Election 2012

Bishop E.W. Jackson of Staying True to America’s National Destiny (STAND) continues to tell (largely white) Religious Right leaders that black voters are about to move against President Obama in huge numbers to punish him for supporting marriage equality for gays and lesbians. While Jackson came in fourth place in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate in Virginia with less than 5 percent of the vote, he won accolades in the conservative movement for his new video comparing Democrats to salve masters.

While speaking to talk show host Janet Mefferd, Jackson claimed that his video is part of a larger move of God to move African American voters against Obama and other Democrats. He told Mefferd that black Christians are “overwhelmingly” supporting his mission to punish the Democrats for backing gay equality, saying that the party is “in rebellion against God” and lost the confidence of Black America.

Unfortunately for Jackson, polls show Obama receiving over 90 percent of the black vote, in line with past elections showing tremendous support for Democratic presidential candidates among African Americans.

Jackson: When the Democrat Party [sic] said we’re making same-sex marriage a part of our platform and the President came out in support of it I think those were straws that broke the camel’s back and people say ‘you know, we’ve had it.’ Black folks have voted overwhelmingly against these things when they’ve come up on state constitutional questions and now I think many are saying, ‘you know what I voted for this president the first time, I cannot vote for him again and I cannot support this party because it’s in rebellion against God.’

Mefferd: What has been the reaction, you have mentioned a lot of people have been reacting to your video and overwhelmingly you’ve had great support from black pastors, what about rank and file black Christians listening to what you’ve had to say, are they with you?

Jackson: I think overwhelmingly yes. I think there’s a generational issue here and people ask me, ‘how can the black community support people who just absolutely reject their most core values’ and I said because it’s not logical, it’s emotional. There’s a sense of fear, there’s a sense that this is what we’re supposed to do, but I think younger people are coming along. I noticed younger pastors, when I said younger I’m not talking about 20s and 30s I think in the 50’s they’re saying ‘you know what we need to take another look at this?’ I am finding that rank and file black folks have come up to me and they’ve said: how do I change my registration? I’ve voted for this party in the past, I’ve been a kneejerk Democrat, I’m never going to do that again. I’ve had people come to me in tears and say ‘thank you for waking me up.’ God is doing something Janet, it’s far beyond me and that video, I believe God is doing something to stir the hearts of His people as an eagle stirs a nest.

Later, while discussing the manufactured scandal regarding the New Black Panther Party case, Jackson said that the Justice Department has “turned loose their investigative powers on anybody who seems to question them” and that the Obama administration is “going to try to hurt you” if you stand in the way of their supposedly anti-Christian agenda.

Jackson: I complained when they intimidated voters during the last election and you can imagine what kind of response I got from Eric Holder’s Department of Justice, absolutely none. They ignored me. In fact if you press too hard apparently they have actually turned loose their investigative powers on anybody who seems to question them, they’ve done that on more than one occasion to people. So it’s just clear to me that we’ve got in a sense an administration that’s decided it’s not interested in God, the Bible, Christianity or any of that, it’s interested in pursuing its own willful agenda and if you get in the way, they’re going to try to hurt you. We just need to make sure that we are prayed up and we’re trusting in God because He is our ultimate protection anyway. Even though STAND does not endorse candidates, we’re standing on principle; I trust that the outcome of this election will at least begin to move the country back toward more traditional values, toward our Constitution, our Declaration and our Judeo-Christian principles.

Janet Mefferd brought Washington Times columnist Jeffrey Kuhner on her radio show yesterday to shower praise on his wildly anti-gay column attacking Tammy Baldiwn, the openly gay Democratic congresswoman running for U.S. Senate in Wisconsin. They kicked off the program by mocking gay Massachusetts congressman Barney Frank’s marriage to his “male husband or wife” and Kuhner joked that he will support same-sex marriage only if Frank or his husband can get pregnant.

Mefferd: I love this line, the left got so mad at you for saying this, you say, ‘the last thing Wisconsin needs is Barney Frank in a dress’ and I thought, who is that insulting, Barney Frank’s manhood? I’m not even sure. Aren’t they transgender-friendly, why are they mad about that?

Kuhner: He’s married now and I’ve issued a challenge to Barney Frank. I said, Barney, the purpose of marriage is to have children, now if you and your male husband or wife, I don’t know how to put this, your male partner, if one of you can get pregnant because now they’re in the honeymoon phase, they’re lovers, I said if one of you can get pregnant and you can pull off a miracle I will openly support gay marriage. So I am waiting for a miracle from Barney.

Mefferd: That’s very magnanimous, well good for you.

Kuhner had previously told Mefferd that the LGBT community promotes “civilizational collapse” and is “even worse than the radical Islamists” and “brutal dictatorships,” and yesterday maintained that the “gay gestapo” is the “most frightening, scariest lobby” in politics. He said Baldwin’s Republican opponent Tommy Thompson should not have apologized over a campaign aide’s smear email targeting Baldwin for attending a gay pride rally, arguing that a pride parade is like a “bordello” and “pornography on asphalt.” Kuhner advised Thompson to remind voters that homosexuality is “destructive” and “harmful” to children.

Kuhner: Here you have a woman who is not just an open lesbian, she’s been an active promoter of the gay lifestyle, she’s an active promoter of gay pride, she’s always in these marches. I’ve been to some of these marchers, for example, you go to the one in San Francisco, it’s a bordello. The public displays, this is not fit for people to see. It’s basically pornography in public, on asphalt. When I look at this and I see the way Tammy Baldwin has behaved and conducted herself and the values that she preaches and champions I don’t understand why Tommy Thompson is apologizing, in fact I would do the opposite. If I were Tommy Thompson I would say very simply: marriage is between a man and a woman, we do not believe that homosexual behavior is natural and moral. Every major faith: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, going back thousands of years, in most cultures today, in most civilizations today, understand marriage to be between a man and a woman. 

If Tammy Baldwin wants to be lesbian in the privacy of her own bedroom, that’s her business. But when she makes it a public issue, when she starts promoting a lifestyle that we know is immoral and we know is destructive and we know has a harmful impact, especially on children. Children who are adopted by homosexual couples clearly don’t do as well as children that are adopted by heterosexual couples. Why? Because children need — newsflash to the liberals — a mommy and a daddy. Instead what we have is the gay gestapo who go out and try to intimidate morally, economically, professionally and personally anybody who speaks out against the homosexual agenda. After my piece came out—Janet I said this on your show before and I’ll say it again—the homosexual lobby is to me the most frightening, scariest lobby whenever I publish a piece. They are the worst.

They ended the show by warning that gays promote a form of “totalitarianism” and “will do everything possible to destroy” those who are in their way. “Either you accept homosexuality or you are burnt at the stake,” Kuhner said.

Kuhner: There’s nothing tolerant about it, there’s nothing inclusive about it, there’s nothing compassionate about it. They preach an intellectual, moral totalitarianism. Either you accept homosexuality or you are burnt at the stake, professionally your career will be finished, and they will do everything possible to destroy you. Well to me, that’s not America.

Mefferd: No, that’s not America and that’s why this agenda has to be stopped. As you said very well, it’s one thing to allow people the personal freedom to conduct themselves the way they choose in their own home and not have the state intrude into people’s bedrooms, but when it becomes a matter of public policy, as you say very well, it affects all of us, it affects our religious freedom when it comes down to it.

"Mean," "Demonic," "Retard" -- just some of the words Radical Right leaders used to describe President Obama in his winning debate performance on Oct. 22. Find out who said what.

As her husband Mike Huckabee has emerged as one of Todd Akin’s biggest boosters, Janet Huckabee is now hitting the campaign trail along with the Duggar family for Akin, whose campaign has been unraveling after he said survivors of “legitimate rape” rarely become pregnant as a result. She told conservative radio show host Janet Mefferd, who noted before the broadcast that “portions of The Janet Mefferd Show are sponsored by the Todd Akin for U.S. Senate campaign,” that “women are really on fire for Todd Akin” and “women know what they want and right now I think they want Todd Akin to be their Senator.” Despite Huckabee’s spin or presence in an alternative reality, polls have consistently shown McCaskill with a double digit lead among women voters.

Mefferd: As you’re going around and you’re talking to women and you’re doing these events around the state of Missouri, what are you hearing from women in particular about their support for Todd Akin and what they think conversely about Senator McCaskill?

Huckabee: I think women are really on fire for Todd Akin. They’re out there, they’re praying for him, they’re lifting him up in prayer, they’re giving financially. You know everybody can’t give millions and millions of dollars, and it’s to me more important that a thousand people give one dollar than it is for one person to give a thousand dollars, because if you have a thousand people that are willing to give a dollar the amount is the same but you have a thousand people that have put skin in the game and you have a thousand votes of people who are going to say ‘hey, I’m going to vote for him.’ I tell people it doesn’t matter what you give, it’s equal sacrifice that you’re willing to make phone calls, that you’re willing to put up signs, that you’re willing give that dollar or that thousand dollars, whatever you can do and women around the state are doing that. To me it’s exciting, they always want to say ‘do you want to talk to the man in charge or the woman who knows’? Women know what they want and right now I think they want Todd Akin to be their Senator.

Mefferd: Oh I agree, it is so exciting. Go to JanetMefferd.com, click on that box that says ‘Support Todd Akin, Help Take Back the Senate’ and get involved today.

Concerned Women for America is trying out a novel strategy in its fight to draw women to support Mitt Romney this November: denying that the next president can do anything to eliminate abortion rights. In a new TV ad, CWA counters a MoveOn.org ad featuring female celebrities talking about the issue of reproductive rights in the presidential election. In the CWA ad, women derisively call the MoveOn.org supporters “Hollywood women” and mock the contention that a President Mitt Romney would “overturn Roe v. Wade.”

“Have they ever heard of the separation of powers?” asks one Concerned Woman.

Maybe it’s CWA that needs the civics lesson. Mitt Romney has repeatedly stated that he would choose Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. It even says so on his website. With as many as three Justices possibly retiring in the next four years, Romney might very well have the opportunity to shape a court that would take away the right to choose.

Which, of course, is what CWA has been working toward since its founding. A petition on CWA’s website calls for signers to support “any and all legislative efforts to overturn Roe v. Wade” and “support pro-life nominees to the courts.” A pamphlet the group distributed shortly before President Obama's inauguration said anti-choice advocates should work to "pass limits on abortion and appoint judges who will overturn Roe." And here’s the CWA’s blog discussing an Alabama Supreme Court ruling in February that challenged Roe.

This ruling has major implications for the pro-life movement. First, it clearly mirrors the growing sentiments of a majority of Americans who are pro-life, especially our younger generation. Second, Alabama has set a clear precedent that more states are expected to emulate. Finally, as state laws continue to represent Americans’ growing pro-life attitude, the U.S. Supreme Court will be called upon to reconsider and, ultimately, repeal Roe.

Unveiling the deception of Roe shouldn’t be a difficult task. Mario Diaz, Esq., Legal Counsel for Concerned Women for America, explains, “Legally speaking, Roe v. Wade is simply indefensible. It rests on the false premise that the ‘fetus’ is not a ‘person’ because the Justices say so. The scientific bases for that claim simply were not there in 1973, and they are not there now. In fact, JusticeBlackmun acknowledged that ‘[i]f this suggestion of personhood is established, [Roe's] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [Fourteenth] Amendment.’ Advances in science have been proving just that: we are dealing with a baby, not a blob of tissue as some conveniently tried to tell us. This decision by the Alabama Supreme Court is another indication that Roe‘s house of cards is slowly tumbling down.”

Pro-life conservatives can only hope that the Supreme Court revisits the abortion question sooner rather than later. With a few more decisions like the one in Alabama, we may just hold the legal trump card when that time comes.

Romney himself as also tried this tactic, claiming that there is nothing he would do to restrict abortion rights. A New York Times editorial this morning sets that notion straight.