Yesterday, the Supreme Court of India reinstated a law dating back to the 1860s which mandates that anyone who "voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal" be punished by up to 10 years in prison.
This decision outlawing consensual homosexual sex was predictably hailed by Bryan Fischer who rejoiced that the ruling demonstrates that making homosexuality illegal "can be done."
"This is entirely right and entirely appropriate," Fischer said of the law. "Same-sex behavior is unnatural, it is against the order of nature: you just look at the plumbing and you can tell that, what body parts are designed for what use and you can see right away that this is contrary to nature."
"So that shows," he continued, speaking of the court ruling,"ladies and gentlemen that it can be done. It shows that this cultural trend that we're dealing with can be reversed, because for four years it was open season for homosexuals in India and now that drift away from cultural norms and moral norms, that's been reversed in the country of India ... Good law in India upheld by the Supreme Court":
Outraged that Time Magazine has named a Marxist like Pope Francis as its "Person of the Year," Glenn Beck responded on his radio program today by declaring that Sen. Ted Cruz was The Blaze's "Man of the Year."
Claiming that Time snubbed Cruz by not giving him the honor because "they don't want to give him any more power," Beck proclaimed that "progressives are fascists," which is why Time has named people like Hitler and Mussolini as the "Man of the Year" (for the record, Mussolini was never named "Man of the Year.")
Even though Cruz was among the finalists for the "Person of the Year," Beck is positive that he never had an actual chance of winning, even though "he's the guy who is going to affect our life, your life, much more than anybody else."
As such, Beck unilaterally decided that Cruz was the "Blaze Man of the Year":
On several recent "Prophetic Perspective on Current Events" programs, host Rick Joyner has gone on and on about the amazing prophetic gifts possessed by his close ally and friend, Bob Jones. This is not the Bob Jones of the infamous Bob Jones University, but rather a modern day prophet who met the Arch Angel Gabriel when he was only seven years old.
Jones appeared on Joyner's program just last week and on Monday's broadcast, Joyner spent the bulk of the program marveling about what a "legend" Jones is, calling him "one of the most remarkable prophetic voices ... in our times."
Joyner's relentless fawning over Jones reminded us of this short excerpt from John MacArthur's recent book "Strange Fire: The Danger of Offending the Holy Spirit with Counterfeit Worship," which presents a rather different view of Jones and the entire movement of self-proclaimed modern day prophets and apostles that he, Joyner and their ilk inhabit :
Perhaps the most bizarre admission of modern prophetic error came during an extended interchange between self-proclaimed prophets Mike Bickle and Bob Jones—two of the most well-known figures associated with the Kansas City Prophets. While discussing the topic of "visions and revelations," Bickle asked Jones to talk about the numerous times his prophecies have been wrong. Here is a transcript of their conversation:
Mike Bickle: "Tell them about the error in your life; the measure of error that you have and the measure of accuracy, 'cause I want people to understand a little bit about that?"
Bob Jones: "Well, I've had a lot of measure of error in my life. I remember once that I got into pride. Every time I get into pride, boy, Papa [God] sure knows how to pop my bubble. And I got into pride and called a church into a three-day fast and told them that certain things was going to happen, and they went into a three-day fast. It was terrible. And after that three-day fast—it was terrible, and the Spirit didn't even show up that night ...."
Mike Bickle: "You called people to a fast?"
Bob Jones: "I sure did, and it wasn't of the Lord; it was of my pride. I thought you could force the Lord to do something through fasting—boy, I found out real quick you couldn't. So there's a bunch of old saints that was ready to stone me, and so I was ready to get out of there and I went home like any good prophet, and I resigned. And I bawled and I squalled and I finally went to sleep and when I went to sleep the Lord come and took hold of my hand. And [in my vision] I was about like this little girl right here ... only I was in a lot worse shape because I had a Pamper [diaper] on and I had really messed it good. It was running down both of my legs. And the Lord had a hold of my hand and I was a bawlin' and a squallin'. . . . And I heard a voice sort of speak, puzzled I can say, 'What happened to Bob?' And my [heavenly] counselor spoke up and said, 'He had an accident."
Mike Bickle: "Spoke some wrong words."
Bob Jones: "'Yeah. He had an accident. He messed his Pamper real bad: And I think, 'Oh boy, here it comes.' And then I really got a surprise. A gentle, tender voice said, That boy needs more insurance. Let him know we've got him covered from them accidents. Give him a higher insurance policy.' That wasn't what I was looking for because I just resigned. 'Clean him up—tell him to go back into the body and prophesy twice as much. This time, he'll do what I'll tell him to: The next thing I knew I was back in bed, and boy, I come awake and man, I mean sweat was rolling down." ...
Mike Bickle: "So there has been errors; there's been a number of errors."
Bob Jones: "Oh, hundreds of them."
Jones's comments illustrate two of the primary problems with modern prophecy: it is chock-full of errors and inaccuracies, and it abounds with a level of sacrilegious lunacy that certainly does not find its source in God. Jones may have chosen just the right analogy in comparing his prophetic errors to a dirty diaper, but he is wrong about everything else. His claims to be a true prophet are obviously bogus. He does not have true visions of heaven. And God has certainly not given him "insurance" that allows him to get away with hundreds of errors as if it's no big deal.
Fewer than three years after that interview, Bob Jones was temporarily removed from public ministry by the Metro Vineyard Fellowship of Kansas City in Olathe, Kansas, whose senior pastor was none other than Mike Bickle. It had come to light that Jones was using false "prophecies" as a means of gaining trust from women whom he then abused sexually. "The sins for which [he was] removed from ministry include[d] using his gifts to manipulate people for his personal desires, sexual misconduct, rebelling against pastoral authority, slandering leaders and the promotion of bitterness within the body of Christ." He nevertheless returned to the charismatic limelight after a short hiatus, and as of this writing, he is still speaking in charismatic churches, presenting himself as an anointed prophet of God, and making prophecies that are demonstrably false and often patently ridiculous.' Thousands of gullible charismatics still hang on his every word—as if all the scandal and false prophesying never happened. The fact that Jones's online biography compares his ministry to that of the prophet Daniel only heightens the blasphemous nature of the whole fiasco.
We are used to Religious Right leaders like David Barton saying that the Bible has a clear and unequivocal position on every single political issue from the minimum wage to net neutrality. Of course, in most cases the Good Book just so happens to support the same view held by right-wing activists.
For example, take the controversy over a bridge construction project in North Carolina’s Outer Banks, where two environmental groups challenged a proposal to replace the 50-year-old Bonner Bridge. Christian Action League head Mark Creech claims he knows exactly where God and the Bible stand on the matter of rebuilding Bonner Bridge.
Obviously, God agrees with Creech that the environmentalists are wrong to oppose the project:
Fiery state Senator Bill Cook at a recent press conference called upon the environmentalists to give up their legal shenanigans. Cook said they were to blame for the situation getting to this point. He said, “Today, I would like to call for the Southern Environmental Law Center to give it up….You’ve done enough damage.” He further stated, “Here we have a beautiful place, an island, and we’re letting overly zealous environmental folks shut down a bridge effectively. They delayed a bridge for what, 20 years? It’s insane.”
Indeed it is insane. It’s as insane as when farmers just a few years ago in California’s San Joaquin Valley had to have the water they used for crops diverted to the Pacific just to save a three inch fish known as the delta smelt. The action driven by radical environmentalists caused a 40% unemployment rate in the region, also causing food shortages, higher prices, and situations that made it more difficult for the poor.
What precipitates such nonsense? It is one’s worldview.
Most people in North Carolina and the nation have been deeply impacted by a cultural Christian worldview, even though they may not know or acknowledge it. The Book of Genesis teaches that mankind is to ‘[b]e fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion…over every living thing that moves on the earth” (Gen. 1:28). Jesus taught that human beings, made in the image of God, are of much more value than animals. On one occasion the Savior said, “Look at the birds of the air…Are you not of more value than they?” (Mt. 6:26). On another occasion, He demonstrably stated, “Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! (Mt. 12:12). The biblical worldview on the environment is that we should responsibly “subdue” (subjugate, restrain, control) and develop the earth and its natural resources in a way that best benefits the human race.
Contrast the Christian worldview with the viewpoint of militant environmentalists and you’ll see there’s a divide wider than the Bonner Bridge. Many believe in “untouched nature” as their ideal. Thus they subvert building projects via lawsuits to protect some species of animal, bird, and even insect life. Some go so far as to argue the human population should be drastically scaled back to save the earth.
The Bonner Bridge closing is a case in point as to how our worldview affects us for either good or bad. Moreover, it demonstrates that when some point of view other than a biblical worldview is granted supremacy in public-policy, it inevitably results in harm to God’s crowning and most beloved creative achievement – man.
Sen. Cook is right; the environmentalists in this case need to get out of the way. But they might consider an even greater reason for getting out of the way than the trouble they’ve caused the people of Hatteras Island. Much of the philosophy behind what they do stands as an obstruction to the purposes of God.
The Tea Party biker group 2 Million Bikers To DC, which drew praise from Fox News for its protest against a tiny 9/11 truther rally, is definitely not racist…so not racist that it posted this image to its Facebook page today:
Most recently, the biker group’s leader Belinda Bee spoke at Larry Klayman’s rally for a second American revolution, where she denounced Sharia law, homosexuality and the amendments to the Constitution which followed the Bill of Rights.
Today on the 700 Club, televangelist Pat Robertson railed against President Obama as both an incompetent leader “who never ran anything” and an ideologue who is imposing his radical agenda.
“He doesn’t understand what these things are, he’s never been in the military, he doesn’t understand it, he doesn’t understand geopolitics,” Robertson said. “But he has a prism on the world that was shaped by his radical father and he has a prism that was shaped by some of his friends who were radical leftists and his spiritual mentor who at one time hated America; that’s who is running our country.”
“We are waiting like, are we ever going to get delivered from this thing?” he said.
Robertson compared the state of the nation to Gulliver’s Travels: “This is a great nation, it’s like Gulliver and the little Lilliputians. Here’s a giant who is held down by all these pygmies and we’re a giant, America is a giant, being held down by these pygmies. It’s time to pray, lots of prayer, and some action maybe in these next elections.”
In a column today, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah claims that the late Nelson Mandela was “an unrepentant terrorist” who should not be mourned. Farah takes issue with the federal government’s decision to lower flags to half-staff in honor of Mandela. Americans should “mourn instead for the tens of millions of innocent victims of Communism and other forms of totalitarianism Mandela promoted,” he writes.
Last week, Farah argued that Mandela was an advocate of white genocide.
Should the U.S. be lowering its government flags to half-staff for a Communist Party leader?
Should the U.S. be lowering its government flags to half-staff for a liar and a deceiver?
Should the U.S. be lowering its government flags to half-staff for an unrepentant terrorist?
Should the U.S. be lowering its government flags to half-staff for a friend of Arafat, Gadhafi and Castro?
Mandela was not a freedom fighter – any more than his loathsome buddy Yasser Arafat was.
Forgive me if I don’t mourn for Mandela. I mourn instead for his victims. I mourn instead for those martyrs being persecuted, tortured and killed every day around the world for their faith in God. I mourn instead for the tens of millions of innocent victims of Communism and other forms of totalitarianism Mandela promoted.
Sen. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, a centrist Democrat facing a tough re-election campaign, launched a new political ad this month, and both the ad and the responses to it have highlighted the challenges of mixing religion and politics in ways that respect religious freedom, pluralism, and the spirit of the Constitution.
In Pryor’s new ad, he doesn’t talk about political issues or his opponent; he just talks about the Bible.
“I’m not ashamed to say that I believe in God and I believe in His word. The Bible teaches us no one has all the answers. Only God does. And neither political party is always right. This is my compass, my north star. It gives me comfort and guidance to do what's best for Arkansas. I’m Mark Pryor, and I approve this message because this is who I am and what I believe.”
The centrality of faith in Pryor’s life is well-known. But the ad was slammed by Brad Dayspring at the National Republican Senatorial Committee, who mockingly suggested the ad contradicted comments Pryor had made last year: “The Bible is really not a rule book for political issues. Everybody can see it differently.” But I don’t see the contradiction. In both, Pryor seems to be acknowledging that even people who look to the Bible for guidance can disagree on particular policy positions. Dayspring’s attack drew a surprising rebuke from Pryor’s Republican opponent, Rep. Tom Cotton, who called the NRSC response “bizarre and offensive.”
The ad has drawn a mixed response from progressive commentators. Ed Kilgore at the Washington Monthly praises Pryor for “basically saying the Bible teaches some humility and reserves wisdom and final judgment to Gold Almighty, not to his self-appointed representatives on earth.” But Paul Waldman at the American Prospect takes issue with Pryor’s “I’m not ashamed” line, suggesting it is a dog-whistle for those who believe the Religious Right’s charge that Christianity is under attack in America.
Waldman notes, however, that the ad could have been a lot worse, reminding us of this notorious Rick Perry ad from 2012 which starts with very similar “I’m not ashamed” language but then gets “much more vulgar.”
A more recent example of the “a lot worse” school of religion and politics came from Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, who is currently running for the Senate. In a six-minute speech from the floor of the House of Representatives in September, he mixed personal religious testimony with Christian-nation claims that the government should be run according to his interpretation of the Bible.
Broun’s remarks start with a core Christian Reconstructionist principle: that God ordained family, church and government and gave each a specific area of authority. But, he says, because of “this mistaken idea that we’re supposed to have a separation of church and state, the family and the church have abdicated a lot of its duties over to government.” (Reconstructionists believe that God did not authorize government to be involved, for example, in education or the reduction of poverty; that role is meant for family and church.)
Broun calls the Bible “the basis of our nation,” and says the fact that we aren’t running society accordingly will mean the death of our Republic. The founding fathers, he says, were “Bible-believing Christians” who believed that “every aspect of life should follow the dictates of God’s inerrant word. That’s what I believe in. That’s what we should all believe in.”
This message is not new for Broun. Last year Kilgore wrote about a Broun speech in which he said that evolutionary science is “from the pit of hell” and that the Bible is a “manufacturer’s handbook” that “teaches us how to run all of public policy and everything in society,” as well as our lives as individuals. “That’s the reason as your Congressman I hold the Holy Bible as being the major directions to me of how I vote in Washington, D.C.”
There are important distinctions between Pryor’s ad and Broun’s speeches. It is helpful to look at them through the prism of People For the American Way Foundation’s 12 Rules for Mixing Religion and Politics. These “rules of the road” are meant to generate a broader conversation about how we can create and sustain a civic space that reflects the principles of the Constitution and the values of respectful civic discourse, one that welcomes the participation of people of all faiths and people of none. Consider this passage from the 12 Rules:
Public officials are free to talk about their faith, the role it plays in their lives, and how it influences their approach to issues, but must not use the power of their office to proselytize or impose particular religious beliefs or practices on others.
Pryor’s ad seems to be intended to keep to the appropriate side of this rule, where Broun clearly violates the rule by proselytizing from the floor of the House.
In addition, Broun, like David Barton and other Religious Right leaders, claims that the right-wing position on every political issue finds some grounding or justification in the Bible, which should be the final word on every policy matter. Broun’s insistence that every aspect of law and society should fit his interpretation of the Bible also violates another rule, “It is appropriate to discuss the moral and religious dimensions of policy issues, but religious doctrine alone is not an acceptable basis for public policy.” In contrast, Pryor’s ad explicitly says that he doesn’t claim to have all the answers, even though he uses the Bible as his moral compass.
A Religious Right critic of Pryor’s ad broke another of PFAW Foundation’s rules: “Religion should not be used as a political club.” As blogger Jeremy Hooper noted, Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition was “outraged” by Pryor’s ad. She said his claim to be guided by the Bible “the furthest thing from the truth” because he had voted for the Employment Non Discrimination Act, which protects people from being discriminated at work based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Lafferty is of course free to believe that fairness is not a biblical value; but she shouldn’t denigrate the sincerity of Pryor’s faith because he disagrees.
Still, Pryor’s ad is a cautionary tale about the fact that, as he himself has said, the intersection of faith and politics can be difficult to navigate. It can come across as saying, “vote for me because I’m a Christian,” a message that fails to respect America’s constitutional ideals and growing religious pluralism. And it could be seen as uncomfortably close to the message of Mike Huckabee’s 2008 primary campaign against Mitt Romney in Iowa, which essentially boiled down to, “vote for me because I’m the right kind of Christian.” Candidates or campaigns that suggest only Christians, or certain kinds of Christians, are worthy of public office violate the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution’s prohibition on a religious test for public office.
With Christian-nation advocates like David Lane organizing all over the country for the 2014 and 2016 elections, there’s little doubt that the months ahead will bring some downright toxic mixing of religion and politics.
Even after a Texas school district refuted an erroneous report from Fox News reporter Todd Starnes alleging that the district is banning Christmas trees and the colors red and green, Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition yesterday decided to run with the story anyway in order to scare its members about the “War on Christmas.”
In August, TX Gov. Rick Perry signed into law the “Merry Christmas Bill,” which legally permits students and teacher to use traditional holiday greetings such as “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Hanukkah” and also protects traditional holiday symbols. Lawmakers in the state hoped it would put an end to the “War on Christmas” scandals that plague us each winter. Unfortunately, officials at Nichols Elementary School in Waco, TX have already violated the new law, banning all reference to Christmas, from Christmas trees to the colors red and green, in their upcoming “Winter Party.”
Contact Principal Courtney Murphy & school board president Renee Ehmke and tell them that the parents and students at Nichols Elementary are guaranteed the right to celebrate Christmas. Call Nichols Elementary at (469)-633-3950 or contact them via email at email@example.com and contact Emke at (469)633-6000.
Of course, if the FFC had simply contacted the school district (as it advises its members to do) or just did a Google search, it would have found out that the school district’s “War on Christmas” is nothing but a Fox News-generated myth:
An unfortunate misunderstanding regarding an email that was sent by a room mom has unfairly portrayed a school and the Frisco ISD as having violated the “Merry Christmas Law.” This is simply incorrect.
The email being referenced was not an official PTA email nor was the school aware of it being sent. The email that was sent by the room mom was sent two weeks before the party planning meeting had even been held. At the party planning meeting held on November 19, prior to any knowledge of the email, the school leaders went over the new law as part of the meeting. Please understand, there has never been a ban on what is worn, what is said, or what is brought to the party (as long as they do not violate the “Limitations on Content” prohibited by policy FNAA -obscene, vulgar, inappropriate for the age, etc.). The new law is consistent with the manner in which holiday parties have been handled by the District in the past and in line with state and federal law.
When the email was forwarded to Mr. Fallon stating no red or green or Christmas trees and no reference to Christmas or another religious holiday, he sent a letter to our Superintendent regarding the law. Our Superintendent called him and assured him these were not our rules. We are still unsure of why the campus and District’s position was misunderstood and why there is the feeling that there is some sort of ban of items or greetings regarding the winter holiday parties at that school.
When in our schools and offices, you will see a variety of decorations – you will see Christmas Trees at some, you will see a winter wonderland theme at others, you may even see staff wearing Santa hats. Yesterday the District hosted a senior citizens luncheon and students performed a lovely concert with Christmas and holiday tunes.
Last week, a Colorado judge ruled that the owners of a bakery who were refusing to serve gay customers must do so or face fines. The owner is vowing to resist the ruling and Bryan Fischer voiced his support on his radio broadcast today, saying that the baker has become a victim of "The Secular Inquisition."
"Our secular theocrats have found this man guilty of heresy," Fischer said, "guilty of idolatry, guilty of blasphemy because he will not agree to the dogma of the secular theocrats. He is a heretic and he must be punished just like the Spanish Inquisition did for those that went astray from the dogma of the church in their day."
Last week, Glenn Beck was telling his audience of Tea Party activists that they "are the people that our Founders saw, the wise and the honest" who would rise up and save the nation when it was on the verge of collapse.
Today on his radio broadcast, Beck stepped it up a notch, telling his audience that "governments fear the individual," which is why the South African government imprisoned Nelson Mandela for twenty seven years. So, of course, Beck then told his audience that they are exactly the sorts of strong, courageous individuals that the government fears.
"They fear the next Nelson Mandela," he proclaimed, "and I tell you, you are the next Nelson Mandela. You are the next Martin Luther King. You are the next Gandhi. You are the next Abraham Lincoln. You are the next George Washington":
WorldNetDaily columnist and regular Fox News guest Erik Rush told his radio show’s listeners last week that while he opposes apartheid, South Africa may have declined since the fall of the racist system, adding that the late Nelson Mandela “didn’t do much.”
“You know I hate to rain on the parade here, but there really isn’t a whole lot to celebrate aside from this synthetic symbolism that is being made out of someone who, you know, didn’t do much,” Rush said. “Apartheid went away, great. There are South African blacks who have told friends of mine they wish it was back because the country was safer, if you can believe that.”
Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas joined a conference call last week organized by Tea Party Unity, the conservative group founded by Texas pastor Rick Scarborough, to warn listeners that President Obama is trying to “achieve peace by allowing evil people to take over the world.”
He warned that God may soon remove his hand of protection from America, leaving no place in the world safe for liberty and freedom…except for Israel.
I know, Rick, you probably hear people say, ‘Well if it gets much worse, maybe I just need to go to an island somewhere or go to a different country.’ Let me tell you folks, when the United States is not around with its protective hand in the world to protect freedom and liberty and freedom from abuse, then there is no other place to go. Maybe Israel. But when God removes his protective hand from America, this isn’t a safe place either. I hope and pray people will wake up. You cannot achieve peace by allowing evil people to take over the world, that’s not how it works.
As we reported yesterday, we have been engaged in a battle with "Dr. Chaps" Gordon Klingenschmitt for several weeks now, stemming from Klingenschmitt's mistaken belief that the videos we have been posting featuring excerpts from his television program are violations of his copyright. As a result, Klingenschmitt has filed multiple copyright claims against our YouTube account and succeeded in shutting it down on two separate occasions.
In both instances, we have filed counter-claims against each and every alleged violation and every one has been resolved in our favor, resulting in our account being restored and the strike against us being removed.
Fed up with his on-going campaign to hamper our work, our lawyers have sent Klingenschmitt a cease and desist letter explicitly warning him that if he continues to file bogus copyright complaints against our YouTube account, legal action will be taken against him.
But, according to an interview Klingenschmitt conducted with David Pakman yesterday, it doesn't appear as if he has any intention of ceasing his campaign to permanently shut down our YouTube account by relentlessly filing bogus copyright complaints against our videos.
Insisting that we are "stealing" his content and trying to pass it off as our own in an effort to make money, Klingenschmitt amazingly asserted that we have been filing a "false counter-claim knowingly infringing on my copyright" by responding to his bogus copyright claims and getting our videos restored on YouTube.
As such, Klingenschmitt states that he has been in contact with lawyers of his own who have allegedly recommended that he sue us, but that is not a course of action that he intends to pursue at this time, he said, though he does intend to continue to file copyright claims against our videos and have them removed from YouTube.
When Pakman pointed out that we cannot be expected to moderate the thousands of comments our videos receive on YouTube nor be held responsible for what anonymous users might post in those comments, Klingenschmitt insisted that we do, in fact, moderate the comments and have removed comments from people supporting him. He even claims to have screencaps that prove it, which is pretty amazing considering that that has never happened.
Pakman's interview with Klingenschmitt was very fair and even-handed, but we would like to address the hypothetical argument he raised that the videos we post to YouTube might not be protected by Fair Use since we are not adding any commentary or criticism.
The entire purpose of posting these brief video clips to YouTube is so that they can serve as the focus in blog posts written here on RightWingWatch where we provide commentary, context, and criticism. Each video uploaded to our YouTube account makes clear that the clip is being posted as part of our regular news reporting to highlight and expose the outrageous statements made by key figures in the right-wing movement and includes commentary on the statements highlighted in the video. As the most popular video sharing site, posting our clips to YouTube makes our reporting available to the broadest swatch of people so that it can easily be shared with other bloggers, activists, and media outlets. In addition, our videos also include a link to the relevant RightWingWatch blog post in which it is being used, which contains further commentary, context, and explanation.
There can be no question that our video clips are used for an entirely different purpose (reporting and commentary) than Klingenschmitt's original purpose, which is to spread his radical, right-wing, anti-gay views and agenda, further making clear that our videos are protected by the doctrine of Fair Use.
Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) appeared on "The Steve Malzberg Show" yesterday to reiterate his warning to all Americans not to use the federal government's healthcare website because of cyber-security problems and the risk of identity theft.
During the course of the discussion, Brooks was asked about the possibility of Congress reaching any sort of budget deal, to which Brooks responded by asserting that if one is not reached, it will be because the Democrats have intentionally orchestrated a government shutdown in an attempt to distract voters from "the calamity known as Obamacare" heading into the 2014 elections ... or maybe even started a war.
Brook declared that 2014 is "going to be a disaster and so the Democrats, they need a shutdown, they need something dramatic - perhaps a war - something that will deflect public attention from how bad this socialized medicine system is, this scheme that they have put forth":