Fighting the Right

Huelskamp 'Not Convinced' Sandy Relief Bill Is Necessary; Claims Obama's Policies are Akin to Communism

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) appeared on the radio show of American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer today where the far-right congressman said he found no reason for a Sandy relief bill, arguing that FEMA “can’t spend all the [money] quick enough.” Of course, FEMA just today said that the flood insurance program is about to run out of funds and officials from Sandy-affected states roundly criticized the House Republican leadership for refusing to put the urgent care package up to a vote. But the congressman maintained the bill is “loaded up with pork” and that he is “not convinced yet” that a Sandy relief package is needed, seemingly dumbfounded that “for some reason” people want the aid.

While discussing the fiscal cliff deal, Huelskamp told Fischer that Obama has the view that “government should run everything” which he got straight from “the communist centers of the world.” “Far too many of my Republican colleagues don’t understand that about the President, what his ultimate goals are,” Huelskamp said, “that’s frustrating given that we know where the President is at.”

A Math and Reading Comprehension Lesson for David Barton

David Barton's tendency to utterly misrepresent things in order to promote his own right-wing political agenda is well-established, but it never hurts to keep documenting examples, especially since he continues to provide them on a regular basis.

On today's broadcast of "WallBuilders Live," for instance, Barton claimed that the reason President Obama won re-election was because voters "were not thinking right."  And one of the reasons voters don't "think right" is because the higher education system is dominated by Obama supporters, as demonstrated by the fact that, according to Barton, 96% of the professors at Ivy League colleges donated to Obama's campaign:

After the election, we had those two days where we talked about it afterwards and we went through a lot of the numbers just showing that people were not thinking right.  They voted according to what they thought, but they were thinking wrong about so many areas.

And so, if we're going to change the direction of the nation and the way its headed, we have to change the way people think.  It's real simple. 

What are the areas that cause us to think the way we do?  Well, the media is one, education is one, the pulpit is one.  There are several areas that help us shape the way we think.  Now, I will point out, if we're looking for help out of universities, it ain't going to happen.

This is a report that I just read that is kind of amazing: 96% of the faculty at the elite colleges donated to President Obama ... Not just voted; 96% of faculty donated.

So you have 96% of faculty who donated to the Obama campaign; 96% from the elite colleges.  So if we're looking to get help out of the schools, that ain't going to happen.

You will be undoubtedly be surprised to learn that the report to which Barton referred found not that 96% of faculty donated to Obama but rather that 96% of the donations made by faculty and staff from the Ivy League schools went to the Obama campaign.

Think about it: if only one donation was made by a faculty member from a particular university and it went to the Obama campaign, then the percentage of donations coming from that university that went to Obama would be 100%. But that doesn't mean that 100% of the faculty at that university donated to Obama, which is the claim that Barton is making.

Considering that Barton is a former math teacher, you'd think he'd be a little better at math.

Tea Party Nation: Obama 'Hates America'

Tea Party Nation head Judson Phillips goes full Dinesh D’Souza today in his daily email to members, warning that President Obama “hates America” because he “looks at America through his Marxist background” and wants to destroy it by sabotaging the economy. He tells TPN supporters that Obama seeks “the power to be a dictator” in order to introduce “tyranny” and “completely bring down the American economy and possibly the American state.”

What he really wants is the power to be a dictator.

Barack Obama does not like the American system of government. He doesn’t like our founding fathers either. Our founding fathers were very wise. They dealt with tyranny in their lifetime. The fundamental purpose of the way they set up our government was not to be efficient or even to accommodate rapid change.

It was to block the accumulation of power by one man.

Barack Obama wants to change this.



Obama does not love America. He hates America. He looks at America through his Marxist background and sees not the greatest nation in the world. He does not see the country that has done more good for more people than any other nation. He sees the evil oppressive power that Marxists always view America as.

By continuing to borrow money, unabated, he knows sooner or later debt will completely bring down the American economy and possibly the American state.

There is a deeper battle here as well.

If Barack Obama and the Party of Treason can beat the Republicans down to the point where they abdicate or at least refuse to fight for their Constitutionally mandated role in controlling the purse, America will no longer have three co-equal branches of government.

If Obama wins this next battle, it will fundamentally transform America and our government. Which is exactly what he said he wanted to do when he ran in 2008. Obama has spoken several times, almost longingly talking about how he wishes he had dictatorial powers. Now, here is his chance.

The legislative branch, instead of being equal to the executive will now become inferior and submissive. The tyranny of the strong leader that our founding fathers feared will have materialized here in America.

Thanks to House GOP, New Year Starts Without Violence Against Women Act

Back in April, the Senate passed  a reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which since 1994 has provided funding and training for state and local law enforcement to prevent domestic violence and sexual assault. The law has worked incredibly well: between 1993 and 2010, the rate of intimate partner violence fell by 67 percent and the reporting of domestic violence has increased dramatically.

But this week, the Violence Against Women Act expires because House Republicans refused to reauthorize it. They refused even to hold a vote on it, instead proposing a watered-down bill that the president promised to veto. What they objected to were the new bill’s increased protections for immigrants, LGBT people and Native American women, which Majority Leader Eric Cantor characterized as “issues that divide us.”

Now the new Congress will have to start the process of reauthorizing VAWA all over again. Until they do, women across the country will be left without the safety net that VAWA provides.

PFAW

Swanson: Obama's Reelection 'Solidified our Doom' and Empowered 'Softy-Wofty, Weeny Socialists'

On the latest episode of Generations Radio, Pastor Kevin Swanson recounted the Religious Right’s political drubbings last year, especially the failure to defeat President Obama. He claimed Obama’s re-election “solidified our doom” and will encourage the election of “a bunch of softy-wofty, weeny socialists for the years to come.” Swanson maintained that women put Obama over the top because they tend to have “more communist” views. Later his cohost, pastor Dave Buehner, agreed and said Obama “doesn’t have a mandate; he’s got a woman-date. The men didn’t vote for him, it was the women who voted for him.”

They further speculated that TIME had trouble deciding whether to name Obama or North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un “Man of the Year” since they are “both committed to Marx.”

Swanson: It solidified our doom, it effectively said there is no way out of this thing at least for the time being unless we get back to the foundations, reconstruct the foundations, which is something we’ve been talking about for a long time. Unless we rebuild families, fatherhood, young men, unless we bring back manhood, a biblical manhood, we are going to be a bunch of softy-wofty, weeny socialists for the years to come. That’s what’s going to happen. It’s going to be the single women that run most of the households in America voting and they almost always vote more socialist, more government, more communist, because they find their security in the state and not in the social structure of that family. Dave, we’re headed in that election. I think the 2012 election really was a turning point for America.



Swanson: The man has tremendous influence. He has got a mandate; he’s got a lot of support—

Buehner: He doesn’t have a mandate; he’s got a woman-date. The men didn’t vote for him, it was the women who voted for him, which is why he’s their ‘Man of the Year.’

Swanson: He’s got a woman-date, big time. You know, the North Korean president got the most votes from the audience for ‘Man of the Year,’ he was a close second. If you had a choice between Barack Obama and the North Korean president, they’re both committed to Marx. They are, think about it. If you interviewed both of them and you said: what do you think about Marx and the redistribution of wealth? Remember what he said on that radio station in Chicago, Barack Obama some ten years ago, he said they should have had redistribution of the wealth in the Constitution. He is so committed to Marxism and so is the North Korean president, but it was a tossup for TIME Magazine.

After attacking Obama’s “woman-date,” they then went on to ridicule Sandra Fluke. Buehner later falsely claimed that the health care reform law included “free access” to abortifacients, and said Fluke didn’t win TIME’s honor because “there’s some question about how ladylike she might be.” Swanson wondered if Fluke is a woman at all.

Buehner: This is the year that we learned that it is a fundamental right for women to get free access and their abortifacients provided free. Sandra Fluke was there telling us how it’s unconscionable that women would have to pay.

Swanson: Time did not make her ‘Woman of the Year’ though; I’d like to point that out. I think that’s a positive.

Buehner: Well there’s some question about how ladylike she might be.

Swanson: So they were like, ‘Man of the Year,’ ‘Woman of the Year,’ we’re not exactly sure.

Buehner: Yeah, you know.

Swanson: I understand.

The Christian Right activists later went on to mock Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was recently hospitalized for a blood clot, with Buehner joking that her recent medical problems were a “dog ate her homework” excuse and that “her tummy’s upset.” Swanson expressed shock that Egypt elected a Muslim president and said that Clinton is elated over the election of a Muslim because “it involves killing Christians.” They agreed that Clinton “might even put on a burka” to put Christian-killing Muslims in power, which makes sense because that’s what any “softy-wofty” would do.

Swanson: The Egyptians placed a Muslim into the presidency, which does not bode well for freedom in America. Dave, I wonder what the Secretary of State of the United States thinks about the election in Egypt. I mean, they were pretty excited about the revolution.

Buehner: They were, the Arab Spring. And Hillary Clinton the Secretary of State was unavailable for comment. It turns out that she slipped on something and maybe banged her head—dog ate her homework. She’s not feeling well, her tummy’s upset and she’s not going to make a comment.

Swanson: It’s a sad, sad day in Egypt.

Buehner: The Muslim Brotherhood, not just a Muslim but a Muslim Brotherhood, we’re talking about the radical jihadists.

Swanson: So Egypt, out of the frying pan and into the fire for Egypt. I’m afraid that a lot of these secularist nations are going to flip-flop from secularism into hardcore Muslimism and that’s not going to be a very nice transition because the Muslims have never really been known to be much kinder than the secularists, socialists and communists that have ruled these nations.

Buehner: No, they tend to be a little on the violent edge.

Swanson: If you were Hillary Clinton and you had a choice between a Christian president and a Muslim president, which would you go for?

Buehner: If I was Hillary? Well Hillary would choose the Muslim.

Swanson: Oh yeah, of course. It involves killing Christians, I mean yeah.

Buehner: She might even put on a burka to get that done.

Swanson: Yeah.

Klingenschmitt: Gingrich Under Influence of 'Demonic Voice' for Gay Marriage Statement

It seems that Religious Right anti-gay activist "Chaplain" Gordon Klingenschmitt, perhaps best known for claiming to have freed a lesbian soldier from homosexuality after performing an exorcism on her, has started producing a daily television program that consists of him filming himself talking about the news of the day. 

On episode two of his new series, Klingenschmitt took issue with the recent statement from Newt Gingrich saying that the GOP has to adjust to changing opinions on the issue of marriage equality, claiming that Gingrich is doing so because he is trying to "present himself as the left-wing, moderate Republican candidate" for 2016. 

Klingenschmitt went on to say that since the Bible says that "homosexual acts are worthy of death," Gingrich himself is now condemned for having endorsed it and declares that Gingrich has been influenced by a "demonic voice" in taking this position.

But perhaps the most amazing thing about the video is the revelation that Gingrich personally reached out to Klingenschmitt during his presidential run in 2012 and sought his advice:

Glenn Beck and his Chalkboard Explain Sandy Hook and the Fiscal Cliff

Glenn Beck returned to the airways last night for the first time since before both the "fiscal cliff" deal and the Sandy Hook tragedy and hauled out the chalkboard to lay out his grand theory explaining it all.  He spent an hour rambling about the importance of the reason "why" people do things, going off on tangents about everything from Apple stores to faded t-shirts to fake rust painted on signs at Disney World, all in an effort to explain how both the fiscal cliff situation and the reporting on Sandy Hook were driven by "incompetence, power, and greed" because nobody wants to talk about the real issues, such as how all the Democrats and Republicans in Congress ought to be tried for treason and how video games are turning the nation's children into "zombie killers who are practically dead inside":

WND: Roberts Should Refuse to Swear In Obama

After unsuccessful attempts to knock President Obama off the ballot and defeat Obama after the election by throwing the Electoral College into chaos, WorldNetDaily now is petitioning Chief Justice John Roberts to refuse to administer the presidential oath of office. WND commentator Craige McMillan said that if Roberts doesn’t withhold the oath, he will face “impeachment and eternal dishonor.” He even compared the current state of the U.S. to Nazi Germany by warning that America will have its own Nuremberg Trials to prosecute those who had been “violating their own oath of office, continu[ing] the sham through a second presidential term”

Dear Mr. Roberts,

When you administered the oath of office to Barack Obama for his first term as president, you could have been excused for believing that Mr. Obama was qualified under the Constitution to hold the office of president, which he had sought and won. After all, Obama’s opponent, John McCain, never raised the issue of Mr. Obama’s qualifications.

Now that Mr. Obama has been re-elected and is preparing to serve a second term of office, there can be no doubt regarding his qualifications. This is because by Mr. Obama’s own admission, his father was of Kenyan nationality and perhaps holding British citizenship as well.



Your own oath of office, sworn before God and the American people, requires you to uphold the Constitution. (If not you, then who?) If you now administer the oath of office for the presidency to a man who by his own admission fails to meet the natural born citizen requirement imposed by that Constitution, you have violated your own oath of office and are rightly subject to impeachment by any House of Representatives, at any time, now or in the future.

If you choose the easy course of ignoring our Constitution, it does not change the fact that Mr. Obama is barred by that same Constitution from acting as president. I am sure that if you turn your judicial mind to the ramifications of this fraud, both foreign and domestic, you will understand that the harm you will have done insures your impeachment and eternal dishonor at some point down the road: If not this House of Representatives, then the next, or the next, or the next.

These things do not end well. One need only look to the aftermath of World War II and the Nuremberg Trials to see what awaits. Illegal wars. Illegal debts. Illegal laws. Will the rest of the Supreme Court’s justices, now knowing they are violating their own oath of office, continue the sham through a second presidential term? How, then, is the highest court of law in the nation any different than that pictorial proverb in Japan of the three monkeys who see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil?

Given the gravity of this situation, we therefore urge you to take the honorable course of action and refuse to administer the oath of office to Mr. Obama. And yes, this will also require you to explain to the nation in the clearest possible terms why you have been compelled to take this most extraordinary action.

Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice, for your consideration.

Fischer: Fiscal Cliff Legislation is 'Demonic'

Bryan Fischer is not at all pleased with the legislation passed last night by the House of Representatives in an effort to avoid the "fiscal cliff, "declaring that it is a violation of the Ten Commandments' prohibition on covetousness, meaning that the Democratic Party is driven by a "Satanic" ideology and the resulting legislation is "demonic":

Erik Rush Suggests Founders Would Hang 'Evil' Obama for Seeking to 'Enslave Us'

Conservative writer and frequent Fox News guest Erik Rush is so completely off the deep end that we really aren’t all that surprised by his latest column where he suggests that the Founders would have hanged President Obama and that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid “deserves” to be dragged behind a truck. This time, Rush is upset about the fiscal cliff negotiations and the possibility of new gun laws which he warns are both part of a global plot by Marxists, corporations and bankers to destroy America.

The pretense of the ongoing “fiscal cliff” negotiations (this term itself having been coined by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, a big-government economist from academia) are one of the more poignant examples of this ruse. As the machinations of the Obama administration (punctuated by the President’s smug self-assuredness) and the impotent Republican leadership are given center stage, the hows and whys of our arrival here are not being discussed at all. Senate Majority Leader Harry “I-so-deserve-to-be-dragged-behind-a-pickup-truck” Reid likens House Speaker John Boehner to a “dictator,” and the surreal character of this utterance in the face of America’s current predicament should be what the press is covering, but they’re operating in a slightly different modality right now.



This week, I heard a conservative radio commentator refer to liberals with gun control sentiments that were “perhaps well-intended.” I was mortified. The stark reality is staring us in the face: We are under the yoke of evil men who intend to enslave us, and one of the few barriers left to them is the Second Amendment. There is no more room for the naïveté of the “well-intended.”

Black Americans, who should be among the most ardent supporters of gun rights, have fallen into mind-numbing lockstep with their liberal overseers. Following the school massacre in Connecticut on December 14, vapid black entertainers, career activists, and tranquilized black masses climbed aboard the Obama administration’s Gun Control Express without hesitation. Last week, the ever-odious societal parasite Rev. Al Sharpton announced his plans to protest the National Rifle Association in support of stronger gun control laws.

The elephant (or the communist, if you prefer) in the room behind all of the machinations I have described is that the federal government, already grown to Cyclopean proportions over the last hundred years by self-seeking narcissists, is under the control of abject radical Marxists and a kitchen cabinet of global socialists and crony corporate and banking interests intent upon transforming the very globe into a sterile dystopia.

For years, Americans have accepted the dictates of fiat regulatory agencies fabricated by our presidents, which have no constitutional authority to regulate anything. These have done little more than stultify the economy, attenuate our liberties, and bleed taxpayer resources under the pretext of operating for our own good. New federal regulations – recently called “illegal and unconstitutional” by veteran commentator Charles Krauthammer – are hitting the books every week; they all threaten to further cripple the economy, and indeed are calculated to do so, yet, when the axe falls, most Americans won’t even know that they were a factor. Using these regulations, an army of czars, and the instrument of the Executive Order, Barack Obama has become a veritable dictator.

This isn’t a time for discretion, subtlety, or conciliation. It is a time for calling out our government for what it is, and – as the Founders of our nation did – disengage from those who are too stupid or cowardly to resist slavery. Few in Congress, Democrat or Republican, and likely none of the current administration would escape hanging were America’s founders on the scene at present.

Geller: 'How Long do Jews have in Obama's America?'

Leave it to Pamela Geller to warn that under President Obama, Jewish Americans will face immense persecution as it won’t be long “before we can’t walk down the street with a kippah or a Star of David.” She even suggested that the U.S. may soon ethnically cleanse Jews to create “Judenrein” areas. Perhaps Geller should ask the nearly 70 percent of Jewish Americans who backed Obama’s re-election why they voted for their own imminent demise.

What was once unthinkable is now not just thinkable, but entirely possible. When I was a child, I remember sitting in the backseat of the family car listening in on my parents’ conversation. I am not sure what led to the following exchange, but I never forgot it. My father said, “Nothing is forever.” And my mother said, “Nothing?” He repeated: “Nothing.” And my mother thought for a moment and asked, “Not even America?” He said, “Not even America.”

At that time the idea that America could fall was inconceivable to her (and to me). America – freedom – was forever.

But that is not so. And scarier still is the tenuous status of Jews in America. It’s hard not to draw parallels to persecuted Jews in once-friendly nations and their subsequent persecution, expulsion and slaughter. To think that Poland was once the Israel of Europe. Millions of Jews made Poland their home and had a long history there of over a thousand years. And in three short years … complete annihilation.

German Jews, meanwhile, were so very vested in the motherland they considered themselves Germans before Jews. They were war heroes for Germany in World War I.

How long do Jews have in Obama’s America? How long before we can’t walk down the street with a kippah or a Star of David? This is already reality for Belgium Jews, Swedish Jews and French Jews. Large portions of Norway are already Judenrein.

Proud Jews at Berkeley or the University of California Irvine can give you a glimpse of how things can turn, quickly, in America as well. Now that America itself has turned, everything is up for grabs.

Beck's New Year's Resolution: Anyone Who Mentions Obama is Fired

Glenn Beck returned from his lengthy holiday vacation to announce a new policy for his daily three-hour radio program: anyone who mentions the name of President Obama or plays any audio from him is fired:

Larry Pratt's Remedy for School Shootings: More Spanking

Gun Owners of America head Larry Pratt went back on VCY America’s Crosstalk, where he last month insisted that the health care reform law was meant to “take away your guns,” to talk to host Jim Schneider about the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

Pratt agreed with a caller who said that drugs such as Prozac were leading people to kill and another caller wondered if drugs are “raising a bunch of Manchurian candidates.” A man purporting to be Lanza’s uncle had claimed that he was using an antipsychotic drug, Fanapt, but the “uncle” turned out to be an imposter.

Just as many other right-wing commentators blamed the Newtown massacre on the public school system, even though Lanza was homeschooled, Pratt suggested that corporal punishment, along with the arming of teachers, would ensure that schools aren’t “death traps for kids.”

Caller: These kids are on psychotropic drugs, mainly Prozac, which makes them homicidal or suicidal and a lot of the teachers who can’t handle these kids are recommending that they go in for psychiatric treatment and next thing you know they are on these drugs.

Pratt: The teachers aren’t allowed to spank them anymore, which didn’t have any long lasting effects other than, ‘I don’t want that to happen again so I’ll behave in the future.’ But the drugs, as you were getting to I think change their minds.



Caller: I also wanted to know on the coattails of the gentleman that mentioned Prozac: are we raising a bunch of Manchurian candidates?

Pratt: That’s a valid question. I guess there could be long-term damage done by these drugs that may not manifest themselves until sometime in the future because of who knows what stimulus that occurs. But it’s just a very dangerous thing to be playing with the makeup of people’s minds. It’s so avoidable, all we have do is admit that children need discipline, they respond well to it and then things are much more under control. We’ve lost control of our schools in so many places in the United States and it really could be addressed effectively and we refuse to. It’s almost equivalent to the refusal to talk about using drugs in self-defense and making it so teachers, principals and janitors could be armed at schools. ‘Everybody knows that guns and children don’t mix,’ well no, actually everybody doesn’t know that, and in fact that notion, as I have said before today, that notion is unhappily the big reason why schools are such death traps for kids.

After warning against government “confiscation” of firearms, Pratt floated debunked conspiracy theories about the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security purchasing ammunition for nefarious reasons and maintained that all policing on the federal level is unconstitutional.

Pratt: I think the more people invest in protecting themselves in this fashion, paying all this money for firearms to defend themselves, any call for confiscation such as came from the Governor of New York and I gather other politicians as well is going to be met with, shall we say, no respect.

Schneider: Perhaps on that issue there have been a number of stories that have come out recently that the US government is just buying up massive rounds of ammunition. One story indicated the Department of Homeland Security has purchased over a billion rounds of hollow point ammunition for domestic purposes, not for military purposes. Some stories have indicated that even the Social Security Administration has purchased 174,000 rounds of ammo. Is there any truth for this or is this some kind of hype that’s out of control?

Pratt: The reports continue and they are in the mainline press. When you read about the Social Security buying large quantities of ammunition, whatever for? Did somebody lose their check and they’re going to go shoot them up? What exactly is it that Social Security Administration needs a police force at all let alone buying that many rounds? Target practice I don’t think consumes that many and frankly they shouldn’t be having target practices, they shouldn’t have police forces at the federal level, those are not constitutional.

Anti-Gay Coalition Leader Cites Murder Rate to Oppose Marriage Equality

Last month, anti-gay groups in Illinois formed the Coalition to Protect Children and Marriage to oppose impending legislation to legalize same-sex marriage in the state. Coalition leader Paul Caprio of Family-PAC spoke to Sandy Rios today and warned that the gay rights bill will cause more children to go into foster care and seek state assistance. He even pointed to the city of Chicago’s murder rate as a reason to oppose marriage equality.

Listen: 

We think it’s important that we block this in the state of Illinois. We know that there have been several referendums recently in other more progressive states, frankly more liberal states, where this has passed by narrow margins, but we feel that it’s very important to stand up. You know, it’s interesting, when you stop to think about it what should the interest of the state be relative to the issue of marriage? The state, more than anyone, should be looking at marriage in terms of protection of children if for no other reason that if children are not protected, and children need foster care or they need DCF [Department for Children and Families] assistance, it costs the state so much more money. Just looking at it from the point of view from the state, not the point of view that we look at things from, including the moral perspective of this issue, but it’s really interesting when you stop to think about it. Chicago, it was announced yesterday, is murder capital of the United States: 506 murders. We have the second highest unwed—or children out of wedlock birth rate, of any major city in the United States, right behind Detroit. All of these things are for reasons and one of the major reasons is the breakdown and the lack of a stable family for children.

Ryan Dobson Defends his Father's Comments About Sandy Hook, Calling Him 'a Man who is Making a Stand for Righteousness'

Shortly after the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School, James Dobson weighed in to declare that the shooting was evidence that God has "allowed judgment to fall upon us" because the nation has turned its back on him by accepting things like abortion and gay marriage.

Those remarks, not surprisingly, generated some controversy and so, last Friday, Ryan Dobson sought to set the record straight on "Dr. James Dobson's Family Talk" radio broadcast where he asserted that his father's remarks were taken out of context and that he is the victim of an agenda-driven effort to smear him:

Some of our listeners may have seen some of the buzz on-line, especially on our Facebook page, surrounding comments made by my dad right here on the Family Talk broadcast following the Sandy Hook Elementary tragedy that took place on Friday, December 14th.  But believe it or not, people with their own personal agenda have splattered all over the internet and the blogosphere that my dad, Dr. James Dobson, said that God caused the murder of those children and those adults and let me tell you that is a lie, and I believe that is an intentional distortion of my dad's words and it's taken totally out of context.

There have been a lot of accusations aimed at my dad over the years; he is called hateful and a bigot, all kinds of vile things that I would never repeat on the air and I always ask people [to] just quote him. Show me where ... I mean, if he's that hateful, if he's that mean of a person, he's been on air for thirty-five years, he's written over eighty book, if that's who he is, you should have volumes of evidence to bring forth, but there's nothing there!

I just want to say to our friends and our listeners, if you see something distributed about my dad that is outlandish, please consider the source. A lot of these bloggers and online columnists have an agenda and they are just throwing bricks at a man who is making a stand for righteousness.

Of course, our entire original post was built on directly quoting James Dobson himself saying that Sandy Hook was God's judgment:

Our country really does seem in complete disarray. I'm not talking politically, I'm not talking about the result of the November sixth election;  I am saying that something has gone wrong in America and that we have turned our back on God.

I mean millions of people have decided that God doesn't exist, or he's irrelevant to me and we have killed fifty-four million babies and the institution of marriage is right on the verge of a complete redefinition.  Believe me, that is going to have consequences too. 

And a lot of these things are happening around us, and somebody is going to get mad at me for saying what I am about to say right now, but I am going to give you my honest opinion: I think we have turned our back on the Scripture and on God Almighty and I think he has allowed judgment to fall upon us.  I think that's what's going on.

How the NRA is Working with Senate Republicans to Block Judicial Nominees

The New York Times’ Linda Greenhouse has a great blog post up on the National Rifle Association’s little-known role in influencing Senate votes on federal judicial nominees. Greenhouse focuses on the NRA’s effort to scare Republican Senators away from voting for the Supreme Court nominations of Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan – neither of whom had any actual Second Amendment record – and its successful effort to frustrate the DC Circuit nomination of Caitlin Halligan, who had once represented the state of New York in a gun control case.

These are the most prominent examples of the NRA’s efforts to keep qualified judicial nominees off the federal bench without reason. But there are plenty more examples out there. One of the most appalling is that of Elissa Cadish, who President Obama nominated to fill a district court seat in Nevada back in February. The NRA immediately got to work to stop Cadish’s nomination. Why? One month before the Supreme Court’s Heller decision – in which it overturned decades of case law to state that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to own firearms – Cadish correctly answered a questionnaire about the current state of Second Amendment law. At the time, Cadish correctly stated that the law that she would follow as a district court judge did not include the individual right to bear firearms. After Heller, she clarified that she would of course follow current law, which now did include this right.

This was a sign of proper judicial restraint – district court judges are in the business of applying the law as interpreted by higher courts – but to the NRA it was an excuse to bring down a judicial nominee. The gun group strong-armed Nevada Sen. Dean Heller into opposing the nomination and that was that. Heller refused to give his permission for the Senate Judiciary Committee to even hold a hearing on Cadish (permission is traditionally required from both home-state senators), and her nomination foundered.

The NRA didn’t get involved with these judicial nominations because it had substantive reasons to oppose the nominees. It got involved because it is, in effect, a codependent wing of the Republican party. Greenhouse points out that it was Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell who reached out to the NRA about opposing Sotomayor, rather than the other way around. Senate Republicans want to stop President Obama from filling seats on the federal courts. They then used the NRA as a useful bludgeon to keep in line senators who might consider being reasonable. The NRA and the Republican leadership get what they want from this relationship. The rest of us get a gridlocked Senate, a vacancy crisis in the federal courts and nation awash in firearms.

PFAW

Thank You from PFAW Founder Norman Lear

Please take a moment to watch this end-of-the-year thank you message for you and all of PFAW's wonderful supporters around the world from PFAW founder Norman Lear:

year end donate

PFAW

Circuit Court Rejects Attack on Contraception Coverage

The 10th Circuit rejects the argument that an employer's religious liberty is substantially burdened by the contraception coverage requirement.
PFAW Foundation

Gun Advocates Now Worried They'll Be Victims of Hate Crimes?

We have to admit that things are getting very confusing when right-wing gun advocates are now worrying that criticism of their agenda is putting them at risk of becoming victims of hate crimes:

Statements made by broadcasters including CNN’s Piers Morgan and MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, as well as comments on social media have contributed to an environment of hate directed against law-abiding Americans who are being demonized for a crime they did not commit, said Joseph P. Tartaro, the president of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation.

Morgan called one national gun rights leader Larry Pratt, the executive director of Gun Owners of America: “an unbelievably stupid man,” he said.

Matthews suggested gun owners are, “..people on the far-right (who) never lose their passion…Normal people have other interests like their spouses, their lives, their children, and even their generalized politics isn’t driven by one issue,” he said

...

“This kind of rhetoric does not contribute to any rational discussion,” [Alan M. Gottlieb, SAF executive vice president] said.

“Vitriol like this only promotes hate, but apparently it’s okay to perpetuate bigotry so long as you are an anti-gunner, and a liberal. If anyone is harmed as a result of this hate campaign, we expect them to be prosecuted under the hate crimes laws,” he said.

“If this hate speech leads to hate crimes,” Gottlieb concluded, “people like Piers Morgan and Chris Matthews will be partly responsible.”

Of course, actual hate crimes legislation only applies to crimes commited on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or disability; gun ownership does not qualify.

'Prophets' Forecasted Romney Victory Until He Lost

Not only were many conservative leaders confidently predicting a comfortable Romney victory in last month’s elections but so were many Religious Right activists who cloaked the imminent Romney win in spiritual terms. Even the “Bible Code” pointed to a Romney presidency! Of course, President Obama ended up winning re-election and these predictions were quickly forgotten by those who made them.

But Rick Joyner is still perplexed that Romney lost given that all of his fellow “prophets” thought he’d win. In his “Word of the Week” bulletin, Joyner said he was “sorry that we did not do better in understanding this election” and wonders why he knew “a lot of prophetic people who fully expected Romney to win the election.”

The only explanation Joyner thought of was that while Christians were united against Obama like never before, they were just too afraid to vote for a Mormon.

Because the 2012 elections continue to be a source of confusion to many, we will address a couple of more lessons to learn from this to finish out this year. Then we will begin the New Year with possibly unprecedented opportunities to see our nation turn to the Lord for the greatest harvest in history.

I know a lot of prophetic people who fully expected Romney to win the election. Of those I communicated with about the election, I do not know of any who gave a prophecy that Romney would win, but it was an almost universal opinion. I did not even seek a word from the Lord about it myself because I felt that I already had His opinion. That was a huge presumption.

Bob Jones had an encounter with the Lord on January 16, 2012 in which the Lord asked him what he thought about having a Mormon for President. This was long before the Republican nomination had been decided, and Bob’s response was that he did not think very much of it. Bob held to that opinion until after the nomination was won by Romney, and then he believed that he must have been wrong and that Romney must be God’s choice. After the election, he realized how he had let his own opinions cancel out what the Lord was trying to show him in the first place.

Bob is the most seasoned and wise prophetic person I know, and in great wisdom, he embraced this correction. Even the greatest prophets still see in part and prophesy in part. We have had many prophetic words come true exactly as they were given, but we misinterpreted them until they were fulfilled. I still consider interpretation one of the greatest weaknesses in the prophetic ministry, but it was also this way throughout history, including biblical history. Even so, I believe we must do better with interpreting what we are being shown prophetically.

Some would interpret the question that Bob was asked by the Lord to mean that the Lord did not want a Mormon as President, but that is not what the Lord said either. In fact, the Lord did not say anything, but just asked a question. That question may have been the ultimate question that in fact decided the election. Maybe we should have spent far more attention trying to answer that question than we did. I’m not saying that it was, but it could have been. Romney could have been God’s choice, but I know many good Christians who did not vote because they said they could not vote for a Mormon.



This past election was too good of an opportunity to learn to sweep it under the rug. I feel that I have learned something profound almost every day since the election. Wisdom and understanding are worth much more than gold or silver. I am sorry that we did not do better in understanding this election, but I love the correction because of what I’m learning. If we learn our lessons from this, they could save us in far more crucial times to come. I hope this is helpful, and I have a bit more to share next week.

Or, maybe Romney really did win but Obama stole the election.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious