Last week, we noted that David Barton and Glenn Beck had launched an effort to pressure pastors into speaking out on issues of importance to conservatives by misleadingly citing a survey conducted by Christian pollster George Barna.
All three men appeared on Beck's show to promote the poll, claiming that it found that large majorities of average churchgoers are clamoring to have their pastors preach against things like abortion, gay marriage and the separation of church and state. In reality, the poll represented only the views of "spiritually active Christians who hold politically conservative views," which was not surprising since conservative Christians made up "92% of the total respondents."
Barton filmed a video on behalf of the effort in which he, once again, misleadingly created the impression that the findings of the Barna poll represent the views of all churchgoers.
Saying that the poll represents the views of "Bible-minded churchgoers," Barton proceeded to declare time and again that "an astounding 91 percent of churchgoers say that it was critically important that they learn the biblical perspective on abortion," and that "82 percent of Bible-believing churchgoers felt that it was crucial to hear the biblical view of sexual identity," and that "80 percent of churchgoers want to hear about Israel," and that "79 percent of churchgoers want to hear about our Christian heritage."
Of course, what the poll really found was that these were the issues that conservative Christians want to hear their pastors preach about. But Barton never bothers to mention that basic fact because doing so would undermine his effort to create the impression that America's churches are filled with people just dying to hear anti-abortion and anti-gay sermons.
Earlier this week, GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said that he didn’t want “stupid” people — i.e. people who won’t vote for him — to vote at all. Then a Republican state representative in Florida was caught suggesting that the party beat Rep. Corrine Brown by redrawing her African-American-majority district to include a large population of prisoners, who are not allowed to vote in Florida.
These are just two of the instances of Republican lawmakers admitting that their electoral strategy hinges not just on winning votes, but on suppressing the votes of people who they think will oppose them.
More than 30 years ago, an influential conservative leader explained why his movement shouldn’t “want everybody to vote.”
Paul Weyrich, an operative considered to be the “founding father of the conservative movement” because of his hand in founding the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the Heritage Foundation, Moral Majority, the Council for National Policy and other influential conservative groups, laid out the GOP’s voter suppression strategy in a 1980 speech in Dallas.
"I don't want everybody to vote,” he said. “Elections are not won by a majority of people. They never have been from the beginning of our country, and they are not now. As a matter of fact our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
In 2013, North Carolina lawmakers pushed through a package of voter suppression bills , including restrictions on early voting, something that many African American voters had taken advantage of the previous year.
Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly rejoiced in the news , saying that the early voting restrictions were “particularly important” because early voting had tended to help Democrats:
The reduction in the number of days allowed for early voting is particularly important because early voting plays a major role in Obama’s ground game. The Democrats carried most states that allow many days of early voting, and Obama’s national field director admitted, shortly before last year’s election, that “early voting is giving us a solid lead in the battleground states that will decide this election.”
Doug Preisse, the chairman of the Franklin County Republican Party (whose area includes the city of Columbus), put his party’s case frankly in an email to the Columbus Dispatch:
I guess I really actually feel we shouldn’t contort the voting process to accommodate the urban — read African-American — voter turnout machine.
Before the 2012 presidential election, Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai declared that a new voter identification law would “allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”
In 2013, then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott — who has since become the state’s governor – responded to the Justice Department’s accusation that recent redistricting had discriminated against minorities by explaining that the goal was just to discriminate against Democrats and “effects on minority voters” were merely “incidental”:
DOJ’s accusations of racial discrimination are baseless. In 2011, both houses of the Texas Legislature were controlled by large Republican majorities, and their redistricting decisions were designed to increase the Republican Party’s electoral prospects at the expense of the Democrats. It is perfectly constitutional for a Republican-controlled legislature to make partisan districting decisions, even if there are incidental effects on minority voters who support Democratic candidates.
While the Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling represented a major victory for gay rights advocates, Gayle Ruzicka of the Utah Eagle Forum warned at the Eagle Forum’s national conference last weekend that conservatives “better fight like tigers” because the gay rights movement’s “next target is the schools; it’s the children.”
“Are we going to let them take these schools?” she asked the activists who came in mid-September to the Eagle Council, the annual event hosted by Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, which also featured several GOP presidential candidates.
As Ruzicka put it, she knows that Equality Utah is an effective organization because its leader, Troy Williams, is her former protégé. She told the audience at an anti-gay-marriage panel that Williams is now using what he learned at Eagle Forum to fight conservatives:
In our state we have Equality Utah, who is, by the way, I guess you call him as my nemesis now, I trained him, he used to be Eagle Forum, he was at my side all the time, he loved everything about us and everything we did, he now is the head of Equality Utah and they’ve got plans, his name is Troy, the first words out of his mouth, how excited he was over marriage and then his next words were, “and we have just begun.”
“We have God on our side but we don’t have God if we don’t do anything,” she said. Later, she claimed that the fight over LGBT rights may eclipse the one over abortion rights since abortion rights supporters “kind of went away into their abortion mills and we didn’t have to look at the awful things they were doing there.”
“But with this, they are coming after us,” she said of LGBT rights groups. “For them, this is the beginning, this is not the end, and they are coming after us, daily, and daily they are threatening us.”
Many members in the audience agreed with this assessment. One wondered if gay rights advocates would “take our lives over” marriage and another bravely pledged to go to jail due to marriage equality. One activist with Utah Eagle Forum explained that same-sex marriage is comparable to abortion because “in abortion, we kill the baby once it’s born. But with homosexuality, the baby is never born.”
Andy Schlafly, Phyllis’ son and the co-host of the panel, agreed that abortion-rights opponents must speak up against LGBT equality “because the homosexuals and the liberals have taken over the Supreme Court and pro-lifers need to understand that they are going to lose everything on the pro-life issue because of this homosexual rights issue.”
“They are going to lose everything because liberals have come through on this other issue and they’ve got control of Kennedy and Kennedy is the swing vote,” he said.
Schlafly said that activists can do two things to fight gay marriage: One is to followMike Huckabee’slead in urging their elected officials to simply defy the Supreme Court ruling; the other is to find a congressman who would file articles of impeachment against Judge David Bunning, the Bush-nominated federal judge who placed Kentucky clerk Kim Davis in the custody of U.S. Marshals after finding her in contempt of court for blocking marriage licenses in her county.
If Congress were to even consider impeaching Bunning, Schlafly said, it would “send shockwaves to the other side” and put judges on notice. She warned that there is little time left before out-of-control judges go after pastors and Christian schools.
“I’m telling you, the homosexual movement is taking over the court system,” he said. “The courts are gone, the courts have been taken over by the homosexuals, so they are going to sue and bankrupt all of our churches and all of our schools.”
Religious liberty is on its last legs, he said, claiming that Tim Tebow is “excluded from the entire NFL simply because he quotes from the Bible.” He added that religious counselors practicing “ex-gay” therapy are also under attack because gays know that they need to “recruit” people while they are young.
“The battle over this is really with teenagers,” he explained, “there is not as much of a market for it for adults. The focus is on those teen years, when people are forming their sexuality. That’s why there is so much attention to teenagers. The other side is recruiting heavily for teenagers. We have no idea in this room how much recruitment is going on against teenagers right now.”
As expected, members of the audience agreed that gay marriage will effect everybody, and not just by supposedly destroying religious freedom and allowing abortion rights to continue. As one woman in the audience said, Eagle Forum must explain to Americans that they may all die if gay marriage continues:
People who have had any exposure to the Bible at all, people are familiar with Sodom and Gomorrah and this is what’s happened with this homosexual movement and the gay marriage. I mean, we are saying, ok, we are giving them a legal right to go in and commit sodomy, night after night, day after day after day, I mean, if people get that message, we’re making God mad, do we want to make him so mad that he comes down and destroys the whole country? Think of Sodom and Gomorrah. Maybe something like that can be a visual, do you know what I’m saying?
Ruzicka responded to the audience member’s plea by saying that “we have to be sure to remind them who these people are and what it is that they do.”
One audience member similarly lamented that while “there are just not that many people who care about what God did to the people in Sodom,” someone should stand up for the rights of believers: “We have to get the young people who do care, we have to get the laws on the books to protect those of us who care. It is scary out there for what young people are being force-fed.”
Announcing that she worked alongside Phyllis Schlafly in the successful campaign to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment, one woman in the audience said that activists need to realize that they are in a spiritual battle.
“We have demons that work against us,” she said. “If you ever a find a time where there was a hope, it was during the ERA days. We had everything against us, all the momentum, all the money, all the politicians, all the media, everything was against us.”
As it turns out, at least one man in the audience said he was expecting an even greater fight, asking if the U.S. military “is on our side or Obama’s side,” while another attendee speculated that U.S. service members are being conditioned to put on United Nations uniforms during a potential civil conflict.
Ruzicka seemed exasperated by the descent of the panel, which stretched until 11:30 at night, into manic paranoia about civil war and spiritual warfare. Of course, warning about the gay recruitment of children and the closure of Christian churches and schools may have had something to do with it.
Religious Right activists have spent decades warning about gay rights leading to divine wrath, judicial tyranny and the corruption of children, with little to show for it as support for marriage equality has only increased among voters.
Polls consistently show that barely one-third of Americans think that Kim Davis, the new, “persecuted” face of the gay-rights opponents, was in the right for barring her county office from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples.
With the collapse of its public image, the anti-gay Right desperately needs new spokesmen and ideas, but if this conference showed anything, old paranoias are hard to shake.
When Jake Tapper asked the Republican presidential candidates at last night’s debate which American woman they would put on the $10 bill, some named their wives or daughters, some named non-Americans, and some named Planned Parenthood board member Rosa Parks, but nobody picked Phyllis Schlafly, the anti-feminist hero whom several of the candidates have credited with shaping their conservative views.
That’s too bad, because the Phyllis Schlafly $10 bill has already been designed.
At last week’s Eagle Council, the annual gathering of Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, which was attended by Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum and other Republican leaders, speaker after speaker praised Schlafly’s role in fighting the Equal Rights Amendment but lamented that nefarious feminist plots, such as the campaign to put a woman on the $10 bill, have gained traction under the Obama administration.
Schlafly’s son John quipped that the White House wants to have Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, grace the $10 bill, but Eagle Forum had other ideas, offering attendees this sample currency design:
Attendees wandering Eagle Council’s exhibit hall also had the opportunity to pick up several “informative” pamphlets on the dangers of sex, filled with misleading or outdated claims.
The above pamphlet, distributed by a Snowflake, Arizona, outfit called Heritage House 76, cites only articles written between 1987 and 1993, and contains claims such as: “When doctors work on someone with AIDS they put on two pairs of gloves, a full gown over their clothes, a mask and goggles. Even then, they don’t feel completely ‘safe.’”
“Latex breaks down in heat, yet condoms are transported in trucks that get so hot you can fry an egg!” it reads. “Do you want to live? Would you like to raise a family, have a career or follow a dream? Then don’t buy the ‘safe sex’ lie — it can kill you.”
A “Say ‘No’ To Drugs!” pamphlet we picked up at the event doesn’t mention drugs like cocaine or heroin, as one might expect.
Instead, it focuses on a far worse drug: the pill.
Warning that the “dangerous” birth control pill “can make you sterile,” the pamphlet (which does not identify its author or publisher) urges readers to remain abstinent until marriage: “Having sex before marriage is sort of like giving out all your Christmas gifts in July. It may be fun at the time. But when that big day comes around, the presents have all been given out!”
And it’s not just the pill that poses a danger, according to the pamphlet: “Using rubbers (condoms) to prevent AIDS is like playing Russian Roulette—your life is at stake!”
Eagle Council participants were also able to pick up plenty of useful information on the danger that public education poses to children.
In a booklet titled “Government Education…Is this what we want for our children?,” the anti-public-education group Citizens United for Responsible Education tells parents that social studies classes in public schools are “anti-Christian” and “pro-Islam.” Along with exalting Islam, the booklet alleges, “government schools” are trying to “promote atheism, homosexuality, and disrespect for parents and their values.” Even worse, public schools are pushing “pagan” worship and have made sure that “children are bullied into accepting evolution as scientific fact against their Biblical beliefs.”
But fortunately there are alternatives to raising atheist Muslim gay neo-pagan kids.
“God’s Standards for Educating Our Children,” a booklet produced by a Christian publisher in Kentucky, tells parents to consider homeschooling or private Christian education in order to avoid the “pagan and God-ignoring” influences of public schools, noting that “the danger of a child admiring and becoming attached to the unchristian teacher is great.” Other threats include “self-expression” and the same sort of sexual education classes that have destroyed Sweden:
The teaching of self-expression is in complete opposition to Bible principle. It militates against a life of obedience and submission. Disobedience, demonstrations, riots, and campus disorders are all a product of the exercising of self-expression.
The emphasis on sex education is not Biblical. The school was never intended to replace the teaching of the home but to supplement it. It is impossible for immoral, unregenerated, and defiled individuals to teach a subject such as this without being suggestive, thus demoralizing any moral that might be present. Sweden, after ten years of compulsory sex education, is the most immoral nation in the world. Sex relations at an early age is prevalent.
Eagle Forum offered copies of the August issue of its “Education Reporter” newsletter, which claims that “children at schools are indoctrinated into acceptance of whatever the [teachers’] union decides is normal. Programs supposedly meant to prevent bullying are actually meant to bully children into compliance.”
The newsletter attacks opponents of gay “conversion” therapy: “If assistance is offered that could possibly influence a person to leave the LGBTQ community, it is considered to be brainwashing and, by definition, negative. Although embracing and mainstreaming transgenderism could be more dangerous than providing therapy to help children adjust to their biological makeup.”
Other books available at the conference, including many dealing with signs of the impending apocalypse, were unfortunately for sale at a steep price, and Schlafly’s $10 bills sadly aren’t legal tender.
Ted Cruz spoke at David Barton's "Pastors' Briefing" last night on Capitol Hill.
Even Joe Arpaio thinks Donald Trump has gone too far with his anti-immigration rhetoric, which is quite an accomplishment.
Speaking of Trump, he has reportedly turned down an invitation to speak at the upcoming Values Voter Summit.
Dave Daubenmire credits the prayers of his "Salt and Light Brigade" for Kim Davis' release from jail.
Finally, Phyllis Schlafly says that "when the Supreme Court ruled that all 50 states must license same-sex unions on the same terms as marriage, the court was implicitly declaring that Christianity and the Bible are wrong."
Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk Kim Davis’ attempt to block her office from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples has inspired Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, who writes in a column today that Rowan County should become “a ‘sanctuary county’ where the biblical view of marriage continues to be honored and respected.”
However, Schlafly writes in WorldNetDaily, judicial tyrants are instead sending Davis to jail “merely for abiding by state law and the Bible.”
When the Supreme Court ruled by the narrowest possible margin that Kentucky’s definition of marriage is unconstitutional, the Court’s decision was qualified by its assurance that religious freedom would not be jeopardized. “The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection,” the Court solemnly intoned on June 26.
In the Appalachian hills of eastern Kentucky, one brave woman is testing whether Justice Anthony Kennedy really meant it when he wrote those words. But the local federal judge for eastern Kentucky, David Bunning, wrongly sent Kim Davis to jail for her beliefs, without respecting or accommodating her sincere Christian beliefs.
It is not “rule of law” to jail someone based on judge-made law; it is “rule by judges.” Kim Davis is not committing civil disobedience, because she has not violated any law. She was arrested, humiliated with a mug shot and jailed, merely for abiding by state law and the Bible.
When the Supreme Court ruled that all 50 states must license same-sex unions on the same terms as marriage, the court was implicitly declaring that Christianity and the Bible are wrong. If San Francisco can be a sanctuary city, let’s allow Rowan County, Kentucky, to be a “sanctuary county” where the biblical view of marriage continues to be honored and respected.
Linda Harvey of Mission America agrees, calling in her own WorldNetDaily column for such sanctuary cities to not only ban same-sex marriage but also prohibit gay pride parades and sexual reassignment surgery. Because “family life would be much healthier and safer in these cities,” Harvey thinks “the trend would be contagious as people share their positive experiences with friends and relatives across the country”:
Since we are beginning to see violations of constitutional rights based on objections to homosexuality as marriage, I believe there’s a clear precedent for establishing sanctuary cities for authentic, lawful, man/woman marriage.
Think about how great life would be in those cities. After all, unlike the defiance of immigration law, these cities would be upholding the actual law under our actual Constitution, not the imaginary one in the mind of Justice Anthony Kennedy.
So, why not cities that uphold a standing, just law? Family life would be much healthier and safer in these cities. Keep out the vile “gay-pride” parades as well as harassment lawsuits against bakers and florists. And how about no pro-homosexual lessons in school, falsely implying that some people are born homosexual, or born to mutilate themselves by sex-change surgery? Also, no ban on counseling for teens who have same-sex attractions.
Of course, such cities would not be without challenges. They would be targets for dirty tricks, phony “hate crimes,” special sections on “gay apartheid” by the New York Times and so on. The formulaic fables and drama, based on no facts but lots of screeching, can be composed now in advance.
We are not unaware of the schemes of Satan, nor of Saul Alinsky adherents.
It will take a courageous city council to take this step, yet the trend would be contagious as people share their positive experiences with friends and relatives across the country.
NOM needs donations because "same-sex 'marriage' activists have adopted what is essentially a totalitarian regime — they want every American to be forced to accept gay 'marriage' and are prepared to invoke the full power of the federal government to force everyone to accept the sham ruling the Court handed down."
Dustin Siggins and David Flynn explain "Why Same-Sex Marriage Will Never Measure Up To The Real Thing."
It seems that a few BarbWire columnists are not fans of Donald Trump, with one even comparing him to Joseph McCarthy.
Noah Beck offers a convoluted explanation of why "the best possible outcome, at this point, would be a Congressional resolution that rejects the Iran deal but then gets vetoed by Obama" because this is the only way to save Israel.
Finally, Phyllis Schlafly says "the world can probably survive a woman as U.N. secretary general, but not the emasculation of America’s elite combat units."
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Mike Huckabee, and others will be speaking at one of David Lane's upcoming
"Renewal Project" events in Texas later this month.
Brody says that "Fox News should be utterly ashamed. Donald Trump should sue the network for harassment."
Phyllis Schlafly says
that "Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in favor of gay marriage is an affront to God, the Constitution, and the
Phil Burress warns that gay rights activists are "persecuting anyone who disagrees
with them, [they] want to put people in jail who do not bow at the knees of the homosexual agenda" and that Ohio Gov. John
Kasich "is in that camp."
Bryan Fischer had a rather interesting choice of guest on his radio program today.
Don Feder says that "thanks to Obama and his party opening the floodgates to Muslim
'refugees,' Sharia law is coming to America."
Finally, Gordon Klingenschmitt says that Planned Parenthood is possessed by the "demonic spirit of murder," but we see "the spirit of God in these prophets" who are making the anti-Planned Parenthood videos.
In an interview with far-right pastor and Colorado state Rep. Gordon Klingenschmit today, Phyllis Schlafly declared that the Supreme Court’s recent marriage equality ruling should simply be ignored while "we the people" decide if we want to overturn it.
"There's nothing in the Constitution about homosexual marriage," Schlafly said. "The judges made it up and some people think that because they did and the Supreme Court has spoken, therefore we have to accept it. We don't."
Likening the ruling to the Dred Scott decision, Schlafly said that "we don't have to obey it just because a few judges said so," before declaring that GOP presidential hopefuls must declare that they will flout the decision, something several candidateshavealreadydone.
"We just don't believe in accepting what some judge says is the new law," she said. "The Constitution starts with 'we the people,' and so what we need to do is say just because the Supreme Court has handed down a decision, we'll re-evaluate it and we'll decide whether we want to overturn it or not."
Phyllis Schlafly’s latest newsletter is promoting the Eagle Forum’s 44th annual leadership council gathering. The ever-direct Schlafly gets right to the point:
Why is this Eagle Council so important? It is absolutely urgent that we elect a conservative President. Eagle Council is both a strategic forum featuring top-notch experts helpful to activists like you AND a celebration of our values and achievements to encourage all Eagles.
What exactly are the values Schlafly’s gathering will be celebrating? If her main speakers are any indication, those values would be anti-immigrant and anti-gay bigotry, along with lawless resistance to court rulings on LGBT equality and church-state separation.
Can you guess? Friday night’s keynote will be given by Ann Coulter, who has been complaining that the media has gotten so tired of her predictable liberal-bashing shtick that they aren’t giving enough attention to her latest bottom-feeding screed, “Adios America! The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country Into a Third World Hellhole.”
On Saturday evening, Schalfly’s Eagles will hear from Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who was removed from the bench once for refusing to obey federal court orders to remove a Ten Commandments monument he installed in the courthouse. More recently, a group that he founded and that his wife leads, the Foundation for Moral Law, vowed to defy the “illegitimate” marriage equality ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.
On Sunday, Moore told a congregation, “Welcome to the new world. It’s just changed for you Christians. You are going to be persecuted, according to the U.S. Supreme Court dissents.” Moore has previously claimed same-sex marriage would destroy America and invite God’s wrath on the country.
Schlafly’s event will be in St. Louis September 11-13. Mark your calendars!
Phyllis Schlafly is none too pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision striking down state gay marriage bans, and has a modest proposal for Congress: Pass a resolution affirming the “dignity of opposite-sex married couples,” especially that of couples where “a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker.”
While this resolution might not change much in the short term, the anti-feminist crusader writes in her syndicated column today, it might act as an inspiration to the anti-gay movement as they continue to fight marriage equality.
Justice Kennedy's opinion for a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court has rightly been condemned for its lack of grounding in the constitutional text he is sworn to uphold. Unable to find gay marriage in either the due process clause or the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, Kennedy ultimately rests his case on what Justice Clarence Thomas sarcastically called the "dignity clause" of the Constitution.
There is no such clause, of course, although Kennedy's majority opinion mentioned "dignity" nine times. But if dignity can be conferred by decisions of the Supreme Court, then Congress can do so, too.
Therein lies a first response: Congress should formally recognize the dignity of opposite-sex married couples and resolve to protect that dignity in our laws. A joint resolution should recite the many reasons why the special union of husband and wife has been honored for "millennia," as Kennedy admitted.
A crash program to rebuild the traditional American nuclear family is urgently necessary for continuing our nation's political and economic success in this century. This won't happen if we transform marriage into a means of giving "dignity" to mostly childless homosexuals.
Once Congress is on a roll to confer dignity, it should confer an extra measure of dignity on the single-earner family, where a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker, a role more socially beneficial than working in the paid labor force.
After reciting the foregoing reasons and many others, Congress should conclude its resolution by formally resolving that the traditional family, founded on a married husband and wife, carries special dignity and deserves special recognition because it provides unique benefits to society.
This is not to deny that every human person has value and dignity, or that other domestic relationships may have some value in limited circumstances. But Congress should respond to Kennedy with a ringing affirmation of the unique dignity that should be accorded to society's foundational unit: the marriage of husband and wife.
Naysayers will scoff that the foregoing resolution doesn't change the Supreme Court decision, and you can imagine a late-night comedian comparing it to the medal of courage the Wizard of Oz presented to the Cowardly Lion. But movie fans will recall how that gesture inspired Dorothy and her companions toward achieving their goal.
This past Saturday, Phyllis Schlafly hosted former House GOP Majority Leader Tom DeLay on “Eagle Forum Live” to discuss the alleged threat of gay marriage. Schlafly segued into the topic of gay marriage by describing an open letter to the SupremeCourt, signed by conservative pastors and politicians, pledging to defy any Court decision which strikes down state bans on same-sex marriage.
DeLay lamented that “people don’t understand the constitution. We haven’t taught our children now for three or four generations what the Constitution is, and the separation of powers, and what our Founding Fathers had in mind as this brilliant understanding of how you can limit government and limit the tyranny put on us through people or oligarchies.”
Because of this supposed constitutional ignorance, DeLay claimed, “right now, the American people don’t understand that the Supreme Court, when it makes a ruling, it’s just an opinion if no one enforces that ruling. The Supreme Court doesn’t have a police force; the Supreme Court doesn’t have an army; the Supreme Court doesn’t have people that can enforce their ruling.” Therefore, if conservatives “stand up to them and invoke the Constitution, then we don’t have to accept a ruling on marriage that redefines marriage. And that’s basically what this ad is all about. We’re sending a message to the Supreme Court that, number one, it’s illegal that they have this case before them; it’s not in their jurisdiction.”
Proving his Constitutional prowess, DeLay argued that “it’s not in their authority to write law by ten unelected, unaccountable people, lawyers, and if – this is a red line that we’re drawing. If they rule against marriage, we will all defy them.”
Further along in the show, a caller, responding to the overreach of the Supreme Court, noted that “civil rights laws, such as Brown v. Board of Education and Virginia v. Loving [sic], were put on us by courts legislating from the bench and presidential executive orders. And back then even one-third of the black people did not want integration. And Governor George Wallace warned about the tyranny now happening under the Obama administration.”
Responding to this lecture, Schlafly observed, “Well, lots of mistakes have been made along those lines.”
DeLay concluded his time on Schlafly’s show by commentating on the “danger” of the potential imposition of martial law by pointing to the stand-off at Bundy Ranch in April 2015, where Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy refused to pay grazing fees for using federal land. “He stood up to them and backed them down,” DeLay said.
The right-wing outlet WorldNetDaily spoke today to Phyllis Schlafly, the founder of Eagle Forum, and far-right talk show host Carl Gallups about the upcoming Supreme Court ruling on marriage equality. Schlafly said that people should worry about the emergence of anti-Christian “persecution” if the court decides to strike down state bans on same-sex marriage, while Gallups predicted that Christians may even face “enslavement.”
Gallups repeatedly insisted that the legalization of gay marriage will allow the government to force pastors to officiate same-sex couples’ weddings, a baseless prediction and an event that has never happened in the thirty-seven states that already have equal marriage laws.
Even worse, Gallups says, people will experience “economic destruction” unless they rise up and “take measures like our Founding Fathers took.”
Schlafly also highlighted the danger posed to private individuals and businesses because of homosexual activists looking for targets for lawsuits. And she mourns the loss of the free country she says she has lived in “all of my life.”
“Persecuting Christians … that’s not the country we live in. We have the First Amendment. We have freedom of religion. That was a basic element of American policy. And now many, many people think we are about to lose it, and Obama is doing nothing to calm their fears.”
Carl Gallups, a radio host, pastor, and author of “Final Warning: Understanding the Trumpet Days of Revelation,” is one of those people. He says American pastors may face a real test of faith.
“If the Supreme Court declares homosexual marriage to be the law of the land, pastors will have a lot of important decisions to make. If the government were to focus in on the churches and say you have to perform gay weddings or give up tax-exempt status, what will these preachers do? Will they stand on the word of God, and with the historical foundation of civilized societies, or will they cave in – in the name of financial and political expediency?”
Gallups warns what is at stake is the creation of nothing less than a new legal and religious order built upon the destruction of the First Amendment.
He maintains, “If the government can force a church to perform homosexual weddings, then in effect the First Amendment to the Constitution has been completely destroyed. At that point, the government is creating a new religion, a new state church, because they are saying what Christianity is and is not.
Gallups looks to history for examples of how Americans can resist the kind of possible “enslavement” he sees coming for Christians.
He asks believers: “When the First Amendment is gone – trampled in the dirt under our nose, and we are forced to submit to godlessness at gunpoint or economic destruction, will we roll over and put ourselves under the tyranny of those who would desire to enslave us and dominate us? Or will we take measures like our Founding Fathers took?”
He continued, “Never forget, our Founding Fathers stated in the Declaration of Independence that it was our duty to take the same stand that they took should a future ‘regime’ threaten to do to us what King George did to the colonies. Many believe that day might quickly be approaching. That’s a tough thing to consider, but I think pastors, Christians, and every freedom loving, Constitution-loving American had best consider the possibility.
“[The Founding Fathers] began with every peaceful means at their disposal, until violence was eventually threatened and inflicted upon them. At that point it came time to defend their lives, the lives of their families, church families, and neighbors – and their freedom.
“I hope and pray that this never happens. That’s why I, and so many others like me, are working fervently to restore and preserve our constitutional republic with every peaceful and prayerful means possible. Because as long as the Constitution, and especially the First Amendment, is upheld, the government cannot force us to perform a homosexual wedding – in so doing they would be establishing our religious tenants with government decree and sanction. We can easily co-exist with people of different beliefs. But once the First Amendment is gone and the government can tell people what to do in the deep matters of biblical faith that is tyranny – and that is something different altogether.”
Phyllis Schlafly does not believe it will come to anything like that because “the American people won’t put up with it.”
This piece by People For the American Way Political Coordinator Carlos A. Sanchez originally appeared in Fox News Latino.
Even as a diverse coalition of Americans unite around the principle that voting rights are an essential American principle that needs to be protected, the Republican Party remains firmly committed to doing the opposite. Their continued push for policies that make it more difficult for people to vote disproportionately affects minority and young voters.
Republicans – including leading Presidential candidates – have for years been pushing initiatives that make it harder to vote. Jeb Bush supports states’ efforts to enact voter ID laws, and as governor, he restricted early voting and infamously purged 12,000 eligible voters before the 2000 presidential election. Marco Rubio asked, “What’s the big deal?” with voter ID laws. Scott Walker enacted what has been described as “one of the most restrictive voter ID laws in the country.”
Voter ID laws systematically target Latinos’ and other minorities’ ability to vote. In 2012, measures to restrict voting could have affected over 10 million Latino voters. A Brennan Center for Justice study reported, “In Colorado, Florida, and Virginia, the number of eligible Latino citizens that could be affected by these barriers exceeds the margin of victory in each of those states during the 2008 presidential election.”
And it’s no accident that these laws disproportionately affect Latinos. A separate study from last year found “a solid link between legislator support for voter ID laws and bias toward Latino voters, as measured in their responses to constituent e-mails.” And yet another study that was released earlier this year found that even in states without voter ID laws, Latinos were targeted: “Election officials themselves also appear to be biased against minority voters, and Latinos in particular. For example, poll workers are more likely to ask minority voters to show identification, including in states without voter identification laws.”
Some Republicans have explicitly made known their intentions of suppressing Latino and African-American voters in order to win elections. Over 30 years ago, ALEC-founder and co-founder of the Heritage Foundation Paul Weyrich spoke plainly: “I don’t want everybody to vote…As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.” Republican after Republican has continued in his footsteps: An Ohio GOP County Chair stated he supports limits on early voting because, “I really actually feel we shouldn’t contort the voting process to accommodate the urban – read African-American – voter-turnout machine.” Pennsylvania House Speaker Mike Turzai believed voter ID laws would “allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania.” Former GOP Precinct Chair Don Yelton used the “n” word as he tried to deny that a voter ID law in North Carolina was racist (and he explained that “the law is going to kick the Democrats in the butt”). Conservative activist and notoriously anti-immigrant Phyllis Schlafly said, “The reduction in the number of days allowed for early voting is particularly important because early voting plays a major role in Obama’s ground game.” Schlafly’s Eagle Forum endorsed Marco Rubio in his run for Senate (here’s a lovely picture of the two of them) and applauded Scott Walker for his opposition to legal immigration.
The Republican response to the growing power of minority voters could not be clearer: shut them out of the election process. Under the guise of fighting voter fraud, despite a striking absence of evidence that fraud exists, Republican-led chambers across our nation have moved in concert to restrict access through the polls for political reasons. It’s that simple.
What’s even more upsetting is to hear a group who claims to represent the best interests of a community choose to ignore the facts in favor of their funder’s agenda. Daniel Garza, executive director of the Libre Iniative, said he’s fine with voter ID laws and that he doesn’t think Republicans are trying to suppress the Latino vote. Libre is a Koch-funded GOP shadow group that time and again turns its back on the Latino community – for example, Libre supported Republican candidates who opposed immigration reform in 2014. Garza’s support for voter ID laws is yet another instance of him and Republicans supporting a policy that’s devastating to Latinos.
It’s time for the Republican Party to end their campaign against voting rights—and for people like Daniel Garza to stop giving them cover when they do it.
Carlos A. Sanchez is the Coordinator of Political Campaigns for People For the American Way.
In her new book “Adios, America! The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole,” Ann Coulter works tirelessly to hand-pick the perfect “immigrant gone wrong” stories to convince us to deport them all. Coulter, an immigration reform opponent who hopes the government will “round up and deport 11 million illegals,” argues that “the only thing that stands between America and oblivion is a total immigration moratorium.”
Claiming that Democrats only support immigrant rights to get more votes, Coulter tells Republicans that “there is simply no reason for [them] to legalize 30 million people who will vote 8-2 against them.” This book, endorsed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Phyllis Schlafly, and Roy Beck of the anti-immigrant group Numbers USA, proves to be one of Coulter’s most outlandish works yet.
Coulter starts us off with sound advice regarding the type of immigrants we should and should not be letting in to America. According to Coulter, America needs to draft immigrants like the New England Patriots draft players. “No one guilts them into taking a blind kid with one leg over an All American – much less the blind kid’s cousin,” she quips. Because we are in a “sellers’ market,” Coulter urges the Land of the Free to turn away “immigrants’ elderly relatives arriving in wheelchairs,” as well as “cripples, illiterates, and the desperately poor.”
“Earlier immigrants proved their heartiness by vomiting all the way across the Atlantic Ocean to get here,” she asserts, implying that those who risk life and limb to enter into the U.S. today simply don’t cut it. And in case you were confused, “America is not a ‘nation of immigrants,’ it is not an ‘idea,' it was never ‘diverse,’ and ‘diversity’ is a catastrophe.” And, she says, America is white: “Without the white settlers, what is known as 'America' would still be an unnamed continent full of migratory tribes chasing the rear end of a buffalo every time their stomachs growled.”
Moreover, America was virtually perfect before the arrival of “brown people,” Coulter informs us. And no, she is not referring to African Americans who, just in case you were murky on your history, were “freed by Republicans, then discriminated against for another century— mostly by Democrats— until Republicans finally got the Democrats to stop.” Instead, Coulter is referring to Latin American and Asian immigrants, who “don’t get to piggyback on the black experience in America.”
“What’s going to happen when a mostly white senior population is being supported by a mostly brown younger population,” Coulter wonders, before asserting that “despite a hegemonic propaganda campaign about all cultures being equal, they aren’t.” She continues that “there’s nothing good about diversity, other than the food, and we don’t need 128 million Mexicans for the restaurants.”
And when it comes to Somalis, “even Somalia doesn’t want Somalis,” so why should we?
Coulter presents cold, hard facts to back up her claims, especially her argument that immigrants are inherently violent. “Ninety percent of the names on the U.S. Marshals’ list of most wanted criminals would not have been recognizable as names fifty years ago,” she claims. And, moreover, “the dream of many 'Dreamers' is to rob, assault, and murder Americans.”
“When it comes to multiculturalism,” Coulter warns, “you can’t say, We love the empanadas— but we don’t want forty-year-old men raping their nieces. You don’t get to choose. This is not a buffet.” And just so everyone is clear, “gang rape, child rape, elder rape, and murder rape are highly correlated with specific ethnic groups— ethnic groups we are bringing to America by the busload.”
What about white rapists? They simply do not exist, writes Coulter. This is because “white, Protestant, Anglo-Saxon America” is alone in the world as a haven for minorities, women, children, plants, and animals. None have fared so well in any other culture.” America, a nation that has apparently been “taking rape seriously since the first settlers arrived,” is chock-full of “neurotic” women and journalists who cook up “false accusations of rape against American white men.” In fact, “under the diversity regime, everyone gets special rights and privileges, except white men.”
“You can’t make a governing Democratic coalition without breaking a few girls,” Coulter remarks.
Because of all this, Coulter advises Republicans to quit trying to appeal to black and Latino voters and just stick to recruiting white voters by stirring up anti-immigrant sentiment. Or, as she puts it, Republicans “should be unapologetically opposing the transformation of America into a Third World country.”
Coulter’s “advice” for Republicans seems to be resonating in a party that recently quashed an immigration reform bill making its way through Congress. Years after the GOP released an “autopsy” report urging Republicans to “embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform” in a way that “takes into consideration the unique perspective if the Hispanic community,” Republican leaders now seem to be coming around to Coulter’s perspective that immigration reform is bad for the country and that Republicans should campaign on their anti-immigrant stances rather than trying to broaden the party’s appeal beyond its traditional base.
“When Republicans ignore white voters, they lose. When they ignore minorities and drive up the white vote, they win,” Coulter asserts.
Coulter isn’t screaming into a void: it appears that many right-wing presidential hopefuls are following suit.
Coulter, who credits white nationalist Peter Brimelow for her anti-immigrant politics, praises the hardline “self-deportation” platform that Mitt Romney embraced in his 2012 presidential bid. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker recently told Glenn Beck that he seeks to reducelegal immigration levels, while Rick Santorum has boasted that he has tried to lower legal immigration rates for years and chastises the Democratic Party for “selling their souls” by backing immigration reform. These candidates have cynically touted their anti-immigrant streaks as a way to attract white working class voters, just as Coulter recommends.
The Republican Party seems determined to confront the shifting demographics of the American electorate not by changing their policies, but by attempting to change the demographics. It says a lot that it’s Ann Coulter who is leading the charge.
RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.
This week, we learn that President Obama and Hillary Clinton are in cahoots with radical Islam, Caitlyn Jenner’s gender transition is a hoax, Ferguson has unleashed a wave of criminals, and gays continue to destroy the nation.
Obama’s Muslim Plot
Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly explained in an interview with WorldNetDaily this week that President Obama is planning for the U.S. to take in Muslim refugees from war-torn nations such a Syria as part of his plan to wage “war on America,” knowing full well that Syrian refugees seek to “take over the world and establish their caliphate.”
“I don’t think he should let any Muslims in this country,” Schlafly said. “There is no reason why they should come in.” By permitting Muslim refugees to enter the U.S., Schlafly argued, “Obama is trying to absolutely change America by bringing in people who have no sympathy with what Americans believe.”
On her Eagle Forum blog, Schlafly also praised Ann Coulter’s new anti-immigrant screed “Adios America,” thanking Coulter for “alerting Americas to how Obama and the Democrats are destroying the land we love” by “diluting our population” with individuals “who commit all sorts of unspeakable crimes, in particular crimes against very young women and girls.”
Michael Savage joined in on the conspiracy theory, calling Obama a “con man shyster” who is attempting to destroy America by “injecting, like a virus, Muslims from Syria into all-white communities in America.” Obama, according to Savage, has also taken “infected children from Honduras and put them in every school district he could.”
Plenty of right-wing activists are upset about Caitlyn Jenner’s transition. But some have looked beyond the headlines to reveal the true conspiracy that’s afoot.
Alex Jones, host of “InfoWars”, hypothesized that Jenner’s announcement was actually just a plot to distract Americans from Obama’s mischievous, scheming ways. Jones declared that he does not “like being force-fed constantly this weird, one agenda. The obsession, it’s got to be from like five, six years, because I cover media, with the trannies and transvestites.”
“What’s behind the agenda?” Jones asked, revealing that the true agenda of the media is to not only distract us from Obama’s civil war but to “make the coolest thing to be” a “tranny or a transvestite” and glorify a “creepy old guy.”
Jones is not alone in his suspicions, as Cliff Kincaid of the conservative group Accuracy In Media wondered in Barbwire if Jenner’s transition was just “a hoax” to promote her upcoming TV show. Kincaid argued that the greatest threat is to children, criticizing Jenner’s supporters for sending an “extremely damaging” message. Kincaid made sure to warn us that “the nation may not survive, as it becomes a laughingstock before self-destructing or becoming easy pickings for a determined foreign adversary.”
While it may seem like Jenner is simply showing the world her authentic self, Kincaid urged us to question, “Where is the evidence that this is anything but a hoax?”
Hillary Clinton And Her Radical Muslim Cronies
The right loves to hate Hillary Clinton, and the latest conspiracy theories paint Clinton as a supporter and friend of “murderous Islamic thugs.” Rick Wiles, host of “Trunews,” spoke to Christopher Farrell of Judicial Watch Tuesday about his group’s claim that the U.S. compound in Benghazi was “arming Al Qaeda” and coordinating arms shipments to Islamic terrorists in Syria. While this connection may force some to then question why Islamic terrorists attacked the Benghazi compound in 2012, this question did not concern Wiles and Farrell.
Wiles compared the end of Gary Hart’s presidential campaign due to a photograph surfacing “of him with a pretty blonde sitting on his lap” to the apparent “murderous Islamic thugs sitting on the lap of Hillary Clinton.”
While a Republican-led investigation by the House Select Committee on Intelligence found Judicial Watch’s allegations about arm ships to Syria to be as credible as Hillary playing Santa with Islamic terrorists, Farrell and Wiles are not the only ones to remain unconvinced. David Horowitz, a far-right conservative activist, alleged in an interview with Newsmax TV on Tuesday that Hillary Clinton’s aide, Huma Abedin, leaked information to the militants who killed four American diplomats in Benghazi. Clinton “got four people killed in Benghazi,” Horowitz argued. “She, you know, disclosed her private emails to Huma Abedin, a Muslim Brotherhood operative that showed where Ambassador Stephens was all the time, making him a perfect target.”
‘The Ferguson Effect”
Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald penned an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal last Friday titled “The New Nationwide Crime Wave” and the effect has been a week of media outlets sounding the alarm. Apparently, the civil unrest that began after the killing of Michael Brown has flooded the country, inspiring widespread crime.
What this theory lacks in nuance it makes up for in cherry-picked statistics that create a misleading image of increased violence and death. Switching between comparing shootings, violent felonies, and gun-related homicides, Mac Donald argued that the U.S. is “in the grips of a hysteria against cops” and that “cops have gotten the message that they should back off policing,” causing the flood gates to open and crime to wash over the nation.
This tsunami of crime, claimed Mac Donald, is the fault of the “mainstream media, the university presidents talking about assaults on blacks and of course the president and former attorney general.”
Anti-Gay Conspiracy Of The Week
This week in anti-gay conspiracies, gay men are exporting sodomy “to the entire universe” and the prospect of gay marriage will destroy America and cause millions to flee and/or demand secession.
Mike Heath, former head of the Maine Family Policy Council and current blogger on BarbWire, warned that the “[gay] virus is spreading rapidly. It won’t be enough to pervert the whole world with this evil anti-family worldview. Since the developed governments of the world aspire to colonizing planets we have to prepare for the export of sodomy to other worlds—to the entire universe!” Referencing the Apostle Paul, Heath pointed out that “you can tell when a nation has become a walking corpse when it has endorsed perverted sex.”
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, in an interview with CNS News, had a similarly dire warning, claiming that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality would “literally cause the destruction of our country.” The court is “toying with something that’s like dynamite and will destroy our country,” he said.
If, however, by some stroke of luck America does not blow up following a ruling in favor of marriage equality, WorldNetDaily founder and editor Joseph Farah promises that it would be met by secession and mass emigration. Farah wrote that “we need a Promised Land. We need and Exodus strategy.” He asked if there are “any governors or legislatures out there among the 50 states willing to secede to offer a refuge for the God-fearing?” If governors cannot promise Farah this, he promised us there would be a “pilgrimage by millions of Americans” fleeing marriage equality.
CNS News posted an audio clip of part of the interview:
CNS News posted an audio clip of part of the interview: - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moore-gay-marriage-will-literally-cause-destruction-our-country#sthash.SG52o5UE.dpuf
Unsurprisingly, Eagle Forum’s Phyllis Schlafly is a big fan of Ann Coulter’s new anti-immigrant screed “Adios America!”
In a rave review today, Schlafly hails Coulter for exposing how immigration is “diluting our population with people who don’t love America, don’t respect our Constitution and laws, don’t even speak our language, and commit all sorts of unspeakable crimes.”
She then goes into quite a bit of detail about these crimes, “in particular, crimes against very young women and girls.”
“Americans want our border closed to this flow of anti-American foreigners and criminals,” Schlafly concludes. “Thank you, Ann Coulter for alerting Americans to how Obama and the Democrats are destroying the land we love.”
Ann Coulter lives up to her reputation of issuing warnings and political comment that nobody else dares to say in her newest book, Adios, America! It’s aptly titled; she makes the case that it is Goodbye to the America we know and love if we don’t stop diluting our population with people who don’t love America, don’t respect our Constitution and laws, don’t even speak our language, and commit all sorts of unspeakable crimes.
Adios, America! brims with the scathing humor that has propelled Ann’s previous ten books into bestsellers.
Ann Coulter gives hundreds of specific examples of major crimes committed by illegal immigrants and, in particular, crimes against very young women and girls. She shows the devious ways that the media conceal the fact that these horrendous crimes are committed by illegals whom our government should never have let into our country.
The media cover-up doesn’t conceal merely the nationality of these criminals or the frequency of their crimes. The media cover-up also conceals the depravity of these crimes that are so horrific I can’t bring myself to describe them in this column.
Adios, America! spells out chapter and verse on the attitudes and customs of foreigners whom Obama is welcoming by the millions into America, including their horrific mistreatment of very young women and even some younger than teens. Where are the feminists when we need them to shout about the “war on women”?
A new Gallup poll reports that Americans are becoming more liberal on social issues. In fact, Americans are becoming more conservative on many social issues such as pro-life, so our candidates don’t have to take any more advice from those highly paid strategists who tell them to avoid mention of social issues.
Americans want our border closed to this flow of anti-American foreigners and criminals. Thank you, Ann Coulter for alerting Americans to how Obama and the Democrats are destroying the land we love.
In an interview with WorldNetDaily this weekend, conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly declared that the U.S.’s plans to take in refugees from Muslim countries, such as some who are fleeing Syria’s civil war, is in fact part of President Obama’s “war on America” and an attempt to help Muslims “take over the world and establish their caliphate.”
“I don’t think he should let any Muslims in this country,” Schlafly said. “There’s no reason why they should come in.”
President Obama is instigating a war on the United States, according to longtime conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly. But the president hasn’t dropped a bomb or fired a shot; rather, he has opened the country to tens of millions of immigrants and refugees from all over the world, including from Muslim countries that hate America.
“It is waging war on America,” Schlafly told WND. “Muslims would like to take over the world and establish their caliphate, and Obama has let so many Muslims in. I don’t think he should let any Muslims in this country. There’s no reason why they should come in.”
“Obama is trying to absolutely change America by bringing in people who have no sympathy with what Americans believe,” she declared. “They have no concept of limited government, of constitutional government, of rule of law, et cetera. There’s no reason we should let in people who don’t even like America.”
Schlafly, as always, is chiefly concerned with how immigrants will fit into the American social fabric.
“Anybody who comes in should have to renounce allegiance to his former country and accept the American way of life,” she declared. “And if he doesn’t want to do that, goodbye! Adios!”
People who identify as social liberals, the three explain, reject conservative and Christian values, and therefore aren’t true Americans.
Bachmann is especially upset, lamenting that “it is severely frowned upon to suggest new immigrants join America’s predominant Christian religion.”
For the first time, Gallup found the number of Americans describing their views on social issues as “liberal” or “very liberal” was the same as those describing themselves as “conservative” or “very conservative,” with both sides at 31 percent.
But, in its analysis, Gallup neglected to mention a key factor that could explain the entire apparent shift in attitudes: immigration.
“Of course, this is a result of immigration,” Ann Coulter told WND. “Liberals haven’t changed anyone’s mind. They couldn’t win elections with Americans, so they brought in ringers.” Phyllis Schlafly told WND, “The polls don’t reflect the ‘changing’ attitudes of Americans; the polls reflect the attitudes of our changing population.”
“Obama has admitted millions of people who simply reject traditional American social norms. All the changes reported by Gallup can be attributed to the recent unprecedented immigration,” she added.
Michele Bachmann noted how the concept of assimilation has gone by the wayside, telling WND, “Immigrants from Third-World nations aren’t expected to learn American values norms or culture, much less the English language.”
“The explanation for the Gallup Poll report is that Obama has been bringing in so many foreigners who are not conservatives of any kind, who come from countries where government manages their lives, and who reject the idea of Christian values guiding our social mores,” Schlafly told WND.
Bachmann echoed that, noting, “In fact, it is severely frowned upon to suggest new immigrants join America’s predominant Christian religion.”
She also pointed to a generational shift, in which “The millennials are taking their turn at driving and leading American society, and part of that generation is made up of Americans who embrace the belief that says all cultures and values are equal. That belief says Third-World squalid conditions can’t be condemned in favor of Western norms.”
In a radio commentary earlier this month, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly acknowledged that it’s “quite true that America was built by hard-working people from all over the world,” but cautioned that today’s immigrants from Latin America are “not the same sort” as the wave of mostly European immigrants who came to the U.S. in the early 20th century.
Schlafly criticized President Obama for calling the U.S. “a nation of immigrants,” saying, “The problem is that the immigrants coming into our country today are not the same sort as the immigrants who contributed so much to building our great country. The immigrants who came to America in the 1920s and ‘30s were different – with very different motives.”
“It’s quite true that America was built by hard working people from all over the world who sought a place of freedom where they could realize their dream,” she said. “But today’s immigrants don’t have the same motivation, the same love for America, the same desire to be part of the American culture and dream.”
She cited Russian-born songwriter Irving Berlin as the kind of America-loving immigrant who supposedly no longer come to the United States.
Schlafly's commentary varies slightly from a transcript provided on Eagle Forum's website, which adds this thought: "[Today's immigrants] don’t want to leave their homes and become Americans, accepting all that comes along with it. Many of them just want to reap the rewards of our free nation without accepting American culture, the English language, and the rule of law.”