During a question and answer session at CPAC, Ned Ryun of American Majority asked Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker how he would take on ISIS if he were president.
Walker responded in a characteristically vague way, simply stating that he believes in protecting America’s freedom and “wants a commander-in-chief who will do everything in their power to ensure that the threat from radical Islamic terrorists do not wash up on American soil.”
However, Walker boasted that he is fully capable of taking on the terrorist group since he pushed through anti-union legislation in his state in the face of massive protests: “If I can take on 100,000 protesters, I can do the same across the world.”
As we’ve noted, the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) has long had a fraught relationship with conservative LGBT groups, but at the same time has been very welcoming of another subset of the conservative movement: white nationalists.
For the past several years, CPAC has been partially sponsored by the English-only group ProEnglish which, along with promoting an anti-immigrant agenda, is led by Bob Vandervoort, an activist with a history as a white nationalist organizer. This year, CPAC once again allowed ProEnglish to host a booth in the event's exhibit hall, which entails a $4,000 sponsorship.
But white nationalism isn’t just a part of the past of one of the group’s leaders. As our friends at the Anti-Defamation League have pointed out, ProEnglish board member Phil Kent is a prolific writer who especially likes to rail against the scourge of “multiculturalism.”
In an interview with a Georgia radio station last year, promoted on ProEnglish’s YouTube channel, Kent warned that “multiculturalism, this virus that has been injected into our system, is destroying what we call the quote-unquote ‘United States of America.’”
“The multicultural lobby is, to use your words, effectively destroying our culture and breaking our middle class and of course massive illegal immigration is doing it,” he told host Greg Howard.
In an undated column on his website, Kent frets about the United States reaching a “‘tipping point’ when minority babies outnumber white babies,” after which he fears, among other things that “[t]elevision and movies will increasingly have diverse casts-- with whites downgraded”:
If this trend is not reversed-- and it could be if an immigration moratorium were imposed-- what Vassar College author Hua Hsu labels America’s white “centrifugal core” will slowly disappear. This leads to big questions: What will be the values and ideas of a multicultural America? What will it mean to be white after “whiteness” no longer defines the cultural mainstream?
Hsu notes that a glimpse is seen with the popularity of black-originated hip-hop. It opposes the pop mainstream and isn’t assimilating into a traditional, single white iconic image of style— and growing numbers of young whites purchase such music.
Television and movies will increasingly have diverse casts-- with whites downgraded. New York radio personality Peter Rosenberg gushes that it is “now very cool and in to have multicultural friends.” The advertising world will radically change. Brown Johnson, a Nickelodean executive speaking before the Association of Hispanic Advertising Agencies, touts TV characters who don’t conform to “the white, middle class mold.” Hispanic marketer Rochelle Newman-Carrasco further notes “it has become harder for the blond-haired, blue-eyed commercial actor.”
It may be instructive to reflect on the 1990s transformation of South Africa from white to black rule in a majority black country. Ironically, black activist Winnie Mandela recently complained that whites “still dominate” that country economically. So while whites may be a minority in the U.S. by mid-century, their influence will still be enormous because of their economic and monetary clout. But in the new non-white country, will the poorer majority rest content with a wealthy white minority, or will it find ways to expropriate that wealth?
In another column, Kent warns that multiculturalism has brought about “rising gang violence”:
Unless there is a moratorium on legal immigration coupled with stepped-up enforcement efforts to significantly curb illegal immigration, then this country will be radically transformed demographically. It will be highlighted by more and more gang atrocities like that at Richmond High which, by the way, rarely occurred in the United States before “multiculturalism” and “open borders” became liberalism’s dominant dogmas.
Back in 2011, civil rights groups protested when Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal named Kent to the state’s Immigration Enforcement Review Board. He told a local TV station at the time that he feared increasing diversity in the U.S. could lead to violent conflict:
Nothing says rebel outsider quite like speaking at the annual gathering of conservative D.C. insiders that is CPAC, but that is exactly what conservative street artist Sabo did today when he spoke at one of the afternoon break-out sessions and stated that conservatives are today's rebels.
Sabo bragged that he kicked Wendy Davis' "bigwig Hollywood donors right square in the nuts" with his infamous "Abortion Barbie" posters and then bravely called Gwyneth Paltrow "such a tool" because of her response to his "Obama Drone" pieces.
For good measure, he then closed out his remarks by declaring that "Shepard Fairey and Banksy are in the south of France circle-jerking each other with the money they make selling anti-capitalism art."
"They are now the establishment artists," he said. "We are the rebellion. I ask that you join us. I ask that you support us. My name is Sabo":
CPAC changed its format for speakers this year, and now they can elect to use part or all of their allotted time to answer questions. But if today’s questions are any indication, they shouldn’t have to worry about facing any hardballs.
Ben Carson, the first speaker to have a Q&A session, fielded questions about how he will “make us feel more united and less divided” from a questioner who applauded his answers. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, faced a CPAC speaker’s dream question: “What is your biggest criticism of President Obama?”
The questions didn’t get any tougher.
Conservative talk radio host Laura Ingraham kicked off her time with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie by asking him how he “survived” the media’s “onslaught” against him. Sen. Ted Cruz fielded what was quite possibly toughest question of the night from Fox News anchor Sean Hannity of Fox News: “Why does Ted Cruz love America?”
Watch our compilation of some of the “toughest” questions asked today here:
After Sen. Ted Cruz’s speech at CPAC today, Sean Hannity came out to interview him, asking him such hardball questions as “Why does Ted Cruz love America?”
Hannity also asked Cruz a series of rapid-fire questions, asking for the first word that came to the senator’s mind when he said a name.
For Hillary Clinton, Cruz responded “Washington.” For Bill Clinton, he responded “youth outreach”…after Hannity did his best impression of Clinton hitting on a member of the audience.Hannity then asked for Cruz’s first impression of “Barack Hussein Obama,” to which Cruz responded “lawless imperator.”
Sen. Ted Cruz told the CPAC audience today that he will be the one to “bring back the miracle that is America” by reassembling the “Reagan coalition" and uniting voters against universal health care, immigration reform, and net neutrality.
Net neutrality, he claimed, undermines “freedom online” by giving Washington “power over the internet.”
“How do we do that?” he asked. “We do that fundamentally by standing with the people and not with Washington. Washington wants Obamacare. The people want liberty. Washington wants amnesty. The people want rule of law. Washington wants power over the internet. The people want freedom online. And don’t believe President Obama when he says, ‘If you like your internet, you can keep your internet’!”
Today at CPAC, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie spoke with conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham, who asked him hard-hitting questions such as one on how media commentators, a favorite target at CPAC, have “savaged” him.
“How do you survive this onslaught day in and day out?” Ingraham asked.
Christie responded that the “elite folks from the media” don’t like the fact that he decided to “take on a lot of these special interests frontally, that they support.” “They just want to kill you,” Christie said. “That’s what they try to do to me every day.”
Later in the Q&A special, Christie revealed to applause that he is giving up the New York Times for Lent.
Almost from the very beginning of the debate over net neutrality, Glenn Beck has vehemently opposed it, mostly because he has no idea what he is talking about, even warning that America "deserves to be destroyed" if the FCC implements regulations designed to ensure open access.
"You morons! You useful idiots! That's all you are. You're a useful idiot. Read Joe Stalin. You moron!" Beck bellowed. "You know why it's happening? It's happening because our elite institutions, our education, our higher learning ... bullcrap, not even our higher learning, our entire educational system has failed us and they are churning out morons!"
Last week, Gordon Klingenschmitt declared that the owners of a Colorado bakery who refused to provide a wedding cake to a gay couple were really "blessing" the gay couple by letting them know that homosexuality is a sin. On his "Pray In Jesus Name" program today, the Colorado Republican state representative heaped similar praise upon a Washington florist who likewise refused to provide flowers to a gay wedding for supposedly also "blessing" the gay couple against whom she discriminated by trying to save them from Hell.
Calling the florist a prophetic "hero," Klingenschmitt said that while she is being persecuted for standing for the truth here on earth, she will receive a reward for her courage in Heaven for her effort to save this gay couple from damnation.
"There will be a day when, after they've lived their life of pleasure and sin and after they have manifested all kinds of demonic spirits ... that they will be held accountable before God," Klingenschmitt warned. "And some day when they're standing before God, God will ask them, 'Didn't you know this was wrong?' And they'll have to admit that, yes, this gentle Christian woman told us it was wrong":
Bishop E.W. Jackson, the Religious Right activist and one-time GOP nominee for lieutenant governor of Virginia, was in Washington yesterday for a “racial reconciliation” rally he organized last night, and took the opportunity to hold a press conference at the National Press Club attacking the Southern Poverty Law Center for briefly listing Ben Carson in its “extremist files.”
SPLC had posted a profile of Carson in its “extremist files,” but quickly took it down, noting that it did not meet the group’s standards, but standing by its reporting on Carson’s long history of promoting anti-government conspiracy theories and smears about LGBT people.
But Jackson told the National Press Club audience that SPLC had criticized Carson simply for opposing marriage equality, which Jackson said “is a violation of his and potentially all of our religious liberty.”
He went on to declare that SPLC’s criticism of Carson was “no different than what maybe slave masters or segregationists would have said.”
“When an organization like the Southern Poverty Law Center decides that a black man that doesn’t agree with them can be slandered the way they’ve slandered him, what it tells me is that there’s a certain level of racism that they are operating under while they are trying to point the finger at others,” he said. “And I say that for this reason: To me, this is no different than what maybe slave masters or segregationists would have said. You know, ‘Some black people are okay as long as they do what we expect them to do and they think the way we expect them to think.’ In other words, they’re the ‘good ones.’ So apparently, if you’re not one of the ‘good ones,’ then we’re going to try to destroy you. And to me, that is racism at its worst.”
On “The 700 Club” today, Pat Robertson discussed the Federal Communications Commission’s upcoming vote on new rules to preserve the principle of net neutrality, which he alleged are part of a “socialist agenda…to take control of everything.”
“The internet is a model of the world,” Robertson said. “It is free. Think of how many businesses have been spawned on the internet, think how much web traffic there is, think how much i-business goes on, think of all the conveniences that we have now as consumers and think of the constant improvement, the speeds and the things that are being done to improve the service that we have on the internet. Now, they want to treat it like it’s a water company or an electric utility with 1934 regulation.”
“The Obama people, you don’t understand, ladies and gentlemen, the socialist agenda is to take control of everything. They got their hands on health care and they’re about to ruin it, and now they want to ruin the internet. And I don’t know what we can do to stop it,” he said.
“I don’t want to live under a dictatorship,” he continued. “This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. Let’s fight for it. If you don’t stand up and say something, they’re going to run over you like a steamroller. That’s what’s going on. Our liberties are being eroded every single day that those guys are up there in Washington doing what they do.”
Conservative columnist Ann Coulter writes today that while politicians are debating ways to defeat ISIS terrorists, they really should be focusing on the “illegal aliens [who] have killed, raped and maimed thousands of Americans — in America.”
While Coulter mentions tragic cases of violent crimes committed by immigrants, the Immigration Policy Center notes that immigrants are “less likely to commit crimes or be behind bars than the native-born, and high rates of immigration are not associated with higher rates of crime.”
Nonetheless, Coulter claims that “we’re getting our clock cleaned at home” by immigrants who are “murdering far more Americans than ISIS ever will.”
“Can’t a Republican Congress do anything to stop the surge of foreign criminals, viruses and parasites crossing our border?” Coulter asks.
By now, the public knows more about ISIS than they know about the Kardashians. But it has no idea that the very same Senate Democrats who claimed to oppose Obama’s amnesty when they were campaigning are currently filibustering a bill to defund it, and Sen. Mitch McConnell is ready to cave.
ISIS has killed four Americans – in Syria. We’re not exactly talking about another 9/11. Here’s a tip: If you don’t want to be killed by ISIS, don’t go to Syria.
Meanwhile, illegal aliens have killed, raped and maimed thousands of Americans – in America. If you don’t want to be killed, raped or maimed by illegal immigrants in your own country, I have no tips for you. There’s nothing you can do. You’re on your own. Good luck.
Our politicians don’t care. They are obsessed with cleaning up the rest of the world, while we’re getting our clock cleaned at home.
With the media’s Soviet-style censorship about immigrant crime, unless a member of your immediate family has been killed by an illegal alien, you might not have noticed the growing death toll, but here are some small, below-the-fold local news items just from the last two weeks.
ISIS is not at our doorstep. Illegal immigrants are not only at our doorstep, but millions of them are already through the door, murdering far more Americans than ISIS ever will.
That’s what a lot of Americans thought they were voting for last November. Couldn’t we please focus on Americans for a bit? Can’t a Republican Congress do anything to stop the surge of foreign criminals, viruses and parasites crossing our border? Will politicians ever stop gassing on about what’s happening 7,000 miles away and worry about us?
But politicians and the media only want to give us war, while aiding the enemy in the war we’re already in, here at home.
Frank Gaffney thinks that Rep. André Carson, one of two Muslim members of Congress, should lose his seat on the House Intelligence Committee because he might hand classified information to Muslim Brotherhood operatives.
Gaffney, an anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist who leads the Center for Security Policy, told WorldNetDaily that Carson, an Indiana Democrat, may use his position to advance “the imposition of Shariah worldwide and the establishment of a caliphate.”
Gaffney bases his claims on Carson’s work with the Islamic Society of North America and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, alleging that the groups were “unindicted co-conspirator[s] in a terror-financing trial.” Actually, the designations were removed due to lack of evidence.
“At a minimum, Rep. Andre Carson’s presence on the House Intelligence Committee will necessitate restrictions on his access to classified information about the presence and operations in this country of what amounts to a subversive Islamist Fifth Column and his participation in the panel’s deliberations concerning how it can best be countered,” Gaffney told WND.
“Since there are, at the moment, few topics more in need of assiduous oversight by the Congress – even if there were no actual risk of compromise of national security secrets or Muslim Brotherhood influence operations associated with Rep. Carson’s presence on the House Intelligence Committee – the potential impediment he may constitute to such work demands his removal from this panel.”
“Given the Muslim Brotherhood’s unalterable commitment to Islamic supremacism,” Gaffney said, “the imposition of Shariah worldwide and the establishment of a caliphate to rule globally in accordance with that totalitarian program – in place of our constitutional republic and all other forms of government, what the Obama administration is doing is bad enough. Its serial efforts to engage, legitimate, fund, arm and otherwise empower the Brotherhood overseas and to rely upon the Brothers’ domestic front organizations as representatives of and outreach vehicles to the Muslim community in this country are intensifying the dangers we face from the Global Jihad Movement.”
Gaffney said it is “wholly unacceptable to have as a member of a key congressional committee charged with overseeing U.S. intelligence and counterintelligence an individual with extensive personal and political associations with the Muslim Brotherhood’s civilization jihadist infrastructure in America.”
“At a minimum, Rep. Andre Carson’s presence on the House Intelligence Committee will necessitate restrictions on his access to classified information about the presence and operations in this country of what amounts to a subversive Islamist Fifth Column and his participation in the panel’s deliberations concerning how it can best be countered.”
Rep. Mia Love of Utah participated in a panel discussion at CPAC this morning on how the conservative movement can better engage young people, which is something for which Love thinks she is particularly well-suited because, as a black conservative, she refuses "to fit this mold that society says I need to fit into" ... just like Martin Luther King, Jr.
Love said that she had recently been invited to speak to black students at the University of Chicago where someone told her that it "makes no sense" how she "can be a black, female from Utah, LDS, Republican, living in today’s America."
The congresswoman said that just as King defied society's racist laws against African Americans, she is bravely standing up against the mold as a black conservative politician.
"Imagine if people like Martin Luther King decided to [accept] that government said he was a second-class citizen," Love said. "We wouldn't be here today":
At a town hall meeting in his district in Georgia last week, Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk claimed that he and his wife decided against vaccinating their “very healthy” children and said that he is against requiring children to receive vaccinations.
“I believe it’s a parents decision whether they immunize or not,” he said in remarks first noted by the Atlanta Journal Constitution. “We didn’t immunize and they’re very healthy, of course, in homeschooling we didn’t have to get the mandatory immunizations.”
Loudermilk also said that as chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight in the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, he would consider holding hearings on a questioner’s allegation that the CDC “falsified data” on the safety of vaccines.
At a recent town hall meeting, Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., laughed off a question from a participant who asked whether the U.S. should “learn something from Afghanistan and put IUDs in the ground” along the southern border as a way to stop immigrants from crossing the border and “blow them up.” (She presumably meant IEDs, or improvised explosive devices).
As the Atlanta Journal Constitution reported, the freshman Republican congressman said that he was against the use of improvised explosive devices along the border because they might harm the Americans who live and work there, ignoring the fact that the IEDs would kill immigrants.
Loudermilk told the questioner that he opposed the idea "because there’s a lot of Americans who work [there] and kids around the border as well.”
Jim Garlow was a guest on Bryan Fischer's "Focal Point" radio program today to promote the upcoming "Future Conference" that Garlow will be hosting at his San Diego church. During the course of the conversation, the two men began discussing the effort being led by radical Christian nationalist David Lane to recruit 1,000 pastors to run for political office, which Garlow proclaimed was an absolute necessity because the true purpose of government is to function as "a minister of God."
"If you live in a constitutional republic or a democracy, as we do," Garlow said, "that means it behooves us as followers of Christ to make sure our government functions for the purpose for which it was created, specifically to be the minister of God.... We are in a constitutional republic where we the people determine what our government is and so consequently, as followers of Christ, we're commanded to be involved and to make sure the government functions as a minister of God":
The Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney stopped by the American Family Radio at the National Religious Broadcasters convention in Nashville this week to discuss Rudy Giuliani’s recent comment that President Obama doesn’t “love America.”
Gaffney naturally agreed with Giuliani, contending that while Obama might not have a “deep hatred” for America, it is literally impossible for him to love the country.
“How could this president love America?” Gaffney asked AFA president Tim Wildmon. “How could he, given that he grew up in his formative years in an Indonesian madrassa, an Islamist school, he came to this country and sat at the knee of an avowed communist by the name of Frank Marshall Davis, he spent formative years in Chicago hanging with revolutionaries like Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, he went on to church with Jeremiah Wright?”
“And what all of those people have in common is a deep hatred for our country. So maybe he doesn’t have a deep hatred for it, but it’s hard to see how we could have possibly having incubated in that, marinated in it, come out loving this country. Which brings us to your question. If he doesn’t, we’re in jeopardy, because you need someone in a dangerous world like this who loves this country, who believes it’s exceptional and is willing to stand up for it.”
While the U.S.-led coalition to defeat the so-called Islamic State has launched around 5,000 airstrikes against the extremist group, with Central Command posting daily updates on new airstrikes targeting the organization also known as ISIS or ISIL, several Republican politicians appear to believe that the U.S. is not at all engaging in a fight against group.
The same politicians will readily praise the leaders of Egypt and Jordan for launching airstrikes against the terrorist group, while then criticizing President Obama for not following in their footsteps, even though the U.S. is responsible for the vast majority of the airstrikes carried out by the anti-ISIS coalition. Of course, many Republicans and Democrats have expressed legitimate criticisms of the administration’s strategy to defeat ISIS, but some Republicans are acting as if the administration is not at all engaged in fighting the group, whose momentum has been blunted since the airstrikes began.
As Jon Stewart noted, Fox News pundits deny the facts about America’s anti-ISIS airstrikes “even when that fact is spelled out directly next to their face.”
But Fox News commentators aren’t the only one living in this conservative fantasy world.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker continued his habit of simply punting on questions by telling journalists in London recently that he doesn’t have a strategy to fight ISIS, but it is “certainly something I will answer in the United States in the future.” Walker nonetheless criticized the current strategy in an interview with Martha Raddatz, saying that the U.S. needs to show “leadership” and “take the fight to ISIS.” When Raddatz pointed out that the U.S. has launched thousands of anti-ISIS airstrikes, Walker simply replied that “we need to have an aggressive strategy.”
Another potential presidential candidate, former New York Gov. George Pataki, also seems to have blocked out of his mind the fact that the U.S. has been attacking ISIS for months, expressing anger that President Obama supposedly doesn’t realize that “we have got to attack these terrorist groups overseas before they have a chance to attack us again here.”
Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., went one step further, telling a conservative conference that he faces a “conundrum” about supporting the Authorization for the Use of Military Force against ISIS since “we have a commander-in-chief who seems not only not ready, not unwilling, but really working collaboratively with what I would say is the enemy of freedom.”
The congressman worried that Obama would actually use the resolution “to further their cause and what seems to be his cause.”
Perry isn’t the only GOP House member to hold such views.
Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., suggested in an interview that Obama does not want to “destroy ISIL,” while Texas Republican Rep. Ted Poe alleged that Obama is “more aggressive toward Americans, Republicans, conservatives, Christians” than he is toward ISIS.
Not to be outdone, American Family Radio host Bryan Fischer claimed that Obama is directing the military to deliberately “minimize the number of dead terrorists” who are fighting for ISIS.