Fighting the Right

Michael Brown: Jim Wallis 'Brought Reproach to the Name of Jesus' by Backing Marriage Equality

Michael Brown is quite upset that Sojourners head Jim Wallis now supports marriage equality, and in a column for Charisma yesterday accused Wallis of “apostasy” and taking the “path to spiritual and moral suicide.” “Rev. Wallis, you have brought reproach to the name of Jesus, to the Word of God and to evangelical Christianity,” Brown writes, “you will need to humble yourself and repent.”

Rev. Wallis, you have brought reproach to the name of Jesus, to the Word of God and to evangelical Christianity.

You raised concerns for many of us when you argued in 2008 that justice requires Christians to support (and even bless) same-sex unions, but you also stated clearly in 2008, “I don’t think the sacrament of marriage should be changed. Some people say that Jesus didn’t talk about homosexuality, and that’s technically true. But marriage is all through the Bible, and it’s not gender-neutral.”

Now you have declared your support for the radical redefinition of marriage, explaining, “I think we have to talk about, now, how to include same-sex couples in that deeper understanding of marriage. I want a deeper commitment to marriage that is more and more inclusive, and that’s where I think the country is going.”

How can you say this as a student of the Word and a professing disciple of Jesus?



Rev. Wallis, you don’t strengthen marriage by removing its foundational components—as emphasized by Jesus Himself in Matthew 19—namely, one man and one woman coming together in sacred, lifelong union. Instead, by advocating for the radical redefinition of marriage, you align yourself with the many groups in America who want to marginalize, ostracize and even criminalize religious opposition to same-sex “marriage.” What has become of your Christian conscience?



What? Jim Wallis, the critic of the religious establishment; Jim Wallis, the counter-cultural revolutionary; Jim Wallis, the advocate of a Jesus who changes the world rather than conforms to it. You, sir, are now willing to redefine one of the most foundational and sacred human institutions, the institution of marriage, based on where the country is going? Isn’t that the path to spiritual and moral suicide?

You of all people should know that as followers of Jesus, we are called to swim against the conformist, worldly tide of the age, calling society back to the timeless ways of God, especially when society forsakes the Word of God and the God of the Word. Yet you have now joined in the apostasy, choosing to go with the populist flow—one that is becoming more anti-faith by the day—rather than having the courage and integrity to stand your ground.

Rev. Wallis, your best years of ministry could still be ahead, but you will need to humble yourself and repent. I am praying that you do.

Rep. Steve Stockman: Immigration Reform Will Destroy GOP and Help Obama 'Destroy America'

The House GOP’s resident provocateur Steve Stockman (R-TX) appeared on The Steve Deace Show yesterday to urge his fellow Republicans to oppose immigration reform because Latinos typically vote Democratic. Stockman mocked the claims of pro-reform conservatives who believe that many Latinos would back the GOP if the party backed away from its hard-line stance on immigration reform, while noting that reform efforts would only help Obama in his plan to “destroy America.”

Stockman: Their advice is: allow this to happen and they will somehow overnight turn into Republicans. I can assure you, if these people were voting Republican, the Democrats wouldn’t want a single person to be legalized, not one, and yet we are somehow fooling ourselves believing that they are magically going to go into a corner and turn into Republicans. It’s not going to happen.

Deace: Why would anybody think that Charles Schumer and Bob Menendez and John McCain, that all the sudden these people that you’re going to do this photo-op with that have already shown they have no regard for the rule of law where this issue is concerned, people like me are just looking at it from the outside in and thinking: why would I support anything they support? When David Axelrod goes on national television and says this issue is Obama’s legacy, pardon me if I’m a little skeptical of fueling the legacy of a guy—

Stockman: To destroy America

Deace: Who thinks that the Constitution is—he just puts it through a paper shredder. Exactly, I don’t get this.

He also lashed out at groups such as Focus on the Family and the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, which is led by Richard Land, for supporting the pro-reform Evangelical Immigration Table. Stockman said that such social conservative organizations are unwittingly pushing the Republican Party’s demise, imperiling the Religious Right’s political agenda and creating permanent Democratic majorities.

Stockman also accused NPR of calling undocumented immigrants “unregistered citizens,” a charge we haven’t found any evidence to back up, and said that it is like calling drug dealers “unregistered pharmacists.”

I’m upset with our own guys. I’m shocked that Focus on the Family and Richard Land, I’ve been in their camps and worked with them a long time, are coming out against us and saying they’re for legalizing twelve million unregistered Democrats, or as NPR calls them ‘unregistered citizens,’ that’s the new term they are using now. I was really appalled at NPR, government-controlled radio, says they are ‘unregistered citizens.’ I guess drug dealers now are unregistered pharmacists. It’s bizarre. I’m a little bit upset with our side so I’m taking bullets on both the right and the left for my stance. I have a dear friend, he came from Lebanon, he took fifteen years to follow our laws, he respects our laws, he is abiding by our laws, if we go and say ‘okay you guys that break the law now get to cut in front of everybody else that’s been waiting in line,’ what kind of message are we sending to the rest of the world?

Reagan allowed a million illegal immigrants at that time and after he did that two things happened: 1) they voted primarily and increasingly for the Democrats; 2) ten million more came in. The system is if we pass this it’s going to increase illegal immigration and it’s also going to turn Texas, Florida into Democrat states, we will never keep the White House and the entire agenda of Focus on the Family and Richard Land that is pro-life and all those things that we hold dear are going to be washed away because of the stupidity and the folly of granting citizenship to people who have not a clue about how our system is or the principles. They are saying here this is the rope, please put it around your neck and then jump off the tree and young hang yourself. It’s just bizarre that we’re so willingly doing that and a little bit frustrating.

Schlafly Cites 'Tradition' that Sodomy Is Worse than Rape

Phyllis Schlafly wants America to get “back to basics.” And when it comes to preventing “marriage mayhem,” that means talking about sodomy, which is “a central feature of same-sex marriage.”

Specifically, it means talking about sodomy in the “Anglo American legal tradition,” from its criminalization in English common law as early as 1533 through the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1986 decision in Bowers v Hardwick upholding state sodomy laws.  In Schlafly’s April 15 Eagle Forum missive she admiringly quotes from Chief Justice Warren Burger’s concurrence in Bowers, in which he quotes 18th Century commentator William Blackstone to the effect that sodomy is worse than rape:

English Common Law’s opposition to sodomy goes to the bottom of the tradition’s taproot. This progenitor of American law criminalized sodomy as early as 1533. And Sir William Blackstone, the late Eighteenth Century commentator foundational to American law, was quoted by Chief Justice Warren Burger in his concurrence in the Court’s Bowers decision: “[sodomy is] ‘the infamous crime against nature,’ an offense of ‘deeper malignity’ than rape, an heinous act ‘the very nature of which is a disgrace to human nature,’ and ‘a crime not fit to be named.’”

Schlafly doesn’t say that sodomy was punishable by death in Blackstone’s time; Burger's concurrence did note that it was a capital offence under Roman law.  But all this grand history was upended, Schlafly complains, with the Supreme Court’s “anti-tradition” decision in Lawrence v Texas, which overturned state sodomy laws and upheld the privacy and sexual freedom of consenting adults.  And that, she says, has led to the marriage equality cases currently being considered by the Court. Not surprisingly, Schlafly has strong opinions on those cases:

If the pro-homosexual rights forces win, that which is natural to the human race —marriage — is destroyed, and our venerable Constitution and legal tradition are slammed by Humanistic forces wanting to reconstruct American law and society on an anti-Judeo-Christian foundation.

Of course, Schlafly has her own “traditional” views about rape.  She has repeatedly denounced the concept of marital rape, saying that “when you get married you have consented to sex. That's what marriage is all about.” Last year Schlafly helped rally Religious Right support for Todd Akin when his remarks about “legitimate rape” were dooming his Senate campaign. 

Barton: Instead of Passing Obamacare, Congress Should Have Called on People 'to be More Religious'

On "WallBuilders Live" today, Rick Green and David Barton interviewed Frank Newport, author of the book "God Is Alive and Well: The Future of Religion in America."

Following the discussion, Barton commented that the problem in America today is that while the vast majority of people consider themselves to be Christians, not enough are reading the Bible regularly and applying it to their daily lives.

After comparing the Bible to an owner's manual for a car, Barton said that "the more religious you are, the better your health is" and suggested that instead of passing health care reform legislation, Congress should have passed legislation "calling on people to be more religious":

Part of the problem we have is we've not shown then applicability. It's like saying "why don't you sit down and read the owner's manual for your car."  They say "no way, if I need something, I'll go there and get it" and so we wait until we think there's a need but actually, if you read it ahead of time, you'll find there's a ton of stuff that applies before you get there. You'll find when you read it that there's a whole lot more features on your car than you knew about that helped you maximize ... and so we have that same kind of mental hurdle to get over.  People think, man, if I get in a crisis, I'll go get this and read it.  No, no, no, read it before you get in a crisis because it is going to apply to stuff you don't even imagine right now and it will elevate and benefit your life.

And by the way, I thought it was really cool that he pointed out that the more religious your are, the better your health is. Now, instead of passing Obamacare, why didn't we pass a bill calling on people to be more religious and therefore help health over all?

That's the benefits of using God's word and applying God's word is it does provide tangible, measurable benefits not the least of which is health.

Judith Reisman On 'Pornography, Homosexuality and the Gypsy Moth'

Liberty University professor Judith Reisman is out with a column in WorldNetDaily today which seems to blame homosexuality on “erototoxins,” or mind-altering chemicals, which she believes are emitted from pornography.

She points to a lecture which called pornography a “visual pheromone” to argue that sex-ed rewires the brain and consequently promotes homosexuality.

Reisman points to a case where pheromones were used to confuse male gypsy moths in order to prevent them from mating with females, which is apparently like how pornography could be confusing men and making them less attracted to women, or something.

On Sept. 21, 2012, Texas neurosurgeon Donald L. Hilton Jr., M.D., spoke on pornography addiction and sexual orientation, saying:

“Pornography is a visual pheromone, a powerful 100-billion-dollar per year brain drug that is changing sexuality even more rapidly through the cyber-acceleration of the Internet. It is ‘inhibiting orientation’ and ‘disrupting pre-mating communication between the sexes by permeating the atmosphere’ and Internet.” (emphasis added)

Hilton’s lecture, “Changing the Stamp of Nature: Pornography Addiction, Neuroplasticity, and the ASAM and DSM Perspectives,” put a hard neuroscience face on pornographic brain rewiring, implicating sex-education promotions of homosexuality as a normal genetic variation.



Pornography, homosexuality and the gypsy moth Hilton agrees, “Pornography is inducing a cultural pheromonic effect,” recording the mis-orientation of male gypsy moths.

In 1869 gypsy moths, imported to create an American silk industry, instead decimated our deciduous trees – oaks, maples and elms – and devastated our forests for the next 150 years. In the ’60s scientists found male moths mate with the female “by following her scent,” her “pheromone.”

A 1967 paper, “Insect population control by the use of sex pheromones to inhibit orientation between the sexes,” reported that scientists permeated the moth’s environment with strong, artificial female moth pheromone “This … scent overpowered the normal females ability to attract the male, and the confused males were unable to find the females.”

So, our trees got saved by what could be called olfactory moth pornography, a heavy-duty phony scent that unmanned male orientation to create an impotent moth population.

Hilton reports this abstract of the paper: “We have for the first time obtained experimental confirmation that pre-mating communication between the sexes can be disrupted by permeating the atmosphere with an insect pheromone.”

In 1972 another paper described mating disorientation as “preventing male gypsy moths from finding mates,” using pheromones. Called the confusion method:

“An airplane scatters … pellets imbedded with the scent of the pheromone … [that] overpower the male’s ability to find the female. He is thus desensitized to the natural scent of the female by this artificially produced pheromone. … The male either becomes confused and doesn’t know which direction to turn for the female, or he becomes desensitized to the lower levels of pheromones naturally given out by the female and has no incentive to mate with her.” (emphasis added)

Gypsy moth pornography? In the trapping method, male moths looking for the female, enter traps with no exit “only to find a fatal substitute.” As a neurosurgeon, Dr. Hilton concludes:

“Pornography is a visual pheromone, a powerful 100-billion-dollar per year brain drug that is changing sexuality. … It is ‘inhibiting orientation’ and ‘disrupting pre-mating communication between the sexes by permeating the atmosphere’ and Internet.”

So can Cynipidae desensitization tell us genius humanoids about pornographic mating desensitization, say, about pornography as Erototoxic, as the toxic form of Eros? Gosh.

Staver: Labeling Us As 'Hate Groups' Is Just Like What Happened in Nazi Germany

On a recent "Faith and Freedom" radio broadcast, Matt Barber and Mat Staver were discussing the current Religious Right outrage over an Army Reserve briefing in which "Evangelical Christianity" was listed among various kinds of "religious extremism."

A spokesperson said the slide was not produced by the Army and was removed and the person responsible for it has apologized, but Staver and Barber know who is really to blame: the Southern Poverty Law Center.

In fact, Staver said, what the SPLC is doing by labeling Religious Right organization as hate groups "it's just like in Nazi Germany" where Jews were dehumanized and demonized so that when they were ultimately killed, "people turned a blind eye":

Sandy Rios Likens Boston Attack to When Nero 'Burned Rome' and 'Blamed Christians'

Sandy Rios on her radio show today was joined by her boss, American Family Association president Tim Wildmon, to discuss the bombing at the Boston marathon, and said the attack “reminds” her of when the Roman emperor Nero “burned Rome” and then “blamed Christians.”

“It’s that psychological process of blaming people that you hate so that they will take the blame for something and it solves two problems for you,” Rios claimed. “So this is nothing new.”

Rios accused the Obama administration of trying to stop security officials from referencing Islam while supposedly identifying conservatives, like gun owners and AFA radio listeners, as “enemies on equal footing with Islamists.”

She said that this alleged policy makes America “less safe” while Wildmon criticized the media for saying that the bombing could have been an “anti-government” attack when he thinks it was almost certainly an act of “Islamic jihadism.”

Wildmon: These Islamic jihadists, the extremists, they are here among us now and we’re going to have to be vigilant, we’re going to have to keep our eyes open. I don’t know, you’re not going to prevent everything; something’s are going to happen like what happened in Boston yesterday. Again, we’re saying this not knowing for certain that this is what happened that is that it was an act of an Al Qaeda type group or jihad, but that’s what I’m thinking it is, that’s my default position because of all the attacks that have taken place around the world by these groups.

Rios: There’s a good reason why these terrorist strikes have been thwarted because our guys have been working 24/7, our security forces, our FBI, all of these really good guys who are really disconnected from what’s happening at the top but things are changing. The military training manuals, the FBI manuals, all of the people fighting Islam within and without, the manuals have been scrubbed, they don’t dare speak of Islam, they don’t dare speak of jihad. I have to tell you, that’s going to have a correlation to our safety, it can’t help. If we’re now saying, ‘oh it’s probably people who listen to AFA who are right-wing in their politics, they want to keep their guns, they are probably—’ if we broaden the scope that those are the enemies on equal footing with Islamists we are going to be less safe because our resources are going to be spread thin.

Wildmon: You have like twenty acts of terrorism that are related to Islamic jihadism and then you have one Timothy McVeigh anti-government, and the media acts like, ‘oh we don’t know there are a lot of both out there.’

Rios: Chris Matthews weighed in on this last night too, sort of hinting the same thing. This reminds me Tim, do you remember when Nero was the Emperor of Rome? Remember that he burned Rome and what did he do? He blamed the Christians. So I’m just saying it’s transference, it’s that psychological process of blaming people that you hate so that they will take the blame for something and it solves two problems for you. So this is nothing new.

Beck: Muslims Responsible for Boston Bombing Because American Terrorists Always Target the Government

Last night, Glenn Beck went on the air shortly after the bombing at the Boston Marathon happened and even though very little was known at the time, Beck understandably felt obligated to cover it

It was fascinating to watch the reporters who actually work for The Blaze try to do their job of reporting what is actually known while answering questions from Beck, who is under no such constraints and feels free to just randomly speculate about how this couldn't have been carried out by an America, because Americans who do things like this always target the government, not streets filled with people [tell that to Eric Rudolph.]

Beck also speculated that we might never know the "true story" of what happened because the Obama administration is soft of Islamic terrorism and doesn't think al Qaeda exists, so they will have to "spin this" to hide the truth if it was carried out by Islamic extremists:

Tea Party Nation: Boston Attack Occurred Because Obama Administration Is 'Not Committed to Protecting America'

In an email to members today, Tea Party Nation head Judson Phillips claimed that the Boston marathon bombing occurred because “we have a government that is not committed to protecting America” since it isn’t willing to “destroy radical Islam.” Phillips said that “Radical Islam and perhaps even non-radical Islam” is a danger to western civilization, arguing that Muslims believe that “non-Islamic nations may be conquered or otherwise taken over.”

Unfortunately the sad truth is we will be hit again. It will happen sooner or later. It will probably be sooner than later.

There are two reasons why we will be hit again. First, we have a determined enemy who hates us. Second, we have a government that is not committed to protecting America.

It is a pretty safe bet right now that this attack was carried out by an Islamist. It was a well-coordinated attack. In its publication, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula called for just this kind of attack.

While the government and media have fallen all over themselves to downplay this fact, there is a twenty-year-old Saudi student being detained as a “person of interest.” Person of interest in a nice police term that is used for someone who is not under arrest and therefore does not have to be read his Miranda rights and who hopefully will not lawyer up.

Barack Obama could not force himself to use the word “terrorism” in his speech last night and the FBI right now won’t call this a terrorist incident.



The reason we will be hit again is because our government is not committed to destroying our enemy. Radical Islam is our enemy.

Some in the far end of the Liberty Movement will start screaming about war mongering “Neo-cons.” Nothing could be further from the truth.



We need to first recognize our enemy and then come up with a strategy to destroy them. This is an ideological war. While sometimes that will mean guns and bombs, neither will destroy an ideology.

The values of the west, most of them good, some of them not so good are what will destroy radical Islam. In the west, we fall all over ourselves not to insult Islam.

Why?

We can go down the list of things Islam has done to the west. During the height of the Cold War, the Soviets came up with something called the Brezhnev doctrine. It said, “What’s ours is ours. What is yours is negotiable.” Radical Islam and perhaps even non-radical Islam holds to the same belief.

They believe that once a nation becomes Islamic it cannot have Islam removed from it. However, non-Islamic nations may be conquered or otherwise taken over.

Reagan knew that America had to stand up to the Communist threat. Bill Clinton wanted to ignore the Islamist threat. George W. Bush just wanted to hold the hand of the Saudi king and Barack Obama just wants to bow to him. As we mourn the victims of Boston, we need to make a solemn vow that we will not allow this to happen again.

The only way we make sure this never happens again is to identify our enemy and then craft a strategy to totally defeat that enemy.

Tell Fox News: Dump Hatemonger Erik Rush

A Fox News contributor went too far in the wake of the tragic violence at the Boston Marathon. Read more & tell Fox to dump Erik Rush.

Erik Rush: Kill All Muslims in Response to Boston Marathon Attack

Fox News contributor goes too far in the wake of the tragic violence at the Boston Marathon.

Beck: Society Is Going to Hell and the National Organization for Women is to Blame

On his radio program today, Glenn Beck spent a bit of time discussing the case of Kermit Gosnell and the media's supposed refusal to adequately cover the story.  Despite that fact that until last week, Beck's The Blaze had barely mentioned the story, Beck blamed the media for failing to cover it and announced that he was going to delve into it in potentially graphic detail on tonight's television program.

In Beck's view, the Gosnell case and "almost everything that is going on in our society, I think, was hastened by the National Organization of Women" [sic] because the organization convinced women that they were no different than men. 

And when that happens, "society goes to hell" because men stop respecting women "and society starts to careen out of control":

Gun Owners of America Fears Creation of 'Minority Report'-style 'Pre-Crime Unit'

Spokesman for Gun Owners of America have already warned us that background checks on gun purchases may lead to anti-Christian persecution and genocide, and last week the group’s communications director Erich Pratt warned that new gun legislation might include a “government enemy list” that could target Gun Owners of America members or “anybody who attends church or listens to Christian radio.”

Of course, the Senate gun bill actually has language meant to prevent the creation of such any gun owners’ registry, but that didn’t stop Pratt from criticizing the legislation’s plan to expand background checks.

Pratt said that while he has no problem requiring background checks for things like nursery employees, he argued that there should be no background checks at all for gun purchases since it is a “God-given right.” Pratt went on to maintain that such background checks may lead to government screenings of pastors, writers or couples seeking to get married or having children.

“If anybody has ever seen the movie ‘Minority Report’ that is where we end up going, where government sets up a pre-crime unit,” Pratt concluded.

People are thinking ‘well you know in my church we do background checks if I’m going to work in the nursery and you know, what’s wrong with that?’ Well to that I would say, I don’t have a God-given right to watch your children so if you want to do background checks on me to work in the nursery I’m OK with that. But I do have a God-given right to protect my children and my life and my wife so there is a big difference because now when you do that background check you are sending my name to the government and you have just created the framework for a gun registry. When you have people like Gov. Andrew Cuomo saying that confiscation is an option, the Democrats in the New York legislature put forth a plan for confiscating certain firearms and several legislatures around the country talking about confiscation, heck, right after Hurricane Katrina they did confiscate firearms when they went door to door in the city and the police chief announced that ‘no one is going to be allowed to have guns and we’re going to take them all,’ and they did, or at least they tried to, they confiscated thousands of firearms.

So with that threat that’s constantly there that is why any gun owner should strongly oppose background checks on anything related to their Second Amendment rights, it is a huge slippery slope problem. Plus the fact that quite honestly, why should government be screening law-abiding people before they exercise their rights? If you are a good person there is no reason why you should be screened before you preach a sermon, before you publish an article, before you get married. You could argue there are a lot of wife beaters out there so we need to check you out and there are a lot of child abusers so we need to check you out before you have children; no we don’t do that to rights. You don’t take God-given rights and say we’re going to have government check you out first just to make sure. If anybody has ever seen the movie ‘Minority Report’ that is where we end up going, where government sets up a pre-crime unit and it is screening everybody and catch us before we do anything wrong. Heck, they might as well put drones over our homes and spy on us; they could just as easily catch crime that way.

Rick Wiles Wonders if Obama Is in the Illuminati, Learns He's the 'Forerunner of the Antichrist'

Last week, Rick Wiles of TruNews hosted Dr. Preston Bailey of the Spiritual Warfare Center to discuss how the “New World Order” is trying to restore the “Luciferian government” that existed before Noah’s Flood and will accelerate the End Times.

After asking if President Obama, whom Wiles believes is literally a demon, is of the Illuminati’s bloodline, Bailey responded that he is not, at least according to his Illuminati “source.”

But don’t be disappointed just yet.

Bailey told Wiles that the Illuminati consider Obama to be the “forerunner of the Antichrist” (which we always thought was Oprah Winfrey) and that there is an Illuminati member who may be in the White House soon enough: Hillary Clinton.

Wiles: Lucifer ran this world and that is what they are seeking to bring back in the Last Days, that is the world government, that is the last beast, that is the fourth beast that is coming, it is a resurrection of the pre-Flood Luciferian government and the Illuminati is the bloodline that exists today with the assignment to bring about the resurrection of this pre-Flood Luciferian government.

Bailey: That is exactly what they’re doing; now the New World Order, so the head of the New World Order — there are many organizations — but the head of it is the Illuminati.



Bailey: You’re born into the Illuminati so if you hear these people who claim ‘well I joined the Illuminati and blah blah blah’ well they’re lying, that’s just not true, they have delusions of grandeur.

Wiles: Do you think Barack Hussein Obama is part of the bloodline?

Bailey: No he’s not; I’ve asked specifically. He is called the ‘Forerunner of the Antichrist.’ But Hillary [Clinton] is in the Illuminati.

Michele Bachmann to Headline Conference with 9/11 & Sandy Hook Truther, Birthers and Anti-Gay Activists

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) will be joining some of the most extreme right-wing activists in the country at the upcoming Awakening 2013 conference.

Fischer on Praying for Adolf Hitler and President Obama

On Friday's radio broadcast, Bryan Fischer was discussing the importance of praying for elected leaders, especially President Obama since "virtually every single one of his policies is out of alignment with the will and the word of God."

The discussion prompted Fischer to make a bizarre point involving Adolf Hitler in which he asserted that the fall of the Nazi regime and the suicide of Hitler himself "happened in response to the prayers of God's people."

As Fischer explained it, God was trying to do everything in his power to reach Hitler while also respecting his free will "just like God is doing with Barack Obama," citing Ben Carson's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast as proof.

But, Fischer said, it is not doing any good as God has been "giving Barack Obama opportunity after opportunity to hear and respond to the truth and, trust me, the day could come when God says 'I have given him enough chances ... it's time to bring about some kind of a change'" before quickly adding that the change might be nothing more than a new president in 2016:

AIM: Immigration Reform Is 'Destructive to our Society' and May Make Obama 'President for Life'

James Simpson, writing in a column for Accuracy In Media, is warning his fellow conservatives not to work with progressives on crafting a comprehensive immigration reform plan, which he believes is part of a Marxist push to destroy America and potentially make President Obama a dictator.

He writes that an “illegal alien amnesty” simply “cannot happen again, unless we are all willing to start calling Obama ‘President for Life,’ and Democrats, the ‘Commissars.’”

He goes on to accuse the “illegal immigration lobby” of using the tactics of Nazis and Communists in promoting “ideas that are self-evidently destructive,” and says that there is no room to compromise with the left and reform proponents because they are Marxists who will only be “emboldened” to push for further changes.

“When dealing with Marxists, the “moderates” compromise away our rights, our livelihoods and our country to people and agendas that are inherently destructive to our society,” Simpson warns. “As Congress goes with amnesty, so goes the nation.”

As we once again face the specter of illegal alien amnesty, and the permanent Democratic majority it will guarantee, it is critical to understand how the Left plays. They are unethical to the core, but we are so frequently deluded by their tactical use of language and emotion, that we are unequipped to deal with them effectively. The result: they win. This cannot happen again, unless we are all willing to start calling Obama “President for Life,” and Democrats, the “Commissars.”



Our nation’s laws constitute a contract that every citizen implicitly agrees to respect. Those who violate it face sanctions of corresponding severity. If certain individuals can avoid sanction and gain special privilege through political power—despite their blatant violations—then the rule of law becomes meaningless, and is replaced by a society based on political power alone. That is called dictatorship. Yet this is what the illegal immigration lobby wants us to accept.

When individuals or organizations attempt to introduce ideas that are self-evidently destructive, like Nazism or communism, for example, a campaign based on propaganda is necessary. Unlike factual information, propaganda manipulates, using fear and instinct in combination with known psychological reactions. It is evident that the illegal alien lobby uses these methods.



The illegal alien lobby, like most well-trained leftist movements, follows a multi-tiered offensive strategy. This includes in-your-face agitation, public demonstrations, vilification of opponents, direct threats, aggressive legal tactics (i.e., suing and threats of suits) and massive, coordinated legislative assaults. These in turn all reflect their application of the Dialectic:

Thesis—For the illegal alien lobby, the “thesis” is the deliberately provocative proposition that illegals are only “undocumented,” or of a certain “perceived immigration status,” or, using Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley’s terminology, merely “New Americans.” As such, they should be granted all the privileges of citizenship and more.

Antithesis—The “Antithesis” is our collective outrage at such an overtly fraudulent notion. It is the natural and anticipated backlash—in Lenin’s words, the “forces of reaction” which set us up for more outrages, as the Marxists respond even more forcefully to our “injustice,” our “racism.” Such “reaction” is only to be expected of “Imperialists.”

Synthesis— “Synthesis” is the marriage of compromises wherein “cooler heads prevail.” This standard Marxist tactic relies on the natural human tendency to compromise in the face of conflict.

Under normal circumstances, this might be described as a simple way to model the give-and-take of the usual negotiation process, but there is nothing usual about it when dealing with Marxists. The compromise always comes from our side, because the Marxists start from the preposterous position that people who deliberately, flagrantly violate our laws should not be singled out for any kind of consideration other than jail or extradition. Exceptions are already provided in law for those refugees or asylum seekers who come to America under genuine duress, but even these programs have been horribly abused by the open-borders lobby.

Yet even in the case of radical ideas like amnesty or in-state tuition for illegals, over time, common ground between the opponents is found, as the radicals repeatedly pound away at elected officials with the same proposals while their street operation gets ever more strident, threatening and demanding. Meanwhile, those less scrupulous politicians who see gain in supporting such groups are emboldened, especially if the media put a compassionate spin on the group in question. Eventually, politicians give in, finding some pretext like requiring military service, or paying fines or back taxes.

Using this method, the Marxists usually get more than they bargained for, despite the fact that their demands have no legitimacy whatever. Furthermore, it never stops. Once one “right” has been established, new ones are dreamed up until there is nothing left to give. Recall the quote from MALDEF’s Obledo: “Eventually we will take over all the political institutions of California.” He means it. When dealing with Marxists, the “moderates” compromise away our rights, our livelihoods and our country to people and agendas that are inherently destructive to our society.

This is a fight we cannot afford to lose. As Congress goes with amnesty, so goes the nation.

Corsi: ACLU Promoting Pedophilia, Leading Us Back to Paganism

Master birther Jerome Corsi visited the Janet Mefferd show last week to promote his new book Bad Samaritans, a “scorching expose” of the American Civil Liberties Union. Like with most of his work, Corsi’s analysis of the ACLU is light on the truth and heavy on the grand conspiracy theories. He tells Mefferd that the ACLU is now promoting pedophilia “as the next sexual horizon” and seeking to indict pastors with non-existent hate speech laws. All of this, Corsi argues, means that “we’re headed right back to the paganism, maybe a broader form of paganism, that was the ancient world.”

Corsi: The ACLU has championed same-sex marriage, and along with same-sex marriage advocates, got a very effective public relations campaign arguing, you know, ‘How would you deny these two men who are in love or two women the ability to be happy,’ emotional issues. But now the ACLU is doing two things. One, they’re pushing the envelope, they’re arguing that pedophilia should be accepted next, as the next sexual horizon that is just a sexual orientation, and we should accept it as natural.

Mefferd: That’s sick.

Corsi: And they’re also arguing that any of the, the clergy, silencing the Church and ministers so that anybody who speaks out on a moral issue, objecting to, say, same-sex marriage on a moral or scriptural basis from Judeo-Christian principles, that’s hate speech and the person’s committing a crime. I mean, the left is not going to be tolerant when the window is fully pushed open and anyone who objects to their agenda is going to be suspect and silenced. And the problem is that if we continue to expand, you know, if every form of human behavior, sexual behavior, that can be imagined is all accepted and legitimated, well then we’re headed  right back to the paganism, maybe a broader form of paganism, that was the ancient world, rejected by Christianity at the fall of the Roman Empire.

Mefferd: Oh, it’s exactly the case.
 

PFAW: GOP Has ‘Painted Itself Into a Corner’ Over Marriage

WASHINGTON – Today the Republican National Committee passed by voice vote a resolution reaffirming the party’s opposition to marriage equality. Passage of the resolution followed a letter earlier this week from the leaders of thirteen right-wing organizations to RNC Chairman Reince Priebus calling for a reaffirmation of the 2012 GOP platform and warning party leadership of potential “abandonment of our constituents to their support.”

People For the American Way President Michael Keegan released the following statement:

“The GOP has painted itself into a corner.  For many years, the Republican party fostered anti-gay sentiment for political benefit.  Now that the political landscape is shifting, they are unable to escape the extreme ideology of the far Right even as the majority of American voters embrace equal rights for same-sex couples. There are strong forces within the GOP dedicated to preventing the party from embracing marriage equality, and they are making it clear that they will not give in without a fight.” 

###

Starnes Accuses Obama Administration of 'Religious Cleansing of the Military'

Fox News commentator Todd Starnes has taken it in upon himself to chronicle what he sees as an “attack on Christianity” within the military under the Obama administration. So far, the main evidence he’s turned up is an email sent by an Army officer about anti-gay groups and an unauthorized slide in a training presentation listing Christianity as a possible source of religious extremism. These, however, are enough for Starnes to conclude that, as he put it to the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins yesterday, “politically correct Obama administration officials” are conducting a “sort of religious cleansing of the military”

Starnes told Perkins that his concerns are shared by Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who believes “there is an anti-Christian movement afoot at the Pentagon.”


Starnes: It should be shocking and surprising, but unfortunately, for me it’s not, because I’ve been covering this attack on Christianity that’s within the ranks of the military, not just the Army, since President Obama was inaugurated. And we have seen an onslaught of attacks, the sort of religious cleansing of the military at the hands of these politically correct Obama administration officials operating out of the Pentagon.

...

Perkins: This is a fundamental, this is our first freedom. We cannot lose it, we must defend it with our abilities through the political process. That’s how we do that. Todd, what’s the next step on this? What do you think is going to happen next?

Starnes: I think we are going to see some movement on Capitol Hill. We’ve got some lawmakers that are very upset. Congressman Steve King out of Iowa, I had a chance to talk to him, and he believes there is an anti-Christian movement afoot at the Pentagon. And I think we are going to see more people standing in the gap for our fighting men and women. These are folks putting their lives on the line so that we might have religious liberty, and their religious liberty is being denied? It’s just unconscionable.
 

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious