Fighting the Right

Penny Nance Likens Obama to Tarzan for Defending Susan Rice

Concerned Women for America president Penny Nance is getting herself in the involved debate over UN Ambassador Susan Rice’s potential nomination to be Secretary of State. Nance has attempted to paint President Obama as somehow anti-woman by claiming his campaign is “misogynistic” and views women as “a bunch of cheap floozies.” She even mocked Obama supporter Sandra Fluke by saying she and her colleagues couldn’t afford birth control because they spent too much money on beer, while refusing to defend her from Rush Limbaugh’s sexist attacks. Nance’s group launched the SheVotes campaign to energize conservative women and during an Election Day interview with VCY America’s Jim Schneider, she insisted that polling data shows Obama’s efforts to reach out to women voters were a “disaster.”

Of course, Obama carried women voters by eleven points, but being completely wrong about the women’s vote in the election hasn’t stopped Nance from claiming that women across the country are appalled by his purported sexism.

How is he acting like a sexist now? By defending Rice from baseless Republican attacks.

Nance writes that Obama is acting like Tarzan and even threw out the debunked claim that the White House practices paycheck discrimination. She says that instead of speaking out in favor of Rice, he should be defending people like Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter and Michele Bachmann from “his own misogynistic attack dogs.” Speaking out against the attacks against Rice, Nance explains, is effectively “an admission that left-leaning women aren’t nearly as savvy and strong as conservative women and, therefore, need a little extra protection.”

Basically, if Obama doesn’t defend women like Palin, Coulter and Bachmann, it is sexist, and if he speaks out on behalf of a Democratic official like Rice, it is sexist and a sign that liberal women are weak. Get it?

It’s absurd to think Obama would similarly defend his male subordinates. Such statements made by the president would undermine their authority and insult their professional capabilities.

But maybe public displays of “Me Tarzan, You Jane” are just one of the perks you get when you’re part of an administration that pays its women an average of 18 percent less than their male counterparts.

Or maybe it’s finally an admission that left-leaning women aren’t nearly as savvy and strong as conservative women and, therefore, need a little extra protection. Heaven knows there were plenty of times (a la Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter, Michele Bachmann, etc., etc., etc.) when the president could have — and should have — called off his own misogynistic attack dogs. Those were full-on, unbridled, unrestrained, vicious attacks on conservative women. But honest-to-goodness, hard-but-relevant questions pointed at a female, Obama administration mouthpiece is what finally gets the president in an uproar?

Wildmon: Obama Wouldn't Have Been Re-Elected if He Was White

The American Spectator's founder, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., was a guest on the American Family Association's "Today's Issues" broadcast this morning to explain how the thesis of his recent book, "The Death of Liberalism," was still valid despite the recent election results on the grounds that President Obama is not a liberal but rather a socialist. 

In Tyrrell's view, Obama's win was just a demonstration of the fact that conservatism has big victories but then reaches a plateau before going on to even greater victories.  So while the 2010 midterm elections were proof that America is a conservative nation, the 2012 election results were just a temporary plateau before the 2014 midterms, which will be another blowout win for conservatives.

But AFA's Tim Wildmon had a simpler explanation of why President Obama was re-elected:  because he is black.

How Unhinged Rhetoric Sank a Disabilities Rights Treaty in the Senate

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities failed to capture the 2/3 vote needed for ratification in the U.S. Senate today due to fierce Republican opposition. Many Republicans and their allies in the conservative movement claimed that the treaty codifies abortion into law, even though that preposterous claim was rejected by the National Right to Life Committee and Sen. John McCain. Along with the false charges about abortion, opponents of the treaty claimed it will undermine U.S. sovereignty and harm children. Critics like Rick Santorum warned that the treaty may kill his disabled daughter; Glenn Beck said it could create a “fascistic” government and Sen. Jim Inhofe alleged the treaty would help groups with “anti-American biases.”

One of the lesser-known but extremely active opponents of the bill was homeschooling activist Michael Farris.

During an interview with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, he claimed that the treaty will prompt the United Nations to ‘get control’ of children with glasses or ADHD and remove them from their families.

Farris: They’re called living documents, just like the disgraced living Constitution theory, which means the treaty doesn’t mean today what it’s going to mean tomorrow what it’s going to mean ten years from now. So you never know what you’re signing up for, that by itself is a good enough reason to leave it alone and to never enter into one of these things. But in particular, you hit the nail on the head Tony, the definition of disability is not defined in the treaty. My kid wears glasses, now they’re disabled, now the UN gets control over them; my child’s got a mild case of ADHD, now you’re under control of the UN treaty. There’s no definitional standard, it can change over time, and the UN, not American policymakers, are the ones who get it decided.

While speaking with the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer, the two warned that the treaty could lead to the deaths of disabled children, all the while admitting they have no evidence it would do such beyond their pure speculation.

Fischer: Disabled newborn babies in the UK are being put, oftentimes overriding the wishes of parents, on this death pathway where no matter what the parents want the doctors say this kid cannot live, severely disabled, too many congenital deformities, we think the best thing for this kid is just to be starved and dehydrated to death. It seems to me that although that’s not specifically contemplated in this treaty that could be an outcome.

Farris: Whether they thought about it or not, that’s exactly what Rick Santorum said in our press conference. He was holding his daughter Bella and she’s of the category of child that in Britain they would take that position because her official diagnosis is ‘incompatible with life.’ So when the doctor gets to decide, the doctor empowered by the government—these doctors aren’t doing it on their own, they are doing it because the government says they have the power to do it—the doctor/government deciding what they think is best for the child. It goes to the point of deciding whether the child lives or dies, it is that crazy. If we want to live in a Brave New World like that where the bureaucrats and the government and the UN all tell us what to do, fine, but this is the beginning of the end of American self-government if we go here, it’s just crazy, we cannot let this happen.

After warning that the treaty will kill children, Farris told conservative talk show host Steve Deace that the treaty will create a “cradle-to-grave care for the disabled” and said if the U.S. ratifies it “signing up to be an official socialist nation.” Farris claimed that the treaty will treat the parents of disabled children like child abusers in order to grow government power and implement “coercive socialism.”

“Everybody in America will be living under is socialism as an international entitlement” if the treaty passes, Farris maintained, “it’s a way to make the socialist, liberal, amoral element a permanent feature of our law.” Deace agreed and said the treaty will “due in freedom and liberty.”

Farris: Every parent with a disabled child is going to be in the same legal position as if they’d been convicted of child abuse. We are taking away parental decision-making power in that area. The other thing that everybody in America will be living under is socialism as an international entitlement. The United States resisted all the UN treaties of a certain category that began being proliferated in the 1960s; the first was the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights. Our country said no that is coercive socialism, we’re not going to do that. So we rejected all those treaties ever since 1966. Yet we’re signing up now for our first economic, social and cultural treaty which means as a matter of international binding law that goes to the supremacy clause level in our Constitution, we’re signing up to be an official socialist nation, cradle-to-grave care for the disabled. Maybe Americans want to do that, but I think we’d want to do it as a matter of domestic law, not as a matter of international law. I personally don’t think that’s any business of Congress to do that sort of thing but I certainly don’t want to be doing it when the United Nations tells us to do it. So those are two big ways it will affect every American and there are more.

Deace: Michael Farris is here with us from Patrick Henry College, also from the Home School Legal Defense Association, talking about another attempt to usurp American sovereignty, to essentially do an end-run around the Constitution and then of course due in freedom and liberty through an effort through the United Nations.



Farris: If they can get this one through, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, CEDAW, which is the women’s treaty with all kinds of junk in that one, and then a whole host of other UN treaties that the Obama administration wants to send our way, it’s a way to make the socialist, liberal, amoral element a permanent feature of our law through the use of treaties and they are going to do a full-force attack. We’ve got to stop them now. It’s not like just the camel nose in the tent, it is that too, but we don’t want a camel’s nose in our constitutional system, that’s what we don’t want.

The Ten Most Absurd Stories at Rick Santorum's New Home, WorldNetDaily

Angling for another presidential run in 2016, Rick Santorum’s decision to join WorldNetDaily, the organization best known for promoting birther conspiracy theories, may not be the worst idea as birthers were projected to be a majority of Republican voters.

Finding the ten most absurd stories at a website which publishes multiple outlandish articles each and every day is a Herculean task, but here is a good start:

1. The Bible Code Forecasts a Romney Victory

WND’s “award-winning” executive news director Joe Kovacs just before the election wrote an article based on a YouTube video he saw about how the “Bible Code” prophesizes “bad news for Barack Obama” as apparently the “hidden texts in the Holy Bible indicate Mitt Romney will be America’s next president.” Not only would Romney win, but the Bible Code even predicted Romney will be a “fitting president” who has God’s favor.

2. Romney Can Still Win Despite Election Defeat

Tea Party Nation head Judson Phillips also works as a WND columnist, where he has argued that if enough states boycott the Electoral College, then the House of Representatives will get to pick the President and give Romney one last shot. “That is how we can still pull this election out and make Mitt Romney president in January,” he writes. “We need this concept shared with every tea party, liberty and patriotic group throughout the country.” Of course his proposal is completely without merit, but that didn’t stop at least one Republican state legislator from hopping on board.

3. Obama Building ‘FEMA Concentration Camps’

WND commentator and Faith 2 Action president Janet Porter wondered if President Obama was using the fears about the Swine flu to “round up American citizens” and put them into “FEMA concentration camps.” Porter has also used her WND column to push fears that Obama would enact “jail sentences for those who seek treatment outside the socialized health care system” and create a massive “food shortage” so opponents will be “starved to death.”

4. Obama Plans Negotiations with Osama Bin Laden

Porter in WND predicted that Obama bin Laden will be overjoyed by Obama’s election as President and will even be able to meet with him personally. Like most other predictions in WND, this one turned out to be false.

5. Obama is a Gay, Secret Muslim, Foreign-Born Imposter

The group’s most well-known “reporter,” Jerome Corsi, believes that President Obama wears a Muslim ring (confusing a loop-like pattern with Arabic), was married to his male Muslim roommate, orchestrated the murder of his gay ex-loverswas born somewhere outside the United States and his father may be Frank Marshall Davis.

6. Gays Behind the Holocaust and Preparing to Lead the Next One

WND columnist Scott Lively, who is best known for his work in shaping Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill, is the author of the book, The Pink Swastika, about how gays were behind Nazism and the Holocaust in order to have “vengeance against the people whose moral laws had relegated pagan homo-occultism to obscurity and ignominy.” WND Super Store sells his bizarre book and WND editor Joseph Farah eagerly endorsed Lively’s claim while warning that the gay rights movement may bring Nazism to America. Another WND columnist, Erik Rush, even maintained that gays are planning a Holocaust against Christians, and WND commentator Judith Reisman argued that gay-straight alliances are modeled after the Hitler Youth. WND’s Molotov Mitchell has also praised Uganda for making homosexuality a capital offense because the founders would’ve agreed.

7. Obama is Orchestrating the Next Holocaust

If gay people don’t do it first, then President Obama must be the one behind the next holocaust. Farah claimed that he discovered proof that Obama wants a new Holocaust in a speech he delivered at Buchenwald where he used the line, “We are here today because we know this work is not yet finished.” Farah admitted that he is taking the line, which was about the need to combat Holocaust denialism, out of context. But since Obama has a tendency of “speaking in code” to Muslim audiences, Farah explained, then he must be sending a secret message to Muslims to kill Jews: “So, I ask you, am I really taking Obama’s words at Buchenwald out of context? Or am I the only one seeing them in context?

8. Secession Now

WND is extremely sympathetic to the secessionist movement, they only differ on the reasons. Farah believes that America may be forced to “literally…break-up” the nation if states continue to legalize same-sex marriage and WND columnist Vox Day called for a white supremacist secession movement to repel the “African, Asian and Aztec cultures” and “immigrants from various non-European nations.” Mitchell even released a video criticizing Abraham Lincoln for his stance against secession.

9. Norway Terrorist Attacks a ‘Fabrication’ by the Victims

After far-right activist Anders Breivik targeted the left-wing Labour Party’s youth group and the Norwegian government in deadly terrorist attacks, naturally, WND suggested that the attack was a “cover-up” and a “fabrication of the Labour Party,” blaming the left’s policies for apparently encouraging Breivik’s radicalism. WND also is the home of Pamela Geller, who said that Muslims were behind the attacks and tried to justify Breivik’s actions.

10. Soy Turns Kids Gay

Yes, WND ran a six part series about how soy in children’s formula leads to “sexual confusion and homosexuality.” We only hope that WND commentator Victoria Jackson writes a column about her new idea that genetically modified food is “making more men gay these days.”

BONUS: Just today, Kovacs wondered if the Obama administration will construct the Death Star.

Joel Gilbert Faults Karl Rove For Focusing on Economy Rather Than Obama's 'Real Father'

Karl Rove, whose American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS spent hundreds of millions of dollars attacking President Obama’s economic record without avail, has become something of a punching bag for a defeated and embittered Religious Right. Shortly after the election, Gary Bauer faulted Rove for focusing on the economy rather than on abortion rights and marriage equality and radio host Janet Mefferd expressed concern that “we didn’t even talk much about radical Islam.” A few days later, the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios even accused Rove of moderating the GOP’s previous focus on anti-gay policies.

Today, Joel Gilbert, director of the widely distributed anti-Obama movie “Dreams From My Real Father,” joined the pile-on. In an interview with Renew America’s Cliff Kincaid, Gilbert argued that Rove made a fatal mistake by focusing his attacks on the economy rather than on Gilbert’s theory that the president’s real father was communist organizer Frank Marshall Davis. "If Republicans had made Obama's Marxist agenda and personal background the main issues of the campaign, Americans would have had a much clearer understanding of the choice between American values and Marxism,” Gilbert said.


"I heard complaints from Rove's conservative donors four weeks in advance of the election," filmmaker Joel Gilbert told Accuracy in Media. "They kept asking, 'where is the money being spent?'" The questions intensified after Obama's victory and the Democrats achieved a larger 55-45 majority in the Senate.

Gilbert, who directed the documentary "Dreams from My Real Father," about Obama's Marxist roots, notes that Rove had argued to conservative donors that the winning strategy for Republicans was to place ads focusing on the poor economy.

Gilbert's film, which was distributed to millions of voters and argued that Obama's real biological and ideological father was Communist Party USA propagandist Frank Marshall Davis, attempted to expose Obama's character and background. But Rove, Romney and Republican leaders did not want to raise these issues. In fact, Rove had argued that calling Obama a socialist or left-winger would backfire.

Gilbert argued that Obama was a pop-culture phenomenon with a high "likability" factor and that "Voters perceived Obama as a nice man with an inspiring family story." The right strategy, he says, was to expose Obama's Marxist views, the role of Frank Marshall Davis in molding Obama's political philosophy, and Obama's questionable statements about his own upbringing.

Gilbert says, "If Republicans had made Obama's Marxist agenda and personal background the main issues of the campaign, Americans would have had a much clearer understanding of the choice between American values and Marxism."

Gilbert’s film, meanwhile, is on record as having “revolted” focus groups of swing voters and disgusted at least one Florida voter so much that he decided to vote for the president.

Brownback Declares Saturday to be a 'Day of Restoration'

In August of last year, Texas Governor Rick Perry organized and hosted a large public prayer rally featuring a host of Religious Right activists along with various self-proclaimed "prophets" of the New Apostolic Reformation.  For the most part, other elected leaders stayed away from the event, with the notable exception of Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, who spoke and delivered a prayer from the stage.

It was no surprise that Brownback would have no qualms about sharing the stage with these sorts of modern-day prophets, as he had a long history of working closely them and speaking at their events back when he was serving in the US Senate and even lived with Lou Engle for several months. In fact, Brownback's close ties to Engle became a bit of an issue when he was running for Governor in 2010.

And just as it was no surprise that Brownback would appear at "The Response," it is also not surprising that he has now publicly endorsed a similar prayer event that is taking place in Topeka, Kansas this weekend called Reign Down, organized by a group that began "in July of 2005, [when] God woke up a 31-year old stay-at-home mom to give her a vision" of then-President George W. Bush "repenting on behalf of the nation, culminating in a movement of God's hand across America to bring healing, restoration and unprecedented unity and prosperity."

When Reign Down organized a prayer event on the National Mall in 2008, severe thunderstorms threatened to cancel it ... until their prayers held them off: 

Leading up to the four-hour event, a massive storm with life-threatening tornadoes, heavy rain and winds, and lightning was heading straight towards the gathering at the National Mall in D.C. The National Park Service issued one warning, saying that after three warnings—or the first bolt of lightning—they were going to pull the plug and the event would not happen. Realizing it was beyond their control, with less than an hour until the event was to start, ReignDown USA's leaders and intercessors knelt behind the stage and cried out for God to divert the storm to the North and the South. They called upon the power of the Holy Spirit for the winds to shift from the West to the East and blow the storm away. As they cried out on their knees and begged God to move…He did! The wind shifted! The Park Service, watching the weather radar, said that somehow the storm cell was shifting its course and heading to the North.

And this weekend, Reign Down - which has partnerships with groups and leaders like Lou Engle, The Call, Cindy Jacobs, GodTV, the Congressional Prayer Caucus, and Rep. Trent Franks - will host a prayer rally in Kansas that will be simulcast across the country, and Gov. Brownback has not only filmed a video announcing his participation and support but issued a proclamation calling on citizens to "collectively repent of distancing ourselves from God and ask for His mercy on us" and declaring Saturday to be a "day of restoration":

TO THE PEOPLE OF KANSAS, GREETINGS:

WHEREAS, the State of Kansas will host the national simulcast of REIGNDOWN USA in Topeka on December 8, 2012, bringing thousands here from across the country; and

WHEREAS, people from across America will join the millions from around the world on TV simulcast live from MacLennan Park, in the heart of America; and

WHEREAS, the first REIGNDOWN celebration was held 2008 in Washington DC, on the Capitol Grounds, introduced by proclamation of the President of the United States of America, with millions participating on site, on TV, and by computer; and

WHEREAS, regional REIGNDOWN events continued until the need was seen for the gathering to be held in the heart of our Nation; and

WHEREAS, many of our families have slid into poverty, endangering out next generation of citizens, our lands are parched by drought, our quality jobs are scarce, business and industry are struggling to expand, and many of our people have fallen into despair; and

WHEREAS, our Nation’s greatest leaders have called on a merciful God for favor during troubled times, such as:

“We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven; we have been preserved these many years in peace and prosperity; we have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God.” - Abraham Lincoln, 1863.

“The propitious [favorable] smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained.” - George Washington, 1789.

“I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.” - Thomas Jefferson, 1787; and

WHEREAS, we collectively repent of distancing ourselves from God and ask for His mercy on us:

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sam Brownback, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF KANSAS, do hereby proclaim December 8th 2012, as a

Day of Restoration

in Kansas and ask every citizen of our state to join in asking a Holy God to bring healing and restoration – help in mending broken lives, bringing peace to our families, our communities, and this land.

DONE: At the Capitol in Topeka
under the Great Seal of the
State this 23rd day of
November, A.D. 2012

BY THE GOVERNOR: Samuel Brownback

Far-Right Leaders Still Condemning "Intrinsically Disordered" Gays and Lesbians While The Rest of the Country Moves Forward

It has been hard to keep up with all of the historic wins for marriage equality in the past few months. Three states passed ballot measures in support of marriage equality, and one rejected a state constitutional amendment banning it. A new CBS News Poll found – consistent with other recent national polls – that a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage. The Supreme Court could announce any day whether it will hear cases related to the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8. It is not hard to see that the tide is turning in our country.

But some people, it seems, are still not getting the memo.

Case in point: Mission America leader Linda Harvey. PFAW’s Right Wing Watch tuned in to Harvey’s daily radio show today and reported on her tired – but disturbing – opinions about what she views as “unnatural” behavior. “Homosexual marriage is wrong because two men together or two women is intrinsically disordered,” Harvey said. “The behavior is unnatural.”

Not to be outdone, televangelist Pat Robertson also shared some homophobic remarks today as he weighed in on the news that two women were married in West Point’s Cadet Chapel. After proclaiming that General Douglas MacArthur, Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee must each be “rolling over in his grave,” he asked: “What have they done to our cherished institution?”

But I have a different question. With the country seeing progress for LGBT communities in cities and states across the country, and with more and more Americans supporting marriage equality, the real question is when these far-right leaders are going to realize that they are on the very wrong side of a losing battle.

PFAW

Wilson: Courts may 'Force Christians to Not Be Able to Celebrate Christmas'

Buster Wilson of the American Family Association as of late has dedicated his radio program to fighting the so-called “War on Christmas,” railing against municipalities that don’t erect Nativity Scenes and stores that say “Happy Holidays.” Of course, Chick-fil-A has so far escaped his wrath even though the company easily fails the AFA’s “War on Christmas” test.

Last week, Wilson made the absurd argument that not having a Nativity Scene on public property is direct a violation of his First Amendment rights of freedom of religion and his God-given rights.

There are people who can put nativity scenes on their front lawns, it’s their private property and if they want to do that, they can do that, why do you have to have the public square as well? Here’s the reason why that’s a problem. The reason why we rebel against that is that the First Amendment of the Constitution gives every individual American the freedom of worship without any possibility of interference from the government. We don’t want the government saying you can do it here. The Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, we declare that these rights are God-given; they are our unalienable rights from our Creator. They are not privileges granted by our government. If they are a privilege granted by the government then the government can number one, regulate it, or number two, take it away, we have unalienable rights.

However, nativity scenes and other religious symbols are allowed on public lands as long as they are part of a larger secular display and do not convey the state sponsorship of religion, something even the conservative American Center for Law and Justice admits:

In Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984), the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of a government-erected crèche. Significantly, the Lynch Court upheld the constitutionality of the holiday display in that case because the crèche was a part of a larger holiday display in which there were a variety of secular symbols.

Today he took it a step further by saying that the courts are actually going to literally prevent people from “celebrating Christmas,” asserting that those pushing the “War on Christmas” are “using the court system of this country to force Christians to not be able to celebrate Christmas at Christmastime.”

He even suggested that President Obama’s attendance at Ramadan fast-breaking dinners shows that Christians are being slighted and Christmas marginalized.

I don’t understand, ‘you’re not the majority anymore, this is not a Christian nation and you’ve guys have got to quit trying to cram everything down people’s throats,’ nobody’s trying to cram—look, it is the folks who don’t want us celebrating Christmas that are cramming that view down our throats and using the courts to do it. So if we don’t want to start cramming things down people’s throats, then why don’t the folks who are opposed to us celebrating Christmas, why don’t they be quiet for a while because they are the ones that are using the court system of this country to force Christians to not be able to celebrate Christmas at Christmastime. I don’t understand it…I don’t get it, you know if you want to celebrate Ramadan, you celebrate Ramadan. The President of the United States of America has a Ramadan dinner with Muslims in the White House of the United States of America and celebrates Islam with those Muslims.

Beck: UN Convention on Rights of the Disabled Sounds Like Something 'Fascistic From the Nazi Days'

As Brian noted last week, the Religious Right is in the middle of making a full-court press on the Senate in an effort to prevent ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities by doing what they always do:  lying about what the convention says and means.

Today, Rick Santorum, who has been leading the fight against ratification, appeared on Glenn Beck's radio program when Beck ominously cited language from the convention proclaiming that "children with disabilities shall be registered immediately after birth" to suggest that something "really Orwellian or, quite honestly, fascistic from the Nazi days" was going on; an assessment with which Santorum heartily agreed:

The most amazing thing about this, and the subsequent discussion in which Beck and his co-hosts wildly speculated about what this and other provisions within the convention "really" mean, is the extent to which their complete ignorance about the actual meaning and intent of such provisions in no way hinders their willingness to boldly make declarations about them. 

Article 18, Section 2 of the Convention the Rights of Persons with Disabilities says that "children with disabilities shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by their parents."  

While Beck and his cronies were busy laughing about the aburd assertion that children have a right to a name and to acquire a nationality, a bit of research would have taught them that such language is rooted in Article 24 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which entered into force in 1976: 

1. Every child shall have, without any discrimination as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, national or social origin, property or birth, the right to such measures of protection as are required by his status as a minor, on the part of his family, society and the State.

2. Every child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have a name.

3. Every child has the right to acquire a nationality.

The main purpose of such rights is to "reduce the danger of abduction, sale of or traffic in children" and "ensure that every child has a nationality when born." 

And here is a news flash for Beck, who seems to thinks that there is something sinister about having the US ratify a document containing such language: as noted above, the provision that every child shall be registered upon birth was first set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ... which the United States ratified in 1992.

So the United States has already ratified a UN convention containing the very language that Beck is now warning is "fascistic" and Naziesque.

Joni Lamb and Janet Boynes describe Homosexuality as Satan's Trap

Televangelist Joni Lamb of Daystar last week hosted Janet Boynes, an ardent ex-gay activist who has made a career telling Religious Right audiences about the Satanic and “ugly” nature of homosexuality. Boynes is also a favorite author of Rep. Michele Bachmann and her book was on display at Marcus Bachmann’s pseudo-clinic.

Lamb opened the program by maintaining that the “thousands” of people “who have come out of homosexuality” and “may be the most discriminated people in the world today.” She went on claim that homosexuality is “ungodly” and “God cannot bless you and you cannot fulfill your destiny while you are operating within the realm of homosexuality.”

The two went on to agree that homosexuality a “trap that the Enemy has set,” and Boynes claimed that gays and lesbians are “walking right into the Enemy’s trap.”

Watch:

Saleem: Gays and Liberals have 'Unholy Alliances' with the Islamic 'Shadow Government'

Phony ex-terrorist Kamal Saleem last week promoted his discredited book, The Blood of Lambs, on pastor Rick Joyner’s show Prophetic Perspectives on Current Events, where he said that the left and an Islamic “shadow government” have formed an “unholy alliance” against him. Saleem has a tendency to accuse his detractors of working on behalf of radical Islamists, even accusing a Christian professor at Calvin College who has debunked his work of being a Muslim Brotherhood agent. Indeed, Saleem believes that Hillary Clinton, college professors, generals in the U.S. military and Obama’s babysitter are all aiding Islamic extremists.

He claimed that major Muslim-American political and affinity groups “are fronts of the Muslim Brotherhood and operate government places linked together to create a shadow government inside the United States of America.”

“Today we the enemy of Islam, the liberal movement, the socialist movement, the communist movement, the women movement, Cod Pink, all of them are coming against me, the Occupy, all of these are coming against me,” he later told Joyner. “They have unholy alliances together with Islam, whether it’s homosexual or baby-killer, all these have unholy alliances.”

Watch:

Robertson on Same-Sex Weddings at West Point: 'What Have They Done to our Cherished Institution?'

Televangelist Pat Robertson mourned the news that a same-sex couple had their wedding at West Point’s Cadet Chapel, asking, “what have they done to our cherished institution?” After the 700 Club’s Lee Webb reported on the story and called it a “sad day,” Robertson said that General Douglas MacArthur, Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee must each be “rolling over in his grave” over the wedding.

Watch:

Harvey: 'Homosexual Marriage is Wrong Because Homosexuality is Wrong'

Today on her daily radio commentary, Linda Harvey sought to understand and explain why marriage equality won at the polls for the first time in last month's election, and the best she could come up with was that gay rights activists are skilled at misleading people while anti-gay activists just haven't been blunt enough about the threat that homosexuality poses to our society through encouraging kids to become gay ... or something:

The homosexual lobby is skillful at manipulating public sympathy by tugging on heartstrings while not telling the whole story. Our side sometimes plays right into their hands by also not telling the whole story, even when we get the chance.

...

Until we deal with the core issue - the behavior of homosexuality - it was probably only a matter of time before our side would lose a few races. We need to get to the real problem. Homosexual marriage is wrong because two men together or two women is intrinsically disordered, the behavior is unnatural. These aren't activities that are beneficial or healthy. Homosexual marriage is wrong because homosexuality is wrong.

There's significant dangers to our youth in this. One thing our culture does not want if it wants to survive is to have its youth corrupted and this is happening in oh so many ways now, and homosexuality is one more.  And here's how it works with homosexuality: since no pregnancy threat exists, some people think there's no reason to prohibit behavior in the young, even the very young. Those who acknowledge no authority from God, who find innocence threatening, are targeting our youth with these messages for some reason.

When are we conservatives going to get serious about making a case to prevent the corruption of kids? And that's one of the big reasons why homosexual marriage is wrong: because the young are raised on the mores and traditions of the adults and if same-sex marriage is accepted, then children will begin to consider dating and forming relationship in these very different ways; ways that will be very destabilizing to many of them and to our society.

WND Columnist Floats Whites-Only Secessionist Movement

Yesterday, WorldNetDaily announced that Rick Santorum will become a regular commentator for the conspiratorial “news” site. And now, the former U.S. Senator and presidential candidate will get to share space with other commentators like Vox Day, who today uses his column to call for a new secessionist political party to resist the growing numbers of racial minorities.

Day was writing about British Prime Minister David Cameron’s resistance to attempts by the Scottish National Party (SNP) for Scotland to leave the UK and a campaign by the UK Independence Party (UKIP) for the country to exit the European Union. He writes that the SNP and UKIP can serve as a model for “white Americans who still hold to traditional values” to start a new country and leave the U.S. He claims that whites have every reason to secede as the “English people and the Scottish people have far more in common than Americans do with the tens of millions of post-1965 immigrants from various non-European nations around the world,” whom he says are ruining America.

There can be little doubt that Cameron’s opinion of UKIP is but a pale shadow of the U.S. bifactional ruling party’s hatred and contempt for white Americans who still hold to traditional values, believe in their constitutional liberties and derive their sense of identity from historical America. They mock the secessionist petitioners in Texas and other states, celebrate the infestation of even the smallest American heartland towns by African, Asian and Aztec cultures, and engage in ruthless doublethink as they worship at the altar of a false and entirely nonexistent equality.

And yet, they are afraid and they threaten every American who dares to think the unthinkable and speak the unspeakable. Why? Because they know time, history and socionomics are not on their side.

Is the secession of several American states truly unthinkable? Is the breakup of the United States of America really outside the boundaries of historically reasonable possibility?

Some would point to the amount of time that has passed since the Civil War, when the question was last considered. It has been 147 years since Americans attempted to exert their right to self-determination and leave the United States. However, it has been 305 years since the Scottish Parliament passed the Union with England Act in 1707, and even if Scotland does not vote to break up the Union in the referendum tentatively scheduled for 2014, the fact that the Scottish people are seriously considering an exit from a Union that is twice as old as the forcible one imposed by Abraham Lincoln should suffice to prove that the age of the U.S. does not render a potential breakup theoretically or practically impossible.

This is especially true given that the English people and the Scottish people have far more in common than Americans do with the tens of millions of post-1965 immigrants from various non-European nations around the world, or their urban enablers. The fact that the future citizens of Aztlán are presently content to continue collecting tribute in the form of state and federal largesse does not mean that they will refrain from exerting the political muscle that their growing demographic weight provides them once the contracting economy brings the gravy train to an end.

It also seems unlikely that the millions of Americans who have moved away from declining school systems, who have retreated from an increasingly vibrant communities, and who have fled from high-tax jurisdictions will continue to retreat as the people who destroyed their schools, their communities and their state budgets attempt to follow them.

They will not because they cannot. The frontiers are closed. There is nowhere else to go.

Janet Porter Takes Aim at Ohio Senate Leader in Last-Ditch Effort to Pass Heartbeat Bill

Janet Porter of Faith 2 Action returned to Ohio to try to enact the nation’s strictest anti-abortion law, the Heartbeat Bill, but it appears that she only managed to divide her fellow abortion rights opponents and anger Republican leaders. In fact, relations between her and the state’s GOP officials have gotten so bad that she is now calling for Republicans in the State Senate to vote out their own leader.

The Heartbeat Bill, which criminalizes abortion in the vast majority of cases, had passed the Ohio State House but was held up in the State Senate. Because the bill is undoubtedly unconstitutional, the state’s largest anti-choice group came out against it, causing local chapters to defect and join a new group Porter had set up to back the bill.

Porter announced endorsements from Republican presidential candidates; brought in Religious Right activists for prayer rallies; wrote an anti-choice version of “99 Red Balloons”; ran ads on TV and in the sky; sent out advertisements attacking “RINO” Republicans; organized prayer warriors and children with teddy bears; claimed that the bill’s passage will allow God to bless America; and had a fetus “testify” at a hearing. One supporter in the State House said the bill was needed so the U.S. can compete with all the smart kids in China – he was later arrested for drunk driving.

In September, Porter pointed to a “miraculous” breakthrough and said that the Senate would consider a new version of the legislation just before the election. But the vote never came and after Ohio went blue and a majority of voters identified themselves as pro-choice, the Republican head of the State Senate Tom Niehaus weighed putting the bill up to a vote until declaring it dead. Porter, in turn, demanded that a Republican senator buck the party leadership and force a vote:

Despite what you have heard about outgoing President Tom Niehaus refusing to honor his word and bring the Heartbeat Bill to the floor for a vote, the Decision of whether the Heartbeat Bill lives or dies is in the hands of the REPUBLICAN MAJORITY--not Tom Niehaus!

If just ONE SENATOR will circulate a discharge petition, and 16 Republican Senators, who ran as pro-lifers, will sign it--the Heartbeat bill will come to the floor for a vote BEFORE Dec. 31, 2012--otherwise it will die!

Today, however, that plan failed as well as a procedural move made it impossible to use a discharge petition, and Niehaus put the blame squarely on Porter for her “over the line” tactics:

Faith2Action, the lead group pushing for the heartbeat bill, has called for GOP senators to sign a discharge petition — a rarely used procedure in which, if a majority of a chamber’s members sign on, a bill can be forced out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. But moving the bill to the Rules Committee effectively blocks that effort because a bill must be in a committee for at least 30 days before a discharge petition can be used. The Senate will adjourn for the year before 30 days pass.

“This bill saw some of the most-intense lobbying efforts in recent memory. That’s fine,” Niehaus said. “But threatening, in my mind, goes over the line. For a small faction of the pro-life community to target the most pro-life group of senators in recent memory was, to me, outrageous.” Niehaus wouldn’t elaborate on specifics of the “threatening” lobbying tactics.

Porter, of course, now wants the GOP caucus to remove Niehaus as GOP leader so they can vote on her bill before it is too late!

ACT TODAY TO SAVE THE HEARTBEAT BILL

It was bad enough when outgoing Ohio Senate President Tom Niehaus broke his promise to give us a floor vote after the November election. Then he put out a press release calling us "bullies" because we have phoned, emailed, and visited our Senators. Now he has pulled another vindictive move to halt the Heartbeat Bill! Niehaus moved the bill to a different committee, to prevent a “Discharge Petition” from being implemented. A Discharge Petition would have forced a floor vote before the bill dies on December 31.

But the other 22 Senate Republicans still have the power to force a floor vote before the Heartbeat Bill dies. They can remove Senator Niehaus from leadership, and install President-elect Keith Faber now (rather than waiting until January when Faber, a Heartbeat Bill supporter, is scheduled to become Senate President).

Assuming that effort fails, Porter and her allies will try to push the bill through the legislature next term:

The bill’s death likely would be only temporary. The House passed the bill this session, and Speaker William G. Batchelder, R-Medina, is returning as speaker. Niehaus is term-limited at the end of the year and will be replaced by Sen. Keith Faber, R-Celina, a strong backer of the bill.

Lori Viars, vice president of Warren County Right to Life who has also worked to pass the bill, took issue with Niehaus’ characterization of their lobbying tactics. “It’s pretty arrogant to call a group of pro-life women ‘bullies’ because we’re phoning, emailing, and visiting our senators. Don’t they work for us?”

Beck: A Dictator Will Seize Power in America Within the Next Five Years

On some days, Glenn Beck comes right out of the gate spitting fire on his radio program and today was just one such day, as yesterday's UN vote to recognize Palestine as a “non-member observer state" prompted Beck to go off about the Muslim Brotherhood-orchestrated power-grab carried out by Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi and the on-going protests that have erupted in response, prompting him to declare that same thing is going to happen in America within five years: "Mark my words, in the next five years you will see this very thing, somebody seizing power [and a] real democracy movement standing up, but who will stand up for them? No one!" 

Fischer & Beisner Say That Not Using Fossil Fuels is an Insult to God

Earlier this month, the Religious Right's favorite climate change-denying "expert," Calvin Beisner of the Cornwall Alliance, appeared on American Family Radio where he declared that believing in climate change "is an insult to God."  Yesterday, when he joined Bryan Fischer on "Focal Point" for yet another discussion about the "myth" of global warming, both he and Fischer declared that failure to use coal, oil, and natural gas is an insulting rejection of the gifts that God has given to us - gifts which, incidentally, He buried deep in the earth because He delights in our search for and discovery of them:

Perkins: Ex-Gay Therapy a 'Nonjudgmental' Way for Gays to Find 'Wholeness'

After his group said that discredited and dangerous sexual orientation conversion therapy is “designed to bring homosexuals out of bondage and into healthy behavior,” Family Research Council president Tony Perkins maintained that such counseling is simply a “compassionate” and “nonjudgmental” way for gays and lesbians to find the “wholeness that has been eluding them in their current lifestyle.”

While speaking today with con man and ex-gay group leader Arthur Goldberg, who once again compared his embattled group to Weight Watchers, on Washington Watch Weekly, Perkins lauded conversion therapy as a way for gays to pursue “this path of wholeness.” Earlier this year, Perkins argued that gays and lesbians seek to “redefine the norms of behavior” because “there is an emptiness within them.”

Goldberg even claimed that gay rights activists are only pretending to claim that sexual orientation cannot be changed as part of a “pre-planned agenda,” and that people who failed at conversion therapy simply didn’t try hard enough.

Goldberg: This was actually part of a pre-planned agenda that was set forth in a book that they wrote called “After the Ball,” I know that one of your most scholarly staff guys Peter Sprigg has written on this and I’ve also written on this, my book is called “Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change,” they spell out an agenda in their in which they say for example, tell people that we’re born gay: ‘We know we’re not gay, we know we’re not born gay, but that doesn’t matter.’

Perkins: This lawsuit, I would say it looks frivolous to me, it’s kind of novel. Their using a consumer law, consumer fraud is what they’re challenging here, that you’re promising one thing and not delivering. It’s kind of outrageous I think. You’ve said that it’s ‘without merit, designed to create a chilling effect upon speech and programs to assist people in overcoming these same-sex attractions.’

Goldberg: Correct. Their theory is basically if someone goes to Weight Watchers and says ‘I want to lose fifty pounds’ and they don’t lose fifty pounds, they’re going to say, ‘oh Weight Watchers you promised me you’d help me lose fifty pounds and I didn’t lose fifty pounds,’ same basic theory.

Perkins: Obviously the outcomes of any type of counseling is in large part determined by the patient following and genuinely perusing this path of wholeness.

Goldberg: Yes. In fact as an example, I don’t want to get into the facts of the case, but one of the plaintiffs talks about ‘I went to five sessions.’ Five sessions, hello? Is that any kind of long term involvement in terms of showing that you’re really serious about wanting to overcome?



Perkins: I think we’ve got to be very clear here. You’re here to help those who want help and it’s a compassionate help, a nonjudgmental help for those seeking a wholeness that has been eluding them in their current lifestyle.

Goldberg: Precisely.

Fischer: Obama is Intentionally Trying to Keep 'As Many Americans As Poor As Possible'

On his radio program yesterday, Bryan Fischer made the entirely reasonable and logical argument that communists like President Obama "have a vested interest in keeping as many Americans as poor as possible" and to prevent them from succeeding in order to keep them dependent on the government.

In fact, Obama's push to help more students attend college, said Fischer, is really just an effort to saddle them with massive student loan debt and a worthless degree so that when they can't find a job, they become "helplessly, hopelessly, slavishly dependent upon government handouts." 

FRC Continues to Obfuscate its Position on Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill

The Family Research Council claimed on its blog today that the group has always opposed Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill, and accused progressive bloggers of having “mischaracterized” a tweet sent by FRC head Tony Perkins praising Uganda’s leadership just as its Parliament is preparing to vote on the notorious legislation.

But while it sends one message to the public, in 2009 the FRC admits to having spent thousands of dollars lobbying for Congress trying to revise and muddy the resolution condemning the bill because they said it would entail “pro-homosexual promotion.” “We didn’t necessarily lobby against or for the resolution but tried to work with offices to make the language more neutral on homosexuality,” FRC’s Tom McClusky said at the time, “the original language was incorrect on what Uganda was doing as well.”

Perkins himself even grossly mischaracterized the legislation and attacked President Obama for speaking out against it.

Does civility require the acceptance of all behavior? Hello, I am Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council. At the recent National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama took the podium calling for greater civility in Washington, which in my opinion is a laudable goal. However, his comments quickly turned to his preoccupation with defending homosexuality.

The President criticized Ugandan leaders for considering enhance penalties for crimes related to homosexuality. The press has widely mischaracterized the law which calls for the death penalty, not for homosexual behavior which is already a crime, but for acts such as intentionally spreading HIV/AIDS, or preying upon vulnerable individuals such as children. The President said that "We may disagree about gay marriage, "but surely we can agree that it is unconscionable to target gays and lesbians for who they are." Mr. President as long as you characterize efforts to uphold moral conduct that protects others and in particular the most vulnerable, as attacking people, civility will continue to evade us.

As we have reported before, the 2009 bill [PDF] (and the current legislation still includes the death penalty language) does indeed make “aggravated homosexuality” a capital crime and the “offence of homosexuality” guarantees life imprisonment.

2. The offence of homosexuality.

(1) A person commits the offence of homosexuality if-

(a) he penetrates the anus or mouth of another person of the same sex with his penis or any other sexual contraption;

(b) he or she uses any object or sexual contraption to penetrate or stimulate sexual organ of a person of the same sex;

(c) he or she touches another person with the intention of committing the act of homosexuality.

(2) A person who commits an offence under this section shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for life.

3. Aggravated homosexuality.

(1) A person commits the offense of aggravated homosexuality where the

(a) person against whom the offence is committed is below the age of 18 years;

(b) offender is a person living with HIV;

(c) offender is a parent or guardian of the person against whom the offence is committed;

(d) offender is a person in authority over the person against whom the offence is committed;

(e) victim of the offence is a person with disability;

(f) offender is a serial offender, or

(g) offender applies, administers or causes to be used by any man or woman any drug, matter or thing with intent to stupefy overpower him or her so as to there by enable any person to have unlawful carnal connection with any person of the same sex,

(2) A person who commits the offence of aggravated homosexuality shall be liable on conviction to suffer death.

(3) Where a person is charged with the offence under this section, that person shall undergo a medical examination to ascertain his or her HIV status.



4, Attempt to commit homosexuality.

(1) A person who attempts to commit the offence of homosexuality commits a felony and is liable on conviction to imprisonment seven years.

(2) A person who attempts to commit the offence of aggravated homosexuality commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for life.



12. Same sex marriage.

A person who purports to contract a marriage with another person of the same sex commits the offence of homosexuality and shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for life.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious