Janet Mefferd

Is Mark Driscoll A Serial Plagiarist?

Mark Driscoll, a right-wing megachurch pastor best known for his chauvinistic, bullying, anti-gay and domineering preaching style, is facing charges of plagiarism from his fellow conservatives. When talk show host Janet Mefferd confronted him about the plagiarism claims in an interview last week, Driscoll was offended that Mefferd dared to ask him such questions and told her that she was “grumpy,” “rude” and “not very Christ-like.”

He patted himself on the back for being “gracious and humble” through it all, adding that he couldn’t appropriately answer Mefferd’s questions because he had a cold and was doing her a favor by appearing on her show. Driscoll’s publisher similarly claimed that it was not Driscoll who was at fault but Mefferd for taking a “belligerent tone” with him, and supporters eagerly piled on.

Christian blogs have noted that Driscoll himself preached against plagiarism as a “Satanic issue.”

Mefferd responded to the criticism yesterday on her show and posted material [PDF] from two Driscoll publications that clearly lift from other books.

She writes on her blog:

On Nov. 21, I conducted an interview with Mars Hill Church Pastor Mark Driscoll. During the course of the interview, I questioned Pastor Driscoll about two sections of his book, “A Call to Resurgence,” which neglected to contain any quotes, detailed footnotes or attribution for his reproduction of another scholar’s thoughts and insights. The passages in question are on pages 38-47 and pages 185-189 of Pastor Driscoll’s book. Those pages of material all borrow from the original material of Dr. Peter Jones, cited here in his books, “Gospel Truth and Pagan Lies” and “One or Two: Seeing a World of Difference.”

Today, we also revealed that Pastor Driscoll has lifted material from another source — word for word — in another of his books, “Trial: 8 Witnesses From 1&2 Peter.” This was a book published in 2009 by Mars Hill Church. On pages 7 and 8, Driscoll lifts and publishes, under his own name, an entire section from “1 Peter,” New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, Ed. D. A. Carson, 4th ed. (Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994),p. 1370.



Since many listeners have asked for the evidence of our claims, we have compiled 27 pages of material for public investigation. It is our hope that people will examine the evidence and determine whether or not these charges of plagiarism are true.

Gohmert: Obamacare Created Secretive Security Force

Janet Mefferd spoke with Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) on Friday about a Department of Homeland Security solicitation for a security contractor “at various locations throughout the states of Minnesota and Wisconsin.” While Gohmert said he didn’t know much about it, he claimed that the health care reform law may be creating a security force no one knows about.

Mefferd responded by launching into a composite of conspiracy theories hooked on President Obama’s 2008 call for a “national civilian security force” — which was actually just a plan to boost groups such as the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps (a plan that never got funding anyway) — including a right-wing conspiracy theory about DHS stockpiling ammunition that is so ridiculous that even Breitbart News doesn’t buy it.

The congressman, for his part, wondered about “the provisions in [Obamacare] for the President’s own Commissioned and non-Commissioned Officer Corps,” speculating that these officers could be deployed in non-health related emergencies. “Are they using weapons to train or are they being taught to use syringes and health care items?” he asked.

The scary, dangerous group Gohmert seems to be referring to is the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, which trains “emergency response teams” to “respond to public health crises and national emergencies such as natural disasters, disease outbreaks, or terrorist attacks, both here and overseas.” The Affordable Care Act contained a provision setting up a Ready Reserve Corps for public health responders who work for the Commissioned Corps but not on a full-time basis.

Gohmert said that he would investigate the “secret security force” in Minnesota and Wisconsin, adding the caveat that he wouldn’t mind it if it was “something that’s going to protect the borders.”

Self-Aware Matt Barber Declares 'Hyperbole Is Responsible For All The World's Problems'

Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber isn’t exactly known for moderation or mild rhetoric, especially when it comes to gay rights. He warns of “religious freedom being crushed by the homosexualist juggernaut,” says that gay people live a “lust-filled, sex-centric, perversion-centric lifestyle,” believes LGBT families are in “rebellion against God,” claims that the Boy Scouts “committed gay activist suicide” when they allowed openly gay scouts, and insists that the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA) would protect pedophiles.

But according to Barber, the real perpetrator of “propagandist hyperbole” when it comes to gay rights is President Obama. In an interview yesterday, Barber and radio host Janet Mefferd snickered at the president’s assertion that without ENDA, “millions of LGBT Americans go to work every day fearing that, without any warning, they could lose their jobs.”

“I often say that hyperbole is responsible for all of the world’s problems,” Barber said. “And here we have the president dealing in this propagandist hyperbole.”

Barber claimed that “in the rare instance that an employer finds out that someone is engaging in an aberrant sexual lifestyle, a homosexual lifestyle, or if somebody goes home one day dressed as a man and comes back dressed as a woman the next” they would be defended by the news media, and that in fact “it’s the people who have a biblical worldview who are afraid to go to work every day.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 10/23/13

Perkins: Christians Who See A Role For Government In Reducing Poverty Are Wrongheaded Theocrats

Last month, the Family Research Council’s Kenneth Blackwell hailed House Republicans for passing a massive cut in food aid for low-income families, arguing that there is “nothing more Christian” than kicking millions off the food stamp program.

FRC head Tony Perkins had a similar take during an interview yesterday with Janet Mefferd, who askin him about Jonathan Merritt’s recent article: Government Shutdown May Drive More Young Christians from GOP. Perkins told Mefferd that while Christians should be active in political affairs because government reflects the values of society, they should leave issues like helping the less fortunate out of it.

Even though “as Christians we will be held responsible for the policies adopted by this government because it’s us,” Perkins said Christians shouldn’t see the government as a way to help the poor: “The government has a responsibility to care for the poor? That’s not what Scripture says.” 

After making the unsound claim that redistributive policies are unbiblical, he then said that such left-leaning Christians are “treating the government as if it had divine instructions from God to be a form of theocracy.”

Unlike Religious Right activists, whom Perkins claims would never impose their views on anyone, except of course when those views align with those of the conservative movement and then they should.

COPE: Teaching Science Violates Rights Of Christians; Courts Must Block Science Curriculum

Last week, we reported that an organization called Citizens for Objective Public Education filed a lawsuit contesting science standards in Kansas schools, arguing that lessons on evolution represent an unconstitutional establishment of religion.

John Calvert of the Intelligent Design Network, an attorney involved in the lawsuit, told conservative talk radio host Janet Mefferd today that lessons on evolution are “religious education” in violation of the rights of parents, children and taxpayers. Mefferd replied that it is “crazy” to think that public schools could teach evolution to Christian students.

The religious rights that are being promoted here are the religious rights of parents to direct the religious education of their children and a state interferes with that when it seeks to promote an atheistic worldview. The second right is the child’s right, the child has a right not to be indoctrinated by the state to accept a particular religious viewpoint, that right is being taken by the framework. The last right is the taxpayer has a right, you know I pay taxes to Kansas, real estate taxes, a good part of my real estate taxes go to fund Kansas public education and I don’t want the taxes used to promote a nontheistic worldview.

“This really is a case about the establishment of a complete worldview,” Calvert said, arguing that public schools violate the Constitution by teaching “materialistic science” and therefore courts should block the curriculum and instruction on evolution.

“We’ve asked the court to enjoin the whole package, they just need to go back to the drawing board,” Calvert told Mefferd. “In the alternative, if the court is not willing to do that, the court should at least enjoin the teaching of origin science in the primary school grades from kindergarten through the 8th grade.”

Calvert and Mefferd claimed it is only fair to teach creationism and intelligent design alongside evolution. Otherwise, Calvert claimed, schools would be teaching atheism.

“It’s clear that there are lots and lots of people who hold to the biblical account of creation or at the very least a view of intelligent design, share it as a perspective, evolution is not the only perspective out there,” Mefferd said.

Well, there are also “lots and lots of people” who believe that the sun revolves around the earth (one out of five Americans), so is it really settled science that the earth revolves around the sun and schools should teach both points of view?

Must schools also incorporate the claims that the earth is flat into lessons regarding the shape of the earth?

After all, we must keep the curriculum balanced and respect flat-earth proponents who think religion and science back up their beliefs.

Anti-Muslim Author Thinks Obama Is Creating An Islamic Dictatorship, Fomenting Syrian-Style Civil War

Yesterday, Janet Mefferd invited Michael Coffman onto her program to discuss his book, Radical Islam in the House, about how an “Islamist cancer” has “penetrated deeply into the federal government and our culture” in order “to create a global Caliphate or world government.”

Coffman told Mefferd that President Obama might become a dictator and refuse to give up power in order to transform the US into an Islamic state. Once Americans begin fighting back against the dictatorship by the country’s 0.8 percent Muslim population, Coffman predicts that the US will experience a second Civil War that is much like the one taking place in Syria.

He said the Obama administration is building such close ties to “radical Islamists” that they can’t be overturned by the next administration “no matter who is the next president, if we have another president.”

“Actually the Islamists believe that by the end of the Obama administration they will have an Islamic nation here in the United States, they believe very confidently that they will have succeeded within these next three and a half years to make this an Islamist state.”

“The next president, assuming we can get there, is probably going to shut the whole thing down and stop it,” Coffman said of the supposed Islamist takeover. “I think it’s going to become so apparent by that time that it’s going to be almost impossible for them to be able to implement it without going to a civil war type of thing like they do so often like it’s happening in Syria and so forth right now.”

“I don’t think the American people fully understood what they were voting for when they returned Obama back to his second term,” Coffman lamented. “It’s really opened up the United States to so many different things that could destroy us, literally destroy us in the next four years.”

Coffman further alleged that President Obama is sympathetic to radical Islam because his worldview contains only “a little bit of Christianity, just about five percent, not much more than that, and a whole lot of Islam in his background that he has now staked his corner on because there is so much overlap between progressivism and Islam.”

“Not only is Islam diametrically opposed to [Christian precepts] but so is progressivism, but when you have those two things diametrically opposed to what this nation was founded on and what made it such a great nation, you have a tiger forced out and it has to be forced out, it just has to be.”

Mefferd: Gays 'Overrepresented' On Federal Courts

Conservative talk show host Janet Mefferd is not happy that the Senate, in a unanimous vote, confirmed Todd M. Hughes to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, making him the country’s first openly gay judge to serve on a federal appeals court. “Because he had to be gay?” Mefferd asked. “I mean, that was like a qualification, if you’re going to be on the appeals court you better be gay? That’s how it rolls now.”

“They mention that at least seven gay or lesbian judges now serve or have served on federal district courts; sounds like overrepresentation,” she continued. “I don’t know how many judges are on that system but we’re talking about what, 2-3% of the population? This is overrepresentation but they don’t care.”

Overrepresentation? Let’s see.

There are currently six openly gay judges (and a seventh serving on senior status).

Now, there are 874 federal judgeships. Meaning that openly gay judges occupy a massive… seven tenths of one percent of federal judgeships.

Without counting judicial vacancies, the figure comes to a whopping 0.77 percent.

Such overrepresentation!

Lively: Gay Ugandans 'Dupes' Of Marxist Plot To 'Paint Me As A Demon'

After appearing on Rick Wiles’ radio show where he called President Obama the Antichrist, Scott Lively talked to Janet Mefferd on Friday about his view that “homosexuality is the moral issue of the End Times.” He maintains that “everyone is being tested with this issue” because homosexuality represents “the extreme example of rebellion on the verge of judgment.”

Lively is currently facing a lawsuit from Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), which is represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), over his role in inciting anti-LGBT persecution and legislation in Uganda. He told Mefferd that SMUG are only “a handful of Ugandan homosexuals and are really just dupes” of the “radical” and “[George] Soros-funded” CCR.

“They are very powerful, they are heavily funded, absolutely dedicated, these are ideologues,” Lively said of the CCR, “these are the hard-left, Marxist ideologues and I am their primary—I am the most visible symbol of opposition to the gay agenda right now in the United States.”

Lively, who just days before the interview claimed that gay rights advocates are on “the Devil’s side,” criticized the CCR for trying to “paint me as a demon.”

Stemberger: 'Abuse' To Affirm LGBT Youth; Sexual Relations Among Boy Scouts Will Become 'Commonplace'

John Stemberger, who leads the new anti-gay alternative to the Boy Scouts of America, reassured conservative talk show host Janet Mefferd yesterday that his group, Trail Life USA, is “not going to tolerate” any openly gay members, describing them as a threat to the “safety and security of our children.”

While the BSA allows openly gay youth (but not adults) to join, Trail Life USA will ban anyone who is gay, unless he is working to hide and banish his gay demons. Stemberger, who also runs the Florida Family Policy Council, blames “society and schools and even parents” for affirming LGBT youth, which he said is “tantamount to abuse.”

“That is just absolutely nonsense and it’s an abuse to the child,” Stemberger charged. “We are not going to tolerate someone who is ‘here and queer; loud and proud,’ all of that nonsense, that is completely inappropriate in a program where there’s children.”

Stemberger: We’re very sad to leave the Boy Scouts of America. It was a great organization but unfortunately it has taken a turn in a fundamental compromise on its values that is just not acceptable to parents and the safety and security of our children.

Mefferd: Absolutely. Now a lot has been reported about how you will handle the issue of sexuality in the Trail Life USA organization. How did it come about that you put together the parameters that you did and how do you reassure parents that the issues that may come up in the Boy Scouts are not going to be the same in Trail Life USA?

Stemberger: Well first of all, we’re not going to allow open and avowed homosexuality. It’s really important that we distinguish between a mere same-sex attraction, which by the way 20-25 percent of young boys as they are growing up will experience some sort of gender ambiguity or confusion, or just needing to wonder who they are, needing affirmation, that’s not uncommon at all. But what’s horrible is to have the society and schools and even parents, which is tantamount to abuse in my judgment, saying ‘oh he is special, he must be gay, he must be gender confused, let’s let him explore.’ That is just absolutely nonsense and it’s an abuse to the child. We need to be reaffirming that child of their God-given biology that they are special, made in His image, and help them understand these things. So we’re not going to turn away a kid like that, but we are not going to tolerate activists. We are not going to tolerate someone who is ‘here and queer; loud and proud,’ all of that nonsense, that is completely inappropriate in a program where there’s children.

Later in the broadcast, Stemberger warned that when AT&T CEO and BSA board member Randall Stephenson becomes the leader of the organization, it is likely that openly gay adults will be allowed to take part in scouting as well.

While Stemberger said he was “never concerned about the adults” because “the adults have a two-deep leadership policy where no adult can be alone with any scout at one time in scouting,” he told parents to fear openly gay adult leaders anyway and defect to Trail Life USA: “We’re not trying to be bashing the BSA but we are going to be committed to letting parents know of this and that this is a risk, this is a health and safety risk to boys.”

Stemberger even predicted that sexual relations and “physical, sexual and psychological abuse” will become “commonplace” as a result of the decision to end the ban on openly gay youth.

Mefferd: You told us that Randall Stephenson, the head of AT&T, is now going to be in charge of the Boy Scouts. Now this is somebody who drew an awful lot of fire prior to this vote as somebody a lot of conservatives wanted ousted from the Boy Scouts.

Stemberger: That’s right, in May of next year he will become the president of the Boy Scouts of America and he is on the record saying he doesn’t agree with the current policy, doesn’t go far enough, he wants open homosexuality not just with boys but with men as well. When that second shoe drops then we will be positioned to see even more parents come and join Trail Life USA. Honestly, I just hate this. I don’t like this. We’re not trying to be bashing the BSA but we are going to be committed to letting parents know of this and that this is a risk, this is a health and safety risk to boys. They have already issued proclamations saying you will not treat openly gay boys any different, that is they are going to be tented with other boys; they are not going to be separated out in anyway lest they be bullied.

This is where it’s going and this will absolutely increase boy-on-boy sexual contact, which will further contribute to the scandal and the very unfortunate abuse to countless numbers of boys who will undergo physical, sexual and psychological abuse as a result of this policy change. That is the bottom line, that is the thing no one wants to talk about, that is the reality of this change. They can deny it all they want to but you can’t control boys. I was never concerned about the adults; the adults have a two-deep leadership policy where no adult can be alone with any scout at one time in scouting. But you can’t do that with boys. They are high-risk, they’ve got testosterone, they do crazy things and so you’re going to have stuff happen commonplace as this policy goes into effect.

Arguments Against San Antonio’s Anti-Discrimination Ordinance Collapse Under Their Own Ridiculousness

The Religious Right has gone into overdrive to fight a San Antonio ordinance that added “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the city’s non-discrimination policy [PDF], which already included bans on discrimination “on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex…veteran status, age or disability.” But despite their hyperventilating, the measure passed anyway.

The ordinance’s opponents were certainly not helped by their strategy of using far-fetched, over-the-top arguments to mischaracterize the ordinance…because that it was just too easy to point out where went wrong.

Take, for instance, pastor Charles Flowers, a vocal opponent of the ordinance, who appeared on The Janet Mefferd Show on September 6 to charge that councilmembers who backed the measure “don’t deserve to serve any longer” because they “assaulted” the rights of Christians.

His main complaint about the ordinance was that homosexuality is a “sexual lifestyle choice” and not an immutable characteristic…like a person’s religious beliefs.

“There is a strong response coming from this community to rid our city council of people whose judgment -- this is the issue, they could not judge the difference between the sacred suffering of someone involved in the Civil Rights Movement to gain basic human rights based on immutabilities like race, sex, where you were born and your creeds, that don’t change,” Flowers charged. “They couldn’t tell the difference between that and some group that has a sexual propensity or making as sexual lifestyle choice and now seeking protection in order to persecute and punish anybody whose ideology is different from their own.”

That’s right; the arguments from ordinance’s opponents have come down to the claim that a person’s religious beliefs are unchangeable.

Flowers later contended that “speaking out against the homosexual or lesbian agenda could garner you a fine of $500 per day.”

“That’s $15,000 a month that you could be fined in the seventh largest city in America for expressing a difference between the ideology proposed by a city, where homosexuality and lesbianism is concerned, and your personal belief and personal faith.”

“This is like a police state,” Flowers said, adding that employers who don’t believe in gay rights won’t be able to win city contracts.

His claim that people will be fined for speaking out on homosexuality was so blatantly false that Mefferd had to ask him if pastors could be fined. Flowers alleged that the ordinance would only affect businessmen who seek to fire their openly gay staff members or refuse to serve transgender customers.

Now there is a huge difference between a government fining a person for speaking out against homosexuality or for harboring anti-gay views and prohibiting businesses from discriminating against LGBT employees and customers in public accommodation.

Does he really not see the difference or is he just hoping that listeners will fall for the blatant falsehood?

Furthermore, “religious organizations” are clearly explicitly exempted from the ordinance’s provision on public accommodation, employment and housing, so the Christian businesses Flowers mentioned wouldn’t be impacted.

Mefferd: If SCOTUS Legalizes Gay Marriage, Prepare For Divine Punishment

Janet Mefferd spent part of Labor Day chatting with Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, where they spent most of the time decrying New Jersey’s new law barring ex-gay therapy for minors.

“The homosexual agenda is about restricting people’s liberty and freedom,” LaBarbera told Mefferd, “We have to get back to showing where the true discrimination is: the citizens of New Jersey just lost their freedom here; we have got to get back to emphasizing that we are for true liberty.”

After reading an excerpt of Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the Windsor decision, Mefferd said that it is only a matter of time before the Supreme Court declares “gay marriage a constitutional right,” which she believes will bring about divine wrath: “And every single Founding Father will flip in his grave and God in his Heaven will still have that arrow, that bow and arrow pointed at us, that Jonathan Edwards talked about in ‘Sinners in the hands of an Angry God,’ holding the bow and arrow, holding back His wrath, but only for a time.”

Mefferd Links Trans Rights To Case Of Attempted Murder

Religious Right talk show host Janet Mefferd is using an attempted murder case in Jacksonville, Florida, to attack protections for the transgender community. On her Facebook page, Mefferd links to a New York Daily News article about how “a Florida man tried to kill a 9-year-old-girl in a Best Buy bathroom,” but was stopped after a customer heard the screams and informed the staff.

Although the suspect is not transgender and Jacksonville does not have a policy on sexual orientation and gender identity protections, Mefferd claims that the case is evidence that transgender-inclusive nondiscrimination ordinances, or, as she calls them, “bathroom bills,” are “horrible pieces of legislation that need to be defeated.”

Anti-Sharia Activist: Oklahoma Judge 'Went Out Of Her Way To Side With The Minorities'

In an interview with Janet Mefferd Friday, the chief advocate of Oklahoma’s Sharia law ban lashed out at federal judge Vicki Miles LaGrange for her ruling striking down the 2010 amendment. Rex Duncan, a former Republican state representative and now a district attorney, told Mefferd that the judge, who is African American, was upset by the prohibition on any “special treatment for a minority ideology or religion” because of her past support for “preferential treatment for minorities.”

“She just went out of her way to side with the minorities and make up a reason for it,” Duncan charged.

Somewhere in the recesses of her liberal mind she arrived at, and this is just my opinion, she arrived at the disposition, quickly, that she wanted to get and then had to torture the logic to justify her, in my mind, pre-determined opinion. This lady, she’s a smart lady, but when she was a state senator in Oklahoma she was very liberal, she was known for the liberal causes that she authored, many of which established preferential treatment for minorities with quotas set aside for hiring contracts with preferential treatment for minorities. So it didn’t come as a great surprise that a constitutional amendment that in effect tried to close the door on special treatment for a minority ideology or religion would be seen as her as hostile and I think that’s how she saw it, as a threat to the founding principles of our country, and she just went out of her way to side with the minorities and make up a reason for it.

Focus on the Family Spokesman Distances Himself from Dobson While Mefferd Is Curious About Pro-Gay Group's '666' Address

Focus on the Family spokesman Glenn Stanton, who called same-sex unions satanic, ironically told virulently anti-gay talk show host Janet Mefferd in an interview yesterday that the Religious Right should move away from the polarizing rhetoric of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and James Dobson, the founder of Focus. While discussing a study pointing to greater acceptance of gay rights among evangelicals, Stanton said that people are moving away from the tactics and style of leaders like “Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, you know even speaking here from Focus, Dr. Dobson.”

Stanton said that activists who aren’t “fire breathing” conservatives are having a stronger appeal, such as the late Chuck Colson: “People aren’t reacting against that, they are reacting against certain manifestations of the culture war and in some sense we can say you know what some of those things were fine for the 70s but we are in a new age and we need to address these issues in truth and in a very different kind of way. I think Chuck Colson, who we don’t have anymore, was a wonderful example of that kind of thing.

That’s right, Stanton thinks that the Religious Right leader who said gay marriageinvites terrorist attacks,gravely damages children, leads to the end of democracy and a Nazi-style dictatorship and unleashes “cultural Armageddon,” and longed for the day when homosexuality was condemned as “sexually deviant” and “ shameful and embarrassing” is a figure of moderation.

Just in case you thought that anti-gay activists were toning down their rhetoric in any way, prior to the interview Mefferd discussed the lawsuit against Scott Lively over his role in Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill. She “found it interesting” that the Center for Constitutional Rights, a pro-gay group representing Sexual Minorities Uganda in the case, is located at 666 Broadway, New York, and wondered if the organization “sought out the address.” “Not that that means anything, just interesting.”

Right Wing Leftovers - 7/23/13

  • Oh good, Christine O'Donnell is thinking of making another run for the Senate.
  • Apparently, Rep. Peter King is now thinking of running for president solely because some reporter from Newsmax convinced him that it is a good idea.
  • Jennifer LeClair prays that Lady Gaga will start "going gaga over Jesus and used her celebrity for His glory, millions would stop buying immoral filth and start singing songs to God."
  • Michael Brown tells closeted and married gay men that "commitment to love your wife and your children trumps your sexual desires and romantic attractions, and to destroy your family for the sake of those desires is, indeed, 'the most selfish thing in the world.'"
  • Is any surprised that Ken Cuccinelli thinks that people ought to be prosecuted for adultery?
  • Finally, do you know what this country needs? "A Congress full of Rep. Gohmerts."

Anti-Muslim Activists Fear Islamic Enclaves in Brooklyn and Chicago That Will Spread Across America

Apparently, radical Muslim groups aren’t just setting up in national parks, but they are also carving up parts of major US cities. Christian Braodcasting Network’s Erick Stakelbeck talked to Janet Mefferd yesterday about the threat of Sharia law-administered enclaves in the US, warning that the Muslim Brotherhood acts like “termites” by “gradually eating away at the host society from within.”

Mefferd said Brooklyn and Dearborn, Michigan — Stakelbeck added Chicago — are quickly becoming radical Muslim enclaves, asking, “What do you do when they are able to establish enough beachheads that there aren’t enough places to move back to?”

Stackelbeck claimed that progressives, both the “hardcore left” and “your garden variety liberals,” are helping the Muslim Brotherhood by “crying Islamophobia” even though “if the radical Islamists get their way the first people with their heads on the chopping block will be the left.”

“We’ve basically lost one whole side of the political aisle when it comes to confronting this threat,” Stackelbeck said. “As a nation we are collectively shaking our fist at the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob right now.”

Rep. John Fleming: Obama Administration and Gay Rights Advocates Pushing Atheism, Socialism

Louisiana Republican congressman John Fleming is upset that “those who want to promote homosexuality as a mainstream lifestyle” are trying to change Americans’ “whole way of thinking to that secular humanist, atheist viewpoint” and allow “just about any kind of lifestyle you can think of.” Fleming made the remarks in an interview yesterday with conservative talk show host Janet Mefferd, criticizing Obama administration officials for working “to rid government of any last vestiges of religion, especially Christianity.”

I do believe that those who want to promote homosexuality as a mainstream lifestyle and to change the whole nature of the marriage relationship that has been for centuries one man and one woman, they view that as inconsistent with religious beliefs, so what they want to do from the administration is to change our whole way of thinking to that secular humanist, atheist viewpoint, which means it opens it up to just about any kind of lifestyle you can think of. So I really think that this is a push from the administration and throughout the administration, other people, to rid government of any last vestiges of religion, especially Christianity.

He said that the supposed push for atheism is part of an alleged plan, including Obamacare and government-dictated school lunches, to “push socialism on the American people.”

I would say that the global issue in this whole thing is to push religion completely out of government at any level at all to make this a socialist secular humanist society because as you know, Janet, socialism is incompatible with religious beliefs. So if you’re going to be promoting Obamacare, which is the cornerstone of socialism; if you’re going to have a government that manages its people on a microscopic level; if you’re going to have a growing government, a top-down, directing you as to what your children can eat in the lunchroom and all of these things; that is inconsistent with religion, especially Christianity. So I see this as just another front to push socialism on the American people.

Bozell: Romney Lost Because The Media Failed To Report The Obama Was A 'Pothead'

Yesterday's Janet Mefferd program featured a truly idiotic interview with the Media Research Center's Brent Bozell about his new book "Collusion: How the Media Stole the 2012 Election---and How to Stop Them from Doing It in 2016," the premise of which seems to be that there were a variety of negative stories about Mitt Romney but none about President Obama.

Apparently, if the media had just dedicated more coverage to the fact that Obama smoked pot as a youth and ate dog as a child while living in Indonesia, Romney would be president today: 

Mefferd: You're not allowed to touch those on the left; you're not allowed to dig into the past of Barack Obama and expose what little was exposed before 2008.  And it just ramped up, didn't it?

Bozell: You just pitched me a softball. What about the past?  How should somebody's past be covered?  Well, we know about Mitt Romney, we know that because the Washington Post spent five thousand four hundred words of this, we know that had a dog on his roof.  Everyone knows that story.  Now why do we all know that story? Because it was reported endlessly because dogs on a roof are important to report. 

Well, if dogs on a roof are important, what about dogs in your stomach? What about eating dogs? Is that important? Now, am I making a false accusation or a nefarious accusation about Barack Obama? No, I'm quoting him in his own book. He had said how he ate dog. How is that not newsworthy but leaving a dog on a roof is?

The Washington Post; five thousand four hundred words devoted to an essay on Mitt Romney's youth and it all revolves around, remember, the haircut in 1965?  We had to know that. So that's the microcosm of Mitt Romney's youth.

They then did a five thousand word essay on Obama's youth, and it's all about his love for basketball.  He had a love for something else, Janet.  It was called marijuana. He was a pothead. He was a member of the Choom Gang. What they did was they'd get stoned all the time.  Is Brent making an outrageous accusation? No, it's right in Barack Obama's book.

Huelskamp: Supreme Court Legalized Polygamy

Yesterday, while speaking with Janet Mefferd, Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) expanded on his claim that the Supreme Court Justices who ruled on Prop 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act should’ve flunked law school.

Huelskamp said Justice Anthony Kennedy’s decision on DOMA was “outrageous” and based on smearing gay rights opponents: “If you’re writing for the left and you’re not gonna follow the Constitution you have to make it up as you go along so you inject name-calling into a constitutional decision, I mean that’s an outrageous decision.”

He also called Chief Justice John Roberts’ ruling on Prop 8 “crazy” and described it as an example of left-wing bias. Huelskamp even argued that the DOMA ruling effectively tossed out state laws barring marriages between a mother and her daughter, adding that “polygamy should be allowed under this decision.”

“What’s the impact on our children? That’s what the left doesn’t care about,” Huelskamp said, repeating his earlier claim that “children will be hurt” by the rulings. “That’s why this is showing up in these decisions that you know what just because two adults or three adults desire one thing that doesn’t mean it’s best for our children.” 

The congressman also told Mefferd that Republicans are too timid in their opposition to gay rights and should also focus on the “fiscal impact” of gay marriage and what he believes is the legalization of polygamy: “There’s a real big fiscal impact, we’re going to extend 1,100 benefits to homosexual and polygamous couples, perhaps, what’s the impact on that?”

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious