Fighting the Right

Boykin Explains Sandy Hook: 'When You Remove God, it is Always Replaced with Evil'

At the end of last year, MorningStar Ministires hosted a New Year's Conference featuring presentations from Rick Joyner, Kamal Saleem, Jerry Boykin, and others.  Clips from that conference have now begun showing up on the MorningStar TV website like this one featuring Boykin explaining that the massacre at Sandy Hook was not at all surprising because "when you remove God, it is always replaced with evil" and placing the blame on video games and pornography, which he claims inevitably leads people to bestiality and pedophilia:

Mefferd and LaBarbera Agree Gay Rights Supporters Don't Show 'Compassion' to People with HIV

For decades, the gay community and its allies have been doing incredible work combating HIV/AIDS and providing care for people with the virus, but according to anti-gay activists Janet Mefferd and Peter LaBarbera, gay rights supporters have tried to whitewash the epidemic and show little compassion to HIV-positive people.

While discussing LaBarbera’s “20 Resolutions for Pro-Family Advocates Battling the Homosexual-Transgender Agenda in 2013” on her radio show, Mefferd said that the Religious Right had an opening to exploit the issue of HIV/AIDS “because we’ll say, we care about people who are having terrible diseases because of the behavior and where is the compassion on your side for these people who have these illnesses?”

Of course, Mefferd and LaBarbera have both defended efforts to criminalize LGBT status, which only exacerbates the spread of HIV.

LaBarbera: Boy, about fifty years ago the whole issue of homosexual behavior was taboo. Now, they are basically running society, they are deciding which issues get covered on the news, which people get to speak at inaugurals, I mean wow, this country is really de-Christianizing fast.

Mefferd: That’s right. One of the things you’ve mentioned and this is one of your resolutions as well, but you mention the fact that we don’t talk very much at all anymore about the health consequences of the behavior. It used to be in the ’80s when then AIDS crisis was at its peek peak at the time, when Elizabeth Taylor and everybody came out and they had the red ribbons at every awards show and everything, everybody wanted to raise money and solve the AIDS crisis; people aren’t talking about AIDS anymore and yet it is still an issue, isn’t it? We still have venereal diseases and all kinds of bad health consequences to this, how are they successful and able to get this whole subject to be something we don’t talk about anymore?

LaBarbera: Well, it’s just the media, they have the media in their pocket and so the media is like a massive affirmative action program for the gay agenda, the media does not want to talk about the obvious connection between homosexual behavior and sexual diseases, especially for men. I put in my point four on my list, you know getting back to the behavior, try Googling ‘MSM, ‘CDC’ and ‘HIV,’ and you get this laundry list of articles about the strong, disproportionate connection between men who have sex with men and sexual diseases like HIV.

Mefferd: And on that point we could really make a lot of progress because we’ll say, we care about people who are having terrible diseases because of the behavior and where is the compassion on your side for these people who have these illnesses? This is awful.

LaBarbera: Absolutely.

This post has been updated, 1/16.

Tea Party Nation: Colin Powell Needs 'To Get His Alzheimer's Treated Already'

Tea Party Nation president Judson Phillips emailed members an article yesterday entitled, “What The F#@$ Is Up With Colin Powell?” by tea party activist John Wiseman that asks Powell’s family to “get his Alzheimer’s treated already.” He said Powell is “hypocritical” for criticizing intolerance in the Republican Party since he worked for several Republican administrations before he “began drinking the liberal kool aid.”

Before I go too much further in my rant of disgust with Powell's recent behavior, allow me to say that I admire his long, distinguished, and honorable service to our nation. I thank him for all that he has done. That being said, there is a difference between his past and current actions. What ever benefits of doubt he earned with his service, he has used up, and then some. Just to put the point to the word hypocritical that has been so thoroughly earned by Powell, let's do some score keeping, shall we? Powell served as a White House Fellow in both the Nixon and Ford Administrations. He served as a National Security Adviser to Republican Ronald Reagan. George H.W. Bush appointed Colin to be his Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. George W. Bush made him his Secretary of State. To date, he has been appointed to nothing by any of the more tolerant Democrats who occupied the Oval Office. Colin Powell's support of Barack Obama is his Constitutional Right. I applaud him for using his gravitas to support any candidate he chooses, he has earned that privilege to both hold that gravitas, and to use it in any way he sees fit. What I have a problem with is his usage of his gravitas to demagogue me, and any who agree with me because we would dare to disagree with him politically. Just for Colin, and any who might be swayed by his recent rap, here is the definition of demagogue.

dem•a•gogue /ˈdeməˌgäg/ Noun A political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument. (in ancient Greece and Rome) A leader or orator who espoused the cause of the common people.

Special note for Powell's family:

Please, for the love of God, get his Alzheimer's treated already.

It is possible to support your chosen candidate and to keep the arguments focused on factual debate. It should be possible to be opposed to any one and not automatically labeled as racist or be bullied for holding an opposing view point. The discourse coming from the political left for years has been nothing more than ad hominems, straw men, non sequiturs, and the lowest form of divisive class warfare. Part of my reason for being so angry with General Powell is not just the fact that he switched sides and began drinking the liberal kool aid, such is his right as an American. It is that I had come to expect so much more from him in terms of honest discourse. Watching a person for whom I had so much admiration descend to this level of slime is painful to me on a very personal level. I gave him my personal trust and admiration, and he has so thoroughly destroyed that trust, that I am no longer interested in welcoming him back into any tent that I will ever occupy. He may be a perfect fit for the new Republican Party, once they've successfully purged themselves of any who hold the slightest resemblance of being principled.

Barber & Staver: Scott Lively Lawsuit is an Attempt to Intimidate and Silence Christians

Liberty Counsel has been representing anti-gay pastor Scott Lively in the lawsuit filed against him stemming from his anti-gay activism in Uganda. Not surprisingly, Matt Barber and Mat Staver do not think much of this lawsuit and are, in fact, convinced that it is designed to intimidate anti-gay activists that should be, like the California legislation, "a wake-up call to America [because] this is not a tolerance movement, this is a dominance movement" that seeks to "punish anyone" who disagrees with them: 

Coburn: Not Raising the Debt Ceiling 'Might be a Wonderful Experiment'

In an interview with the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios today, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) said that a government default – which would crash the U.S. economy – may actually be a “wonderful experiment.” Coburn encouraged Republican resistance to raising the debt ceiling, the routine mechanism that allows the government to borrow to meet its existing financial obligations. 

Coburn justified his opposition to raising the debt ceiling by using the false equivalence of the federal budget with a household budget. He also falsely claimed that programs like Social Security and Medicare would not be impacted by a default and even used inflated statistics to attack public workers, suggesting that they are to blame for the national debt.

He concluded by arguing that “our freedoms are going to be put at risk” under President Obama and expressing doubt that the nation could “survive” Obama’s leadership.

We can also now add Coburn to the list of GOP leaders who apparently have no qualms appearing on shows hosted by the extremists at AFA. Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised: he seems to fit right in to the group’s fact-free alternate universe.

Coburn: Let me address again, which I didn’t, this idea we’re not going to pay our bills. We’re going to collect $200 billion a month if in fact the government were to not extend the debt limit. Social Security would be paid, Medicare would be paid, the essentials would be paid; it’s the non-essentials that wouldn’t be paid, it’s the $250-300 billion a year in stupid things we do that we wouldn’t pay, it’s the programs that aren’t an absolute necessity that wouldn’t get funded, the things that would be a necessity would get funded. It might be a wonderful experiment, regardless who wins the next election or not, just to see if we could live on the money that’s coming into the Treasury and not have to borrow against the future of our children.

Rios: But Dr. Coburn, who decides that. [Obama] made that threat yesterday when he said you know, Social Security recipients would have delayed checks and military and on and on the most horrible list of all these horrible cuts that would happen. Doesn’t he decide that? Doesn’t he ultimately decide?

Coburn: He can decide it but the point is, look, we’re coming to a point in our country where the cost of our profligate spending in the past is going to be so great and so manipulated that our freedoms are going to be put at risk. I’m not sure we shouldn’t challenge that. I’m not sure the debt limit is the place to challenge that. I’m not sure that we should continue to run a government that is highly inefficient and highly ineffective where the average federal employee works 3.8 weeks less than the rest of us and makes on average twice what the rest of us make. I’m not sure we should continue down that road. That doesn’t mean federal employees aren’t good employees and it doesn’t mean they don’t do a good job but we have set it up where we’ve undermined self-reliance, we’ve undermined efficiency, we’ve undermined expectations in this country as far as those who work for the federal government and then we’ve overpromised.

So when the federal government’s discretionary spending is about forty percent bigger than it was eleven years ago and the average family is tightening things and living within their means and living within their budget, its’ time for that comparison to be seen. Maybe we lose that battle but if we lose that battle we’re going to lose our country anyway and that’s what people ought to be thinking about. you cannot continue to borrow the way this President wants to borrow and our country survive.

Gaffney Troubled that Obama's CIA Pick Speaks Arabic

Frank Gaffney is demonstrating once again why even an increasing number of Republicans aren’t taking him seriously anymore, as he is attacking President Obama’s nominee to head the CIA for speaking Arabic. In his Washington Times column today, Gaffney said that counterterrorism adviser John Brennan’s knowledge of Arabic and past role as CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia are actually negatives and reveal his terrorist sympathies. Gaffney also took issue with Brennan’s resistance to using the term “jihad” and argued that Brennan is “the single most important enabler of the Islamic supremacists’ agenda in government today” as he “has helped legitimate, empower, fund, arm and embolden them abroad, and embraced and appeased them here at home.”

Mr. Brennan is a textbook example of a U.S. official who has “gone native.” He speaks Arabic and was formerly the top CIA officer in Saudi Arabia. He has shown himself to be deeply sympathetic to Islamists — for example, excusing and dissembling about their commitment to jihad and the necessity of not offending them.

After President Obama himself, Mr. Brennan is, arguably, the single most important enabler of the Islamic supremacists’ agenda in government today. In his role as homeland security adviser to the president — a position that does not require Senate confirmation and that he was given as a consolation prize when it became clear that he might not be confirmable as CIA director back in 2009 — Mr. Brennan has helped legitimate, empower, fund, arm and embolden them abroad, and embraced and appeased them here at home.

Of particular concern is the fact that Mr. Brennan has presided over the policy of engaging the Muslim Brotherhood, which has consequently been portrayed by a politicized intelligence community as “largely secular” and “eschewing violence”; the shredding of training briefings and the proscribing of trainers that might upset Muslims by telling the truth about Shariah and the jihad it commands; the penetration of U.S. agencies by Muslim Brotherhood-associated individuals as employees or senior advisers; and misrepresentations to Congress about the true, jihadist character of the attack that killed four Americans in Benghazi this past Sept. 11.



Ordinarily, a president should be given wide latitude by the Senate to appoint those he wants to staff his administration. This is no ordinary time, though, and this is no ordinary president or administration. The circumstances are such that a Team Obama that is pursuing so dangerous a policy course must be challenged and impeded, not encouraged and abetted.

The Senate’s constitutional responsibility to confirm senior executive branch appointees is one of the few it hasn’t compromised or allowed the president to expropriate. It must exercise its authority to assure “quality control” with respect to his picks for top national security Cabinet posts.

Indeed, the fact that Mr. Obama seeks not one or two but three individuals who share his determination to achieve the radical and dangerous national security transformation he seeks in his second term demands that senators defy him. After all, should the Senate fail to object to this trajectory by rigorously debating and defeating any — and preferably all — of these problematic choices, its members risk not only allowing but becoming party to the realization of a world without America.

Glenn Beck Sees Civil War Brewing in America

After spending last week mocking Alex Jones for believing in crazy conspiracies, last night Glenn Beck put forth his own theory about how President Obama is seeking to foment civil war in America, the catalyst of which will be an executive order he issues gutting the Second Amendment.

As Beck foresees it, Obama will initially accept some sort of compromise gun control legislation from Congress but then start complaining that it didn't go far enough while waiting patiently for another high-profile gun crime to take place which he can then use as evidence that the compromise legislation was insufficient and thus provide justification for issuing an executive order banning and confiscating weapons. 

At which point, Americans will have two choices: either to hole up in heavily armed compounds à la Waco and Ruby Ridge or to peacefully protest and resist.  Beck prefers the latter because, as everyone knows, things Waco and Ruby Ridge just provide an opportunity for the government to kill its citizens while the media portrays the victims as a bunch of crazies:

Beck went on to advocate for the other course of action where all gun owners refuse to hand over their weapons, get arrested and fill the nation's jails with peaceful Second Amendment martyrs who will overwhelm the legal system and generate a groundswell of opposition to the government's violations of the Constitution. 

Because the alternative, he explained, was outright civil war in which the US government would blame the world's economic problems on the right-wing free-market gun nuts who are leading the rebellion, eventually leading to NATO planes bombing America in order to protect the government.

Sandy Rios Hails Failure of Violence Against Women Act, Attacks Biden's 'Private Behavior with Women'

The Violence Against Women Act expired this year after House Republicans blocked a reauthorization that boosted protections for Native Americans, immigrants and the LGBT community. This development has overjoyed Religious Right activists, who have long opposed the anti-violence law.

Sandy Rios of the American Family Association, speaking today with Ed Bartlett of Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, criticized the indisputably effective law and attacked Vice President Joe Biden, warning that “if we knew Joe Biden’s private behavior with women it might not be a pretty picture.” Rios stated that Biden’s “crassness, crudeness and disrespect for women” raises doubts about his work on VAWA while Bartlett used Biden’s own admission that abuse occurred in his household when he was younger as a reason to block the law.

Rios was also upset that VAWA may soon include protections for the LGBT community. Bartlett contended that these new protections prove VAWA is too easy on women since “studies have shown that lesbian-perpetrated domestic violence is higher than violence among heterosexual couples.”

However, according to the Center for American Progress, “Studies have found that domestic violence occurs among same-sex couples at comparable rates to straight couples.” While Bartlett admits that domestic violence is a concern among same-sex couples, he and Rios seem to believe that is a reason to oppose the inclusion of LGBT protections in VAWA.

Rios: Then we have this whole business of reaching out to the LGBT community and now that’s confusing because that’s women against women in many cases. That would have to be women against women.

Bartlett: Exactly, you’re right. In fact, studies have shown that lesbian-perpetrated domestic violence is higher than violence among heterosexual couples. So that again shows that this is a problem not limited to male perpetrators and female victims.

Rios: You know the person that has been pushing for all these years is Vice President Joe Biden, I find that very curious, what can you say about that?

Bartlett: I’ll tell you something that most people don’t know about Vice President Biden. He himself as a child was subjected to very serious physical abuse by his female sister, his sibling. Most people don’t know that but he has actually stated that in hearings held in the Senate. There’s a high irony here, a fellow who as a child was subjected to female violence is now denying the very existence of that.

Rios: I also think it’s ironic. I have a personal opinion because of Joe Biden’s repeated behavior. I know he’s become the brunt of jokes because he’s always saying something silly. But one theme in his jokes is crassness, crudeness and disrespect for women. He’s supposed to be some champion for women and yet he comes out and says these outrageous things which are insulting. I think if we knew Joe Biden’s private behavior with women it might not be a pretty picture.

Rios even argued that the law has had “an extremely detrimental, unfair, tilted, bad effect on men.” Bartlett dismissed reports that women face disproportionate rates of domestic violence and said that VAWA was actually passed by those seeking “to undermine family stability.”

Rios: The problem with this particular law, as I understand it, is it has had an extremely detrimental, unfair, tilted, bad effect on men. Give us an example of how that has happened.

Bartlett: Sandy, you’re right and it’s happened in many ways. Part of what many people believe is the agenda is to undermine family stability by stereotyping men as being abusive. So over and over when you go to the websites of these various domestic violence organizations, they quote arrest statistics but they don’t quote the actual statistics from the Centers for Disease Control, which are the best statistics of all, which show that this is an equal opportunity problem. So we have men being stereotyped as being abusive, obviously that’s not good for strong, respectful gender-relationships in our country.

To be clear, the CDC and the Department of Justice [PDF] both find that women are much more likely than men to experience intimate partner violence. The DOJ found that “intimate partners were responsible for 3% of all violence against males and 23% of all violence against females in 2008,” and the CDC reports that “about 1 in 4 women (24.3%) and 1 in 7 men (13.8%) have experienced severe physical violence by an intimate partner” in their lifetime.

Lance Wallnau Keeping Purported Diabetes Cure all to Himself…and Select Communist Leaders

Evangelist Lance Wallnau announced on the Trinity Broadcasting Network’s Praise the Lord that God is giving Christians "technology that can heal diabetes" within months, along with technology “that is going to revolutionize our dependence on oil and energy.” However, Wallnau shared that these new discoveries will only be “given to Kingdom-minded believers” and not sold to benefit the general public.

Later in the interview, Wallnau likened the development to the Apostle Paul, who in Acts of the Apostles obtained refuge from the leader of Malta after healing his ailing father. Wallnau claimed that he is urging that the purported diabetes cure be shared with “top layers of the political elite” of the Chinese Communist Party in order to gain access to their government and help to spread the Gospel.

Watch:

Barton: There Were No Gun Accidents During the Founding Era

Today, Rick Green and David Barton weighed-in on the tragedy at Sandy Hook by laying out not only the standard Religious Right solutions of putting prayer and the Bible back in schools, but also adding a unique suggestion to start arming everyone from early childhood.

Explaining that he began teaching his own kids how to use guns at the age of four, Barton said that people only want to get rid of guns because they are afraid of them, which can be attributed to the fact that they don't know how to use them.

As such, if everyone had a gun and was taught how to use it from childhood, there would never be any firearm incidents or accidents, just like during the founding era:

That's what these guys do not see and do not look at; they're just flat scared of guns.  And the solution to that is exactly what the Founding Fathers said and that is you start teaching kids to use guns when they're very young because gun accidents are caused by non-familiarity with guns; once you're familiar with them, you don't have accidents with them.

I have searched and in the founding era I think I've only ever found two gun accidents and everybody was hauling guns back then; you took your guns to church, you were required by state law in some states to take your guns to church.  We didn't have accidents because everyone was familiar with how to use them.  It's not being familiar that makes is dangerous.

PFAW Delivers 178,000 Petitions Calling for Michele Bachmann’s Removal from Intelligence Committee

Today, after an overwhelming response from our members and supporters, members of PFAW’s staff delivered a whopping 178,000 petitions to House Speaker John Boehner calling on him to remove Rep. Michele Bachmann from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Last year, Bachmann earned rebukes from Democrats and Republicans alike when she accused Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin and others of a secret allegiance to the Muslim Brotherhood. In an interview first reported by PFAW’s Right Wing Watch, she alleged that “there has been deep penetration in the halls of our United States government by the Muslim Brotherhood.” Later, she accused President Obama of trying to implement Sharia law in the United States and abroad.

The petition states, "Members of the House Intelligence Committee are entrusted with classified information that affects the safety and security of all Americans. That information should not be in the hands of anyone with such a disregard for honesty, misunderstanding of national security, and lack of respect for his or her fellow public servants.”

Boehner, who is among the Republicans who condemned Bachmann’s allegations about Abedin, has not yet responded.

PFAW

Will the Texas GOP Fall for a Chain Email Warning of 'Islamic Indoctrination' in Schools?

After a chain email sparked rumors that Texas was “indoctrinating children with Islam” and anti-American views, the Irving school district launched an investigation. But the examination of the school curriculum, called CSCOPE, found that the charges were bogus. That didn’t stop WorldNetDaily, which often reads like an amalgam of erroneous chain emails, from running with the story.

WND is out with a new article, “Obama Interested in ‘Allah-is-God’ Curriculum,” which claims the Obama administration is using CSCOPE as part of a plan to “nationalize education.” It includes an interview with Texas Republican State Senator Dan Patrick, who says he might launch an investigation into CSCOPE as chairman of the Senate Education Committee.

CSCOPE, the controversial online curriculum that taught “Allah is God” and currently is used in 80 percent of Texas school districts, has caught the attention of the Obama administration’s Department of Education.

A source in the Texas education system has told WND that Common Core operatives in the U.S. Department of Education are actively pursuing CSCOPE as a way around the Texas legislative process.

Texas is one of the few states still resisting implementation of Common Core, Obama’s national standards initiative, which many feel is a transparent attempt to nationalize education and progressively control classroom content with minimal parental oversight.

Implementation of Common Core is known to have been made a condition of school systems’ receipt of federal dollars under Obama’s “Race to the Top” program. CSCOPE recently has come under fire for evidence of what sources claim to be radical content and secrecy. Now new information of such a radical agenda has surfaced showing CSCOPE connections to Obama mentor and self-acknowledged terror group member Bill Ayers.



Speaking with WND, Texas Sen. Dan Patrick, new chairman of the education committee, communicated his intent to hold high-profile hearings and investigate CSCOPE.

Sen. Patrick noted, “Any system where the chairman of the state board can’t get a password to explore their site in detail for six months, requires teachers to sign an agreement that could subject them to criminal penalties, and is not easily transparent to parents, needs to be closely examined by the legislature.”

When asked if he would support placing CSCOPE under state oversight and/or local school board oversight, Sen. Patrick answered carefully, explaining, “We will make that decision after our hearings. However, I have concerns of any curriculum program that is in the majority of our school districts without some level of oversight by either the SBOE, TEA, or the legislature.”

Staver: CA Law is a 'Wake-Up Call to America' That Gay Activists Seek to 'Abolish Morality'

As Liberty Counsel continues its crusade against the California law that bans the use of sexual orientation conversion therapy on minors, it remains a frequent topic of discussion on the "Faith and Freedom" radio program, despite the fact that Mat Staver and Matt Barber essentially just keep making the same points over and over again.

But they do add new twists every now and again, like when Staver recently declared that this law ought to serve are a "wake-up call to America" that gay activists are on a mission to "abolish morality": 

Klayman Prepares for Armed Revolt; Barber Predicts 'Second Civil War'

Prior to the election, right-wing activists were confident of President Obama’s imminent defeat, arguing there was no way he could win another election. Stunned by his re-election and the pummeling Republicans received, now several conservatives are openly calling for armed resistance.

Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman is once again calling for a revolution in his WorldNetDaily column, telling readers to “pray that Obama and Biden and the likes of Pelosi and Reid are so stupid as to carry through with their threats, so that the masses will finally be provoked to rise up as they did in colonial times.”

He called Vice President Biden’s gun task force recommendations, which haven’t even been released yet, “a declaration of war against the American people and our way of life” and hopes they “will in the end serve to be their own undoing and result in our liberation from their evil clutches.”

But quite apart from FACA [Federal Advisory Committee Act] and open government – to use the term government loosely these days, since in practice we no longer have a republic but a despotic monarchy – Obama’s threats to use executive orders to remove or curtail our right to bear arms constitutes the final straw. It is in effect a declaration of war against the American people and our way of life.



So when Obama and Biden effectively threatened to seize our guns, or even just curtail our rights to gun ownership, they are making the same mistake King George III made when he sent his armies to seize and destroy the weapons caches of the colonies, which they had amassed to defend themselves against a British crown that had also raised their taxes without representation in parliament and committed other acts of tyranny. This gun grab by the king was the final straw before revolution, triggering the Declaration of Independence and subsequent war.

The irony today, as it was in 1776, is that that these miscalculations by our rulers will in the end serve to be their own undoing and result in our liberation from their evil clutches. Let us pray that Obama and Biden and the likes of Pelosi and Reid are so stupid as to carry through with their threats, so that the masses will finally be provoked to rise up as they did in colonial times. It is time that their political ilk be legally removed from our nation’s capital – along with their Republican accomplices like Chuck Hagel – before the nation is totally transformed and destroyed.

The always-amusing Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel even predicted a “second civil war” under Obama, and asserted that liberals celebrate school shootings and argued that the National Education Association is to blame for the Sandy Hook massacre.

I love guns. Grew up with ‘em. As a former police officer with 12 years in the U.S. military, I know how to use them, too – use them well. I plan to buy more – a bunch more. In fact, who’s to say I don’t already have a veritable arsenal? Point is, tain’t Big Brother Barack’s nor any other candy-keistered-liberal-cream-puff’s bloody business whether I do or not.

See, the left’s totalitarian brand of “gun control” has nothing to do with controlling guns – or bad guys. Rather, it has everything to do with controlling – disarming – the law-abiding masses. It’s not about protecting the innocents. It’s about rendering the innocents defenseless.



I was disgusted – physically sickened, in fact – when Barack Obama, president of these Divided States of America, shamelessly exploited the Sandy Hook memorial service to lay the groundwork for his unconstitutional gun-confiscation scheme. It was slimy to the extreme.

I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised. That’s what liberals do. Every time some evil nutjob – pumped full of psychotropic drugs by NEA members who don’t want to deal with them – shoots-up the place, the left’s collective mouth begins to water.



I really, really hope this president and his authoritarian cohorts in Congress will slow down, take a deep breath and realize that, right now, they’re playing a very dangerous game of chicken. If they try what I think they might, but hope they don’t, I fear this nation – already on the precipice of widespread civil unrest and economic disaster – might finally spiral into to utter chaos, into a second civil war.

But then again, that may be exactly what they have in mind.

PFAW Delivers 178,000 Petitions Calling for Bachmann’s Removal from Intelligence Committee

WASHINGTON – Today, People For the American Way will deliver 178,000 petitions to House Speaker John Boehner urging him to remove Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann from the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the 113th Congress. Bachmann earned rebukes from Boehner, John McCain and others last year when she launched a smear campaign against Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin, alleging that Abedin and other Muslim-American public servants were agents of the Muslim Brotherhood.

“Michele Bachmann has used her position on the Intelligence Committee to spread baseless conspiracy theories and smear the reputations of honorable public servants,” said Michael Keegan, President of People For the American Way. “Speaker Boehner himself called her actions ‘dangerous.’ It’s mysterious, then, why he has chosen to reward her reckless extremism with continued access to sensitive national security information and a powerful platform for her agenda.”

“Members of the Intelligence Committee are responsible for the safety of all Americans,” continued Keegan. “178,000 Americans are sending Speaker Boehner a clear message: we don’t want our national security in Michele Bachmann’s hands.”

People For the American Way’s Right Wing Watch has detailed coverage of Rep. Bachmann here.
 

###
 

Fischer Says the Anti-Gay Right is Tired of Getting 'Pushed Around' and 'Backing Down' and Vows to Push Back

Over the weekend, Bryan Fischer was interviewed by WorldNetDaily about pastor Louie Giglio's withdrawal from participation in President Obama’s inauguration; a topic on which Fischer has not been reluctant to voice his outrage.

While speaking to WND, Fischer predicted that this development would serve as a catalyst for anti-gay Christian activists to stand up and declare that they tired of "getting pushed around" and will start to push back against these "bullying tactics from the left":

I think more and more Christians and social conservatives are going to say, "Look, I’m tired of us getting pushed around here. You know, the values that we believe in this area are values that were shared by the Founding Fathers. They’re the same set of moral values that built the United States into the greatest, and strongest and most prosperous nation in the world."

I’m tired of backing down on this issue. I’m tired of apologizing for this. I’m tired of Christian leaders who apologize for this. It’s time for us to show some strength and some moxy. So I think we’re going to start to see some push-back against these bullying tactics from the left.

Buehner: Woman Fired for Being 'Irresistible' Should Have Been 'Working For Her Husband'

On yesterday’s Generations Radio, Kevin Swanson and Dave Buehner took on the recent case in which the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that a dentist was justified in firing an assistant whom he found “irresistible.” Swanson and Buehner, who agreed with the court’s decision, used the case as a jumping-off point for a discussion of the woes of modern workplaces that throw men together with women to whom they are not married. Such arrangements, Buehner fretted, are “pseudo-marriages.” Swanson feared that they come dangerously close to “polygamy”:

Swanson: This is not unusual, unfortunately, and it certainly is going to happen when you have a decrease in family economies. It’s one reason why we push the family economic vision, because the family economy is pretty much the way God set things up. The man and the woman come together not just for sexual union but also to be helpmeets and dominion-takers together as a team, as a lean, mean team in the dominion effort. That’s the way it was designed in the garden when the woman came to the man as the helpmeet for the man in the dominion task.

Buehner: And Kevin, I think that’s key. What we have in some of these business workplaces is a woman who’s not the wife being the helper or the helpmeet of the man and she has taken on the role of the helper…

Swanson: …for the man.

Buehner: And the only thing that’s missing in that relationship is the sexual consummation.

Swanson: Or the polygamy.

Buehner: Right. So remember, when God placed Adam in the garden, he gave him a mandate. He said you need a helper. He told Adam to go out and take some dominion, Adam named the animals, He said, ‘Yeah, this is really hard, you’re gonna need yourself a helper.” So He made Eve for him. It does not say that Eve was created because Adam needed to have a sexual outlet, it was created because Adam needed a helper. Now we take a man and we give him a helper out in the marketplace. He’s in a pseudo-marriage.

Swanson: And yeah, it can move in that direction pretty quickly.

The root cause of these inappropriate workplace relationships, Swanson and Buehner conclude, is an economic system built by “universities and colleges and political systems and corporate systems” in which women work outside the family unit. The fired dental assistant, Buehner contends, “would have been better off working for her husband.”

Swanson: Friends, you gotta understand that we have tremendous socio-economic forces that have been set up by systems that want to systematically destroy the integrity of the family life and the marriage in the 20th century and the 21st century. This is what you’re up against. I just want people to understand that as we are trying to reconfigure entire socio-economic systems by way of our familyeconomics.com and by our huge conferences we are sponsoring around the country to this year, we are going up against this socio-economic structure that has been put in place by universities and colleges and political systems and corporate systems, etcetera, etcetera, that makes it extremely difficult for the family to survive in the 21st century.

Buehner: In this dentist case situation, the dentist was married, his wife was working in the office with him. That’s great. This woman, this “irresistible” woman, she was also married and had two children. It would have been better if she was working for her husband! I mean, these are utopian ideas here, but these are Biblical ideas.
 

 

Fischer: We Are the Victims of 'a New Moral McCarthyism'

Yesterday, Bryan Fischer responded to the news that pastor Louie Giglio had withdrawn from participation in President Obama’s inauguration by declaring that anti-gay Christians were "the new Rosa Parks" and the victims of modern-day Jim Crow laws.

He returned to the topic today, citing a piece by Al Mohler  to declare that anti-gay Christians are now the victims of "moral McCarthyism":

Larry Pratt Demands Impeachment of Obama over 'Pagan' Gun Safety Laws

Larry Pratt has been making the rounds criticizing any new laws aimed at addressing gun violence and today appeared on Crosstalk with Vic Eliason to argue that President Obama should be impeached if he signs any executive order regarding gun policy. But Pratt, the head of Gun Owners for America, didn’t say what an executive order would entail, and executive orders have been used by Presidents Bush (41) and Clinton in the past to prohibit the import of certain assault weapons. He told one caller that any executive order would be unconstitutional and merit impeachment. 

Caller: If Obama’s going to be signing an executive order to take away our guns isn’t there something we can do to arrest this man? It’s a treasonous act. He’s swore an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States.

Pratt: Yeah, it’s called impeachment and that would be, along with defunding, the kinds of messages that need to go to Capitol Hill: When are you going to impeach this guy? When are you going to defund his illegal activities? Republicans can’t continue, at least I hope they cannot, continue to be spectators while the country is being torn apart.

Pratt’s gun group has a decidedly Religious Right bent, and so it came as no surprise that he said any laws on gun safety actually represent “the most pagan of paganism” because it “view[s] inanimate objects” like guns “as possessing their own will.”

Pratt: Frankly, it almost would seem that animism won’t go away. The left, which is largely made up of people who don’t believe in Jesus Christ’s blood as being necessary for our salvation, view inanimate objects as possessing their own will. That’s animism, that’s a return to the most pagan of paganism and look at what nutty political views it ends up supporting.

Eliason and Pratt then went on to discuss discredited conspiracy theories about government purchases of firearms and ammunition, which Pratt said proves that “the administration seems to view the American people as the enemy.”

Eliason: We talk about the humongous amounts of cartridges and bullets that are being sent or I guess assigned to some of the federal agencies that you wonder, why in the world are they getting bullets? You know what I’m talking about.

Pratt: I sure do and I think that is another indication that the administration seems to view the American people as the enemy. They are buying anti-personnel rounds from what we can tell; they are not buying practice rounds.

Eliason: No, they’re hollow-point.

According to Pratt, Obama is a “dictator” and implied that any new gun laws will face violent resistance. He argued that law enforcement agencies shouldn’t “obey such an outrageous executive order,” warning that those who carry them out may end up like war criminal Lt. William Calley or the Germans executed “for following orders after World War II.”

Pratt: It’s the talk of a dictator, ‘I will do what I want, whatever seems right in my own eyes I’m going to do,’ and the idea that there’s any restraints imposed by the Constitution is simply not acceptable to the ruling crowd in Washington and they’re getting bolder because now they don’t have to stand for re-election. I believe, first of all, they understand they probably don’t have the votes in the Congress so why make their Democrat buddies go walk the plank and vote against the Second Amendment, they remember what happened in ’94 when that happened and I don’t think they want a repeat of that.

But what they may not understand is that people are watching. If there is an executive order issued in lieu of congressional action, which would be unconstitutional either way, then I’m hearing such resentment and anger and opposition that their simply going to lose any credibility the federal government might have had. It’s going to be a byword, it’s going to be a joke and people are not going to obey such an outrageous executive order.

Eliason: People would be marching in the streets.

Pratt: That would be the nicest thing that would happen.

Eliason: The frightening thing is this: if the President makes such an executive order and seeks to enforce it, is the military or who is there to enforce it if the order goes through?

Pratt: Then he has to ask how many of those police officers and soldiers would actually carry out such an obviously outrageous order. We had consequences rightly come to Lt. Calley for the slaughter of the people of the little village of My Lai and we hung Germans for following orders after World War II.

Fischer: High-Capacity Magazines Necessary to Defend Yourself from a Posse

On yesterday's broadcast, Brian Fischer discussed an incident in Georgia in which a woman used a .38 caliber handgun to shoot an intruder who had broken into her home to make the case for the need for high-capacity magazines on the grounds that just because a simple handgun was effective in this situation, what if someone needed to defend themselves from a "posse"?

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious