Disney thinks that'll fly with parents, they've spent too much time in Fantasyland. OneMillionMoms is flooding the channel with complaints. Like us, they know what the research says: which is that kids who are deprived of a mom or dad grow up with significantly more emotional and academic problems. So it's a little ironic that the show's called, "Good luck, Charlie." Without a dad, he'll need it.

Venker: 'Quality' Men Don't Want 'Slutty' Wives Like Beyoncé

The right-wing outrage at Beyoncé and Jay-Z’s performance at the Grammy Awards continues. In a blog post on her website last week, “men’s rights” advocate Suzanne Venker responded to a New York Post article that called Jay-Z “a poor excuse for a husband,” by contending that Beyoncé is also “a poor excuse for a wife.”

“Behaving as Beyoncé does, or anything close to it, will not produce men who are invested in women. It will merely produce more Jay-Zs, or ‘poor excuses for a husband,’” Venker writes. “If women want a quality husband, they might begin by being quality material themselves.”

“Women like Beyoncé aren’t just contributing to the problem—they are the problem,” she adds. “Classy behavior begets classy behavior. Slutty behavior begets a smut reaction.”

We are sure that Beyoncé and Jay-Z appreciate the relationship advice.

Beyoncé a Poor Excuse for a Wife

In an oped for the New York Post, entitled “Jay Z a poor excuse for a husband,” Naomi Schaeffer Riley asks, “What do you call a man who stands there smiling and singing as his scantily clad wife straddles a chair and shakes her rear end for other men’s titillation?”

Answer: I don’t know—a loser? What do you call a scantily clad wife who straddles a chair and shakes her rear end? Or should this question not be asked since it paints a woman in a negative light?

...

There’s no wondering, Ms. Riley. Women like Beyonce aren’t just contributing to the problem—they are the problem. This isn’t a chicken or egg scenario. If women didn’t do what they do in the first place, men like Jay Z would have no opportunity to respond—poorly or otherwise. Classy behavior begets classy behavior. Slutty behavior begets a smut reaction.

Indeed, which means women haven’t really progressed at all—at least not when it comes to their personal lives. On the contrary, they’ve simply traded one kind of power for another. They may know what it takes to be successful in the marketplace, but they are clueless about the power women wield in love. Behaving as Beyonce does, or anything close to it, will not produce men who are invested in women. It will merely produce more Jay Zs, or “poor excuses for a husband.”

If women want a quality husband, they might begin by being quality material themselves.

Paul Vallely Denies 'Absolutely False' Coup Statements That He Absolutely Made

Former Army general turned right-wing activist Paul Vallely is vehemently denying the fact that he said he would support the overthrow of President Obama. He recently posted this brief statement on the homepage of his website:

MG Vallely Statement – Talk of Coup Support FALSE!

“Statements on the web and elsewhere that attribute me as supporting a coup are absolutely false. From the day I took my oath as a young Army lieutenant to this very day I have supported and defended the Constitution of the United States.

A coup is counter to the guiding principles laid out there. Disagreement and dissension are not! It’s time for change in America and I support that change – but only in a lawful, Constitutional manner.” - MG Paul E. Vallely (US Army-Ret.)

Unfortunately for Vallely, we have the audio from a Tea Party event at which he said that while he opposes an anti-Obama revolution, he would “certainly head it if we had to.”

Vallely is also promoting Operation American Spring, a rally with the goal of forcing Obama out of office, and has proposed a citizen’s arrest of the president along with various unconstitutional ways of removing Obama from office, such as a national recall vote.

The ex-general even believes that the “traditional process” of government is insufficient to remove Obama from office and called for an Egyptian-style uprising:

We are still waiting for Vallely to dispute the comments that he clearly made, rather than just offer a vague statement about how direct quotes of him calling for extralegal and unconstitutional means to remove the president from office are somehow “absolutely false.”

Peter LaBarbera Outraged That Disney Is 'Nonchalant About Exposing' Kids To 'Homosexual Parenting'

Looks like the American Family Association’s One Million Moms isn’t the only group upset about the Disney show “Good Luck Charlie” featuring a lesbian couple.

Naturally, Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality is also urging his followers to contact Disney to tell the company that that “homosexuality is aberrant and wrong behavior.”

“[Y]ou don’t want to model sinful relationships as normative to your kids–YOUR morality and faith, and your child’s innocence, are being undermined by Disney,” LaBarbera warns.

LaBarbera is especially disturbed by the fact that the parents in “Good Luck Charlie” do not seem disturbed or outraged that their daughter’s friend has two moms.

“Note how the main mother character, Amy (Leigh Allyn Baker) is nonchalant about exposing her daughter (Charlie) to homosexual parenting. (Amy goes on to call the lesbians a ‘great couple’),” LaBarbera comments. “Also note how she apparently never discussed the “lesbian moms” visit with her husband Bob (Eric Allen Kramer–of course, the dumber one). Get the message? A visit by homosexual parents is so inconsequential it doesn’t even merit a family discussion!”

Watch the shocking footage here:

Knight: America Becoming 'World's Great Satan' & 'Nuclear Waste Dump' Thanks To Gay Rights

Conservative columnist Robert Knight of the American Civil Rights Union is offended that “our Muslim enemies falsely describe” America as the “world’s Great Satan,” but he agrees that we are certainly on our way to becoming just that. “We might consider asking our ruling elites in Hollywood, New York and Washington to give the mullahs less evidence for that claim,” he writes in the Washington Times.

The ACRU senior fellow alleges that America’s “ever-coarsening, ‘progressive’ popular culture and the ruling elites” are using gay rights and immigrant rights to turn the country into a “nuclear waste dump.”

The trouble with liberals is not just that they eventually run out of other people’s money, as Margaret Thatcher observed. It’s that they find new ways every day to project their own dysfunctional worldview on the rest of us.

It’s like living next door to a nuclear-waste dump run by the Bumpusses. You’d like to ignore it, but shards of spent fuel keep falling into your yard and setting your dog on fire. This is how non-progressive Americans increasingly view our ever-coarsening, “progressive” popular culture and the ruling elites who promote it.

They’re aghast at not only the moral meltdown, but the rise of dictatorial executive power in Washington, as explained to us by the president in his State of the Union address, in which he reduced Congress to a helpmate at best.



The worst sin of all in the age of iron-fisted, liberal “tolerance” is to react to moral degradation by failing to facilitate it. If you get caught in a nonfestive mood, like the Christian bakery owners and wedding photographers who think the First Amendment protects their right not to be forced to celebrate sin, you are in legal jeopardy.

Coming to your state, unless you live in Jerry Brown’s California or Chris Christie’s New Jersey, which already have this abomination, is a law that says right is wrong and that wrong is mandatory.

California’s statute, which the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld last week, denies the right of parents to take children to licensed therapists to deal with unwanted same-sex desires.

Parents are allowed only to enlist therapists who counsel children to be “gay.” This is America, land of the free?



In such a culture, it’s easy for the president and his media allies to stoke the fires of envy and spread more dependency. It works even better when the people are stoned.

Having softened us up with cultural rot, the left is driving for total political control, with little effective opposition.

Failing to hold the administration accountable for a multitude of scandals, the Republican leadership is now trying to figure out how to raise the national debt and to turn 11 million undocumented Democrats into voters.



Vladimir Putin may be exploiting our moral decline for his own purposes, but to many weary Americans, his remarks ring true.

We are not yet the world’s Great Satan, as our militant Muslim enemies falsely describe us, but we might consider asking our ruling elites in Hollywood, New York and Washington to give the mullahs less evidence for that claim.

Dave Agema Is Fighting Gay Rights To Save America From Destruction

In an appearance last month on a conservative talk radio show, embattled RNC Committeeman Dave Agema defended the anti-gay comments that caused prominent Republicans to call for his resignation.

Agema insisted that his anti-gay stance has nothing to do with animus towards gay people, he just believes that gay rights will doom America.

The former Michigan state legislator said on The Renegade River Show that gay rights weaken the family “and when you start destroying the family unit in a nation, the nation starts to crumble from within.”

“Look at the Greek empire, look at the Roman empire,” Agema continued. “Basically, I am trying to protect America.”

He also maintained that schools are “teaching the homosexual lifestyle, how to be a homosexual in some sort of class that they’re teaching that we’re paying for,” and argued that gay marriage had major repercussions in Denmark, Netherlands and Switzerland (a country that has not legalized gay marriage).

Geller: Obama 'Quintessential Affirmative Action Project,' Prince Charles Could Be Secret Muslim

Anti-Muslim crusader Pamela Geller is the type of activist who has never met an anti-Obama conspiracy theory she doesn’t like. In an appearance last week on VCY America’s Crosstalk radio program, Geller pulled out all the stops, suggesting that President Obama didn't really want to kill Osama bin Laden, and “doesn’t respect or even like our armed forces.” She even claimed that fact that the president’s staff screens questioners at events shows that he is “obviously incompetent” and the “quintessential affirmative action project.” Geller also looked abroad, entertaining the idea that Prince Charles may be a secret Muslim.

Geller was seemingly put in a tough spot during the call-in portion of the show, when a caller asked why the president had Osama bin Laden killed “if he’s for jihad or whatever you were referring to it.” But Geller was ready with a response, explaining that Obama had no choice but to kill bin Laden, albeit reluctantly, because “there was no getting around” it.

In fact, she said, Obama showed his sympathies by waiting “ten months” to raid bin Laden’s compound and refusing to release pictures of bin Laden’s corpse so that the al Qaeda leader would not be “humiliated.” When the news of bin Laden’s death first broke, Geller predicted that the president might get “choked up” in sorrow.

Another caller told Geller that he had read that Prince Charles has “apostatized from Christianity and embraced Islam.” Geller responded that while she doesn’t “know that to be true,” she does “know that he has taken very pro-Islamic views.” She then took the opportunity to explain yet again that it doesn’t matter if President Obama is a “secret Muslim” or not because he acts like one. He “favors Islam over all other religions,” she said, and “never goes to church.”

Finally, a caller asked Geller why people asking the president questions at events are screened by his staff members. “This is not a smart man,” she responded. “This is the quintessential affirmative action project.”

Liberty Counsel Fears Prom, Losing Freedom To Be Abstinent Before Marriage

As Valentine’s Day approaches, the conservative activists at Liberty Counsel are once again promoting the competing “Day of Purity,” an opportunity for those “who strive for sexual purity an opportunity to stand together in opposition to a culture of moral decline.”

Liberty Counsel’s previous attempt to make the Day of Purity cool for kids, a video featuring “Purity Bear,” has unfortunately been removed from YouTube following widespread Internet mockery (but can still be found on Vimeo).

Now, the group is trying to make abstinence-only-before-marriage hip by calling it the “politically incorrect” [PDF] thing to do. In a handout [PDF] about the event, Liberty Counsel even makes the absurd claim that supporters of abstinence before marriage are losing their “right to speak and be heard.”

Defending your rights and the rights of others to express their beliefs and act in accordance with those rights. There are those in today’s culture that are trying to silence those who believe that sex should be saved until marriage between a husband and a wife. They say they want tolerance and diversity, but what they really want is to silence anyone who believes in traditional values and traditional family. You have the right to speak and be heard. Be mature and speak out for what you know is right and true.

We are not exactly sure where it is now a criminal act to be abstinent or to encourage others to be abstinent.

Maybe in the same jurisdictions where Liberty Counsel attorney Matt Barber fears he may soon be forced to choose between participating in gay marriage and death.

Liberty Counsel has more fun tips for the Day of Purity, including a “True Friend” guide [PDF] that warns against maintaining friendships with people who do “not share the same value system.” The group also offers great some great prom theme ideas [PDF], such as “Chlamydia”:

…as well as some outdated MasterCard spoof ads:

Along with:

Pat Robertson Explains Divine Genocide

Genocide is okay if its purpose is to stop man-animal sex, Pat Robertson explained today on the 700 Club.

When a viewer asked the televangelist about Old Testament accounts “where God told his people to wipe out cities and take their lands,” noting that it “sounds like Islam to me,” Robertson responded that God was actually showing mercy on the annihilated peoples because otherwise they would pass their sinful ways onto their children and grandchildren.

Assuming you have a culture that has 1,000 really bad people in it — they’re murderers, they’re thieves, they’re rapists, they’re having incest, you name it they are doing everything horrible — now if they have children, what’s going to happen? Instead of having 1,000, you’ll have 3,000 or 4,000; then — nothing has changed them — then they’ll pass it on to the next generation and the next thing you know you’ve got 10,000 or 20,000 of them and if it keeps on going you’re going to have a million of them. So what’s the most merciful thing for a loving God to do? It’s to take the thousand and get rid of them. And that’s what He did.

“It sounds cruel but in the long run it’s more merciful,” he continued. “Further, He didn’t want his people to be contaminated by those people…. They had sex with animals, they had incest, they did all of these terrible things and they offered their children as sacrifices to their gods, it was horrible what they did.”

The 10 Worst Arguments In Eagle Forum's Anti-Immigrant Plan To Save The GOP

Phyllis Schlafly, one of the strongest proponents of the theory that the Republican Party can survive simply by solidifying its base of white voters, is out with a new report arguing that all the GOP needs to do to thrive is to cut legal immigration in half.

In the report, Eagle Forum argues that immigrants – particularly Latino and Asian-American immigrants -- are inherently “leftist,” drawn to “the left’s race-based grievance politics,” and reliant on the country’s “racial spoils system and a huge welfare state,” and so therefore legal immigration should be dramatically reduced in order to save the Republican Party.

The report backs Schlafly’s idea – echoed by groups such as the Center for Immigration Studies and activists such as Pat Buchanan – that the Republican Party shouldn’t bother trying to become “ welcoming and inclusive” (particularly through immigration reform) but instead stir up racial hostility in order to solidify its hold among white voters. Unsurprisingly, this theory was first laid out by a prominent white nationalist writer before it hit the big time.

Schlafly has never been very good at hiding partisan motivation for right-wing policy. Last year, for instance, she unabashedly admitted that the purpose of Voter ID laws is to decrease Democratic turnout.

We’ve collected ten of the worst arguments in Eagle Forum’s report, which we fully expect to see waved around by conservative lawmakers in the near future.

  1. Democrats promote immigration just to get votes. “Looking at the political motivation of the groups push­ing higher immigration and amnesty, it’s obvious that the Democrats promote large-scale immigration because it produces more Democratic votes. A recent Gallup poll found that ‘Hispanics in the United States identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party over the Republicans Party by about a two-to-one margin, regardless of whether they were U.S.-born.’ If the Republican Party is to remain a party that is conservative and nationally competitive, it must defeat amnesty and any proposed increases in legal immigration. Further, conservatives must work to signifi­cantly reduce the number of legal immigrants allowed into the country from the current level of 1.1 million a year.”
  2. Reducing legal immigration should be the #1 conservative issue. “ Each decade under current policy, about 11 million new legal immigrants arrive and become potential voters. If immigra­tion is not reduced, it will be virtually impossible for Republicans to remain nationally competitive as a conservative party. The key conclusion of the report is this: For conservatives, there is no issue more important than reducing the number of immigrants allowed into the country each year .”
  3. Immigrants “attracted” to “affirmative action and welfare” and “identity- and grievance-based politics.” “Most immigrants come from countries where the government plays a larger role in the economy and society. Their support for expansive government is reinforced by liberal elites in immigrant communities and the liberal urban areas in which so many settle. Further, immigrants’ liberalism often reflects self-interest, as many benefit from affirmative action and welfare. Unfortunately, some immigrants are also attracted to the Democratic Party’s support for identity- and grievance-based politics. In short, the factors contributing to immigrants’ liberalism are largely outside of the Republican Party’s control .”
  4. Anti-immigrant policies don’t hurt Republicans. “The idea that Republicans’ support for Proposition 187 two decades ago is what continues to cost the party [California] ig­nores the fact that voters in immigrant communities support Democrats because they largely agree with them on policies other than immigration ... The real problem is that immigration has created a far larger liberal electorate in California. If legal immigration is not reduced, the same thing will happen across the country .”
  5. Immigrants will turn America into New York and San Francisco . “These are two of the most intensely immigrant-settled cities in America — one-third of their residents are foreign-born. The governments of both cities are solidly left-wing, combining high taxes and oppressive business regulation with the Left’s cultural agenda and race-based grievance politics. The immigrants in both cities are quite different, with San Fran­cisco being predominately Asian while New York’s immigrants are very diverse, with Hispanics being the largest share. Yet, there has been no significant political pushback against liberal policies from immigrant voters in either city. In fact, Hispanics and Asians are part of the dominant Democratic coalition in both places. New York and San Francisco show how voters in immigrant communities can live with the most extreme manifestations of the Left’s social and economic agenda and remain enthusiastic Democrats.
  6. Immigrants are “alienated” by patriotism. “Yet the gap between naturalized citizens and native-born citizens on measures of attachment to the United States is so large that the authors of a Hudson report concluded that the nation’s ‘patriotic assimilation system’ is broken. These results matter politically because patriotism and American sovereignty are central to the conservative message, but such a message is meaningless to a significant share of immigrant voters, or even likely to alienate them .”
  7.  Immigrants encourage “ethnic separatism” and “grievance-based politics.” Putting aside the level of immigration, the rise of multicul­turalism and ethnic grievance-based politics makes the kind of assimilation that leads to voting Republican much more difficult. Unlike in the past, today’s immigrants are ar­riving in an America with a racial spoils system and a huge welfare state, which unfortunately many are dependent on. This new reality makes it much less likely that the children of today’s immigrants will come to identify with the small-government agenda of the Republican Party. Most principled Republicans rightly oppose such policies, but identity politics and all the policies that go with it are well established in modern America. Even if one optimisti­cally assumes that someday we will abandon such divisive policies, for the foreseeable future immigrants will continue to arrive in an America that encourages ethnic separatism and discourages assimilation. In fact, mass immigration provides one of the key underlying justifications used by liberal elites for continuing such policies. This fact makes lowering the level of new immigration all the more impor­tant.”
  8. Diversity is ruining America. “Finally, immigration increases support for big government by adding to society’s diversity. Robert Putnam of Harvard has shown that increased diversity results in less civic engagement and attachment. Putnam’s work shows that as diversity increases, people of all groups become less trusting of one another — even less trusting of members of their own group. He concludes that people in diverse communities tend “to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more, but have less faith that they can actu­ally make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in front of the television.” A society in which private citizens do less for themselves but want more from the government is tailor-made for Democrats. Federal immigration policy, if it is allowed to continue, will move America further in this direction. When private citizens do less for themselves or for others, the vacuum is filled by government. Yes, immigration adds many new Democratic voters. But it also makes the rest of the electorate more inclined to support the Democrats’ statist agenda."
  9. Descendants of European Catholic and Jewish immigrants aren't good for Republicans either. "It is also worth pointing out that many of the descendants of Great Wave immigrants still do not vote Republican, a cen­tury after many of their ancestors arrived. Looking at white non-Hispanic Catholics and Jews gives us some idea of how the descendants of these immigrants vote today. While Romney did better in 2012 than most recent Republicans with white Catholics, in both 2000 and 2008 only 52 percent voted for the Republican presidential candidate. Moreover, a majority of Jews have voted Democratic in every presi­dential election for which there is data, including 2012. The idea that the descendants of Great Wave immigrants eventually became solidly Republican is incorrect."
  10. Immigrants will take away your guns just by living in cities. One of the reasons whites have such a strong commitment to gun rights is the much larger share who own them. The reason for this is that a much larger share of whites live in rural America or have roots there and are thus familiar with firearms in a way that is less common among urbanites. Asians and Hispanics in contrast are set­tling in cities and the suburbs where hunting and gun ownership are much less widespread. And they are coming from countries where firearms ownership is highly restricted. It is unlikely in the extreme that Asians and Hispanics will ever have gun ownership rates approaching that of whites given where they are coming from and where they are settling. This fact means that immigration unavoidably increases the share of the electorate that has no experience with guns. As a result, immigrants and their children will tend to be much more supportive of efforts to limit or even ban gun ownership. As is the case with other issues, continued high levels of immigration have important implications for the future of public policy.

 

 

Rep. Jim Bridenstine Shrugs Off Questioner Who Called For Obama To Be Killed

At a breakfast event with the Tea Party organization Tulsa 9:12 Project last week, Congressman Jim Bridenstine (R-OK) saw no need to rebuke or even disagree with a questioner who said that President Obama should be executed.

“Obama, he’s not president, as far as I’m concerned, he should be executed as an enemy combatant,” the questioner said, before asking the congressman about “the Muslims that he is shipping into our country through pilots and commercial jets” (a claim based on a bizarre right-wing conspiracy theory).

“This guy is a criminal and nobody’s stopped him,” she declared.

Bridenstine didn’t respond to her call for the president’s execution, but agreed that Obama is “lawless” and said he rules “by decree” and through the United Nations.

Watch:

Former Komen Exec Karen Handel Fundraising Off Planned Parenthood Debacle

Remember two years ago when the Susan G. Komen For the Cure foundation abruptly dropped its grants to a Planned Parenthood breast-cancer screening program, setting off a national outcry, and prompting the resignation of the Komen official reportedly behind the decision?

The fallout of the debacle is still hurting Komen, which recently reported a 22 percent drop in income over the past year. But the decision to cut off grants to Planned Parenthood seems to be paying off for one person: Karen Handel, the former Komen vice president who was widelyreported to have been the driving force behind split.

Now running for Senate in Georgia, Handel has released a campaign video touting her role in severing Planned Parenthood from Komen and fighting back against the “left-wing groups” and “liberal media” that criticized her.

Back when the news first broke that Komen had dumped Planned Parenthood, Handel denied that the decision was motivated at all by her anti-choice politics, despite reports from sources in the organization that said she manipulated its rules to cast Planned Parenthood out.

The campaign video has a different take, framing Handel as an anti-choice crusader caught in a David vs. Goliath struggle. “As a strong believer in the sanctity of life, Karen Handel had to make a decision: keep quiet in the face of the liberal onslaught, or stand by her convictions,” the video announces.

In speeches and interviews, Handel has made the Planned Parenthood showdown a centerpiece of her biography. She even paved the way for her Senate run by releasing a book calling Planned Parenthood “thugs” and “bullies.”

Whatever Handel’s motivations or role in the Komen/Planned Parenthood split, the whole episode seems to be working out pretty well for her. The decision that Handel advocated for might have left Komen struggling financially, but Handel herself now has the perfect story to prove her status as an anti-choice activist martyred by the liberal media.

Inaction on Immigration Reform Leaves Families Hanging by a Thread

The following is a guest post by Cairo Mendes, a 2013 Fellow of affiliate People For the American Way Foundation’s Young People For (YP4) program.

When I came to the U.S. in 2002, I remember being told on the way home from the airport that I was undocumented. I was told that if anyone knew this, our whole family would be deported and we would lose out on the “American Dream.” That was over ten years ago, but as I write this I cannot help but hold back emotions – a mixture of anger, sadness, and confusion. I feel this way because ten years later, millions of people in our country – including my mother – continue to live in limbo, in the shadows. We continue to be treated as second class citizens.

When I recently received a call informing me that I would be covered under President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) process, I was working at a factory, recycling wire. I remember the joy and relief I felt at that moment. For the first time I would be able to have a social security card and a work permit. I felt like maybe, just maybe, I too could be “normal” and get a driver’s license. Yet later that day, my happiness became bittersweet. My mom – my strong, heroic, single mother – would not be able to receive those same benefits. Still, when I got home later that day I realized how happy she was for me. It was then that I told her, looking straight into her eyes: “Mom, we will figure a way out of this. We will fight, we will march, and we will organize – we are going to figure out a way.”

When President Obama won reelection in 2012 after receiving 71 percent of the Latino vote (compared to Romney’s 27 percent), I felt for the first time that we were on the offensive. From the rhetoric coming from Washington to the energy within the immigrant rights movement in the weeks following the elections, immigration reform was finally a real possibility. But it has not been an easy road. Even though we were able to push the Senate to pass an immigration reform bill through our lobbying, organizing, and advocacy efforts, House leadership has – until very recently – been closed off to the calls for reforms, ignoring the cries of families throughout the country.

As a result, we ended 2013 with no bill delivered. The extreme right – small but loud faction of the Republican Party – managed to derail any efforts involving citizenship, and Speaker Boehner avoided putting the Senate bill up for a vote. His inaction could cost the Republican Party in the 2016 elections, since immigration reform is a top issue for Latino voters.

The Senate immigration reform bill is not perfect, but as families struggle to live day by day, comprehensive immigration reform is still a light at the end of the tunnel. It will make legalization – and hopefully citizenship – possible for many who have lived in the shadows until now, like my family.

This debate goes beyond stats about how many billions of dollars could be added to the economy as a result of reform. This is a moral issue. And it’s one that – if not resolved soon – will result in more deportations and more family separations that damage individual lives and diminish our country as a whole.

Because of Congress’ inaction, mothers and fathers are still being separated from their children and loved ones as 2014 begins.  We cannot wait – our communities need relief now.
 

PFAW

Agema: Stop 'Shoving This Idea Down Our Throat' Of The 'Homosexual Lifestyle'

If Dave Agema were to lose his post at the Republican National Committee over recent anti-gay and anti-Muslim comments, he could probably find a job at the American Family Association – a group that can’t seem to get enough of his bigoted remarks. After appearing on Focal Point with AFA spokesman Bryan Fischer, yesterday Agema spoke to the AFA’s governmental affairs director Sandy Rios on her talk show.

As Kyle has already pointed out, the embattled GOP activist holds a warped view of the First Amendment: “Agema, like so many anti-gay right-wing martyrs before him, seems to be operating under the delusion that ‘freedom of speech’ mean that they are entitled to say anything they want without receiving any criticism or suffering any consequence whatsoever.”

While speaking to Rios, Agema continued to insist that calls for him to resign from the RNC are direct attacks on his right to freedom of speech. He vowed not to resign, lest the culture keep “shoving this idea down our throat that we have to accept this homosexual lifestyle.”

When they use the rules of Saul Alinksy that basically you cut off support from your networks, isolate the person through cruel [sic] and ridicule and so forth, what happens is they fear. The biggest thing is right now we’ve got Hollywood, you’ve got the news media, you’ve got ignorant school courses, you’ve got the Grammys now that are shoving this idea down our throat that we have to accept this homosexual lifestyle.



The whole thing really boils down to the freedom of speech, I think that’s what is stopping me. I put it on my Facebook – an article on freedom of speech and how political correctness is taking away our freedom of speech and that is directed mostly by Hollywood and the news media are [sic] telling us what political correctness is and that’s I think what is really hurting this country.

Harvey: Homosexuality Is Just Like Anorexia

As Kyle noted earlier, Linda Harvey of Mission America joined the American Family Association’s Tim Wildmon and Ed Vitagliano today for a riveting discussion about homosexuality and Harvey’s new book, “Maybe He’s Not Gay: Another View on Homosexuality.”

But the informative conversation didn’t end with the anti-gay activists’ thoughts on “gaydar.” Later in the interview, they moved on discussing to how homosexuality is like anorexia, a theory that Harvey apparently lays out in her book.

Vitagliano agreed with Harvey’s assessment that just as anorexic people are “driven by an impulse not to eat” because they believe they are overweight, gay people are under the false impression that they are gay and so think they are attracted to people of the same sex. “It’s such a perfect and biblical view of a person who sees themselves as homosexual,” he said.

“Your body is made to eat, otherwise you will starve; with homosexuals, your body is not made for the kind of relations they have, it’s made for heterosexuality,” Harvey added later in the interview. “We’re basically all heterosexuals.”

She concluded that both people with eating disorders and gay people are “deluded” and on a path to “self-destruction.”

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious