Fighting the Right

Lively: America Will Face 'Calamity And Judgment' If Gay Marriage Is Legalized

On Friday, rabidly anti-gay activist Scott Lively joined Bryan Fischer in-studio for several segments, where the two argued that homosexuality is worse than murder and genocide and that acceptance of gay marriage is "a harbinger of wrath of God."

In a later segment, Lively warned that while other nations may have already legalized gay marriage, it will be different when America does so because "we're the only nation established on the Bible." As such, America will face a massive "calamity" and wholesale collapse of our national infrastructure if gay marriage ever becomes legalized throughout the country, he said.

"When the United States, in its official policy, establishes homosexual sodomy as a basis for marriage under the Constitution," Lively warned, "that's a whole new ballgame and I'm predicting that we're going to see some kind of calamity and judgement is going to occur ... We're going to suffer the consequences of this and we're going to see a rapid meltdown of the infrastructure of the country, especially anything related to the Christian infrastructure of America."

"When they pass this, if God doesn't intervene, they're going to come out of the gate," he continued, "the entire leftist block is going to declare complete victory for their entire agenda and they're going to shift to the last part of their stage of their conquest, which is punishing dissenters. You haven't seen anything yet":

Mark Regnerus Defends Flawed Research On Same-Sex Parenting

Back in 2012, University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus published a study claiming that children raised by same-sex couples are more likely to be molested, abuse drugs and alcohol, do poorly in school, and experience any number of other maladies. The study quickly made its way into anti-LGBT talking points around the world, even as Regnerus’ fellow academics began to find serious problems with his methodology.

The main issue with Regnerus’ work was that he based his conclusions on same-sex parenting on respondents who said their parent had been in a same-sex relationship at some point when they were a child – not necessarily adults who had been raised by a same-sex couple. Ultimately, only two of the people he studied were actually raised by same-sex couples. He also failed to control for destabilizing childhood events like divorce. Sociologist Darren Sherkat summarized the problems with the Regnerus study in a 2013 interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center:

The key measure of gay and lesbian parenting is simply a farce. The study includes a retrospective question asking if people knew if their mother or father had a “romantic” relationship with someone of the same sex when the respondent was under age 18. This measure is problematic on many levels.

Regnerus admits that just two of his respondents were actually raised by a same-sex couple, though I doubt that he can even know that, given his limited data. Since only two respondents were actually raised in gay or lesbian households, this study has absolutely nothing to say about gay parenting outcomes. Indeed, because it is a non-random sample, this study has nothing to say about anything.

It failed to take into account normal family effects on wellbeing, to control for known​ sources of positive or negative outcomes. Indeed, since he only had two stable lesbian “couples” (or at least a young adult who said that, retrospectively, in a non-random, convenience sample), he instead just constructed differences from a group of people who were raised in unstable environments. Sexuality has nothing to do with that.

Then, earlier this year, Catholic University professor Paul Sullins published a paper with conclusions similar to those put forth by Regnerus...and similar methodological flaws.

As Emma Green wrote in “The Atlantic” recently, most social science “suggests that there are no differences between kids raised in stable households by gay or straight parents” — in other words, most scientists are finding that it’s the stability of their household, not their gender of the parents, that most affects the wellbeing of kids.

But now Regnerus is defending the findings of his and Sullins’ studies by arguing essentially that families headed by same-sex couples are inherently unstable — so there is no need to control for stability in studying the wellbeing of children raised in by same-sex parents. Regnerus told World Magazine this week that divorce is “still, so far as I can tell, the primary means by which a child comes to be in a same-sex household,” so “I think we should evaluate reality as it exists, not complain about the ideal data situation that does not”:

Critics of Sullins’ study claim it can’t tell us anything meaningful about same-sex parenting because it includes children of divorce, who are themselves more likely to suffer from emotional, behavioral, and academic problems. In order to fairly represent gay parents, critics seem to suggest, surveys should only include children who did not experience divorce and were raised from infancy by stable gay couples. In other words, the childhoods Lopez and Barwick experienced should be tossed out of the data pool.

But such “ideal” same-sex parent situations are rare and would be difficult to measure using a random representative survey. Besides, is it fair to ignore the very factor that often precedes same-sex parenting situations: divorce?

“[Divorce] is still, so far as I can tell, the primary means by which a child comes to be in a same-sex household,” said Mark Regnerus, a University of Texas at Austin sociologist whose own survey of same-sex households in 2012 found children of gay parents were more likely to be unemployed, depressed, unhealthy, promiscuous, and to have a negative view of their childhood. “I think we should evaluate reality as it exists, not complain about the ideal data situation that does not.”

It’s not surprising that since same-sex marriage — and the child custody rights that come with that marriage status — is a relatively new development there isn’t a huge pool of data on children raised by married same-sex couples. But that doesn’t mean, as Regnerus suggests, that sociologists should simply conflate same-sex parenting with household instability.

'Coach' Dave Daubenmire: Bar People Who Believe In Evolution From Sitting On Creationist's Jury

Kent Hovind is a right-wing folk hero known as "Dr. Dino" from his days running Dinosaur Adventure Land, a young earth creationist theme park in Florida, who has spent nearly the last decade in prison for refusing to pay federal income tax on the grounds that all of the money generated by his theme park belonged to God.

With his 10-year prison sentence set to come to an end soon, Hovind now finds himself facing even more legal troubles stemming from his alleged efforts to illegally prevent the government from selling off properties seized from him in the original tax case.

"Coach" Dave Daubenmire has long been one of Hovind's most vocal defenders and he has posted several videos in recent days claiming that the government is persecuting Hovind simply for being a Christian, including one today in which he argued that it is unconstitutional for Hovind to be judged by a jury that does not share his particular Christian worldview and belief system.

Daubenmire said that any potential juror who believes in evolution ought to be barred from sitting on Hovind's jury because that would mean that Hovind would not be judged by a "jury of his peers."

"Wouldn't a jury of Kent Hovind's peers be those who believe the same way that he does?" Daubenmire asked. "Wouldn't it be germane that if you put Kent Hovind on trial, that you would have people on the trial who think like he thinks so that they could, in fact, judge the merits of the case rather than their own biases about creationism or the Bible or Christians or whatever?"

To further demonstrate the rock-solid logic of his position, Daubenmire said "it would be like putting a drug dealer on trial [and] you find somebody on the jury who is totally, one hundred per cent against any type of drugs and thinks drug dealers should be prosecuted and thrown in jail."

"That would not be a jury of peers of that drug dealer":

David Lane: Gay People Imposing 'Reign Of Terror'

David Lane, the conservative political activist who organizes meetings and trips to connect evangelical voters with GOP presidential candidates, most recently Ted Cruz and Bobby Jindal, is out with a new column attacking gay rights in the far-far-right outlet BarbWire today.

Lane writes that while what “homosexuals do in their home is none of my business,” he is worried that they now seek to “impose” their “reign of terror” on “anyone who will not celebrate their sexual lifestyle.”

What homosexuals do in their home is none of my business. What does concern me is the reign of terror, now becoming old hat, that they impose on anyone who will not celebrate their sexual lifestyle. They evidently intend their worldview to be forced upon all others. When the coming storm arrives, Christian pastors will have to make a choice. Either capitulate on the Gospel by giving approval to the homosexual lifestyle, or—go to jail.

Through His Word, God fully declared His mind regarding sexual sin—whether it is fornication, heterosexual adultery, homosexuality, or any other form proscribed in the Bible. God defines sin, not the U.S. Supreme Court, “vice stalking in virtue’s garb”.



The commodity which we Christians in America stand in need of is mercy and pardon. We have allowed spiritual calamity to come to a nation founded by Christians—men and women who were giants of the faith.

Such remarks shouldn’t come as a surprise, as Lane has previously alleged that gay rights will lead to the destruction of America and a series of car bomb attacks throughout the country.

Pamela Geller Names Jon Stewart The 'Most Disgusting Jew on the Planet'

In a WorldNetDaily column today about how the U.S. suffers from “an absence of the good” and “an abundance of poo,” conservative pundit Pamela Geller claims that modern American culture is best illustrated by “the popular emoticon found on phones today, of a happily smiling pile of excrement.”

Geller is especially angry with Jon Stewart, blaming him for the rise of America’s “poo generation.” Stewart, Geller writes, “should have given the ‘Most Disgusting Jew on the Planet Award’” at the Oscars last month.

“This vicious traitor, smug and self-righteous, has long been working for the other side under the guise of comedy” she writes. “Vile. Jon Stewart defines self-loathing Jew. But that’s not enough. He means to take us down with him.”

In every generation, there are icons that sum up its core values – not official ones, but symbols that really mean something to people: Rosie the Riveter, the American flag, Elvis Presley, the motorcycle jacket, the defeatist “peace sign” and now the tyrannical “Coexist” bumper sticker. There are symbols that sum up the zeitgeist of a time, a generation.

The popular emoticon found on phones today, of a happily smiling pile of excrement, is just that. It best exemplifies the low state of the world, of the culture, and of America itself in the age of the primitive. It signifies America’s rapid decay in the wake of the left’s decades-long war on Americanism, freedom and individual rights. The absence of morality – and by morality, I mean a code of values – has led to an absence of the good. And an abundance of poo.



The culture is ugly. Ugly as poo. The music is ugly, violent and misogynistic. Every crime drama and suspense series is rife with the most unimaginable gore. “Game of Thrones,” “Law and Order (Sex Crimes),” “American Horror Story” – they’re all devoid of humanity and morality. Devoid of goodness. It’s a cultural rout. It’s not that the line between good and evil has been blurred – it’s nonexistent. We are living in a cultural free-for-all, or more accurately, a free fall.



American traitor Edward Snowden got an Oscar; American hero Chris Kyle got the middle finger. Even the traitorous far-left journalist Glenn Greenwald got an Oscars shout-out. Of course Hollywood would reward vicious traitors. There was no way the Hollywood establishment was going to give an Oscar to Clint Eastwood after he so delightfully skewered Obama’s empty chair. And their disdain for Americanism and the military is infused in everything they churn out.

Sharing their disdain for America is Jon Stewart, to whom they should have given the “Most Disgusting Jew on the Planet Award.” No contest. After Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ground-breaking speech to Congress last week, Stewart scoffed at the many standing ovations Netanyahu received as the “longest bl-wjob a Jewish man has ever received.”

This vicious traitor, smug and self-righteous, has long been working for the other side under the guise of comedy. Vile. Jon Stewart defines self-loathing Jew. But that’s not enough. He means to take us down with him.

He is leaving Comedy Central, thankfully. But don’t get too happy; they’ll turn the show over to another leftist radical. When does Dennis Miller or someone like that get an HBO or Comedy Central gig? The cultural landscape is under siege by these killers.

And what’s next for Stewart? Politics, I fear.

As if Israel didn’t have enough problems …

Ayn Rand said, “There are two aspects of man’s existence which are the special province and expression of his sense of life: love and art.” Both of which have all but been extinguished in the era of amoralism – reflected in cultural rot and the exaltation of the crank.

This is where we are now. In the poo generation.

Lively: Homosexuality Is 'Worse Than Murder And Worse Than Genocide'

Last month, rabidly anti-gay activist Scott Lively warned that if the Supreme Court strikes down state bans on same-sex marriage, it could lead to the rise of the Antichrist by the end of the year.

Naturally, Bryan Fischer decided to have Lively join him in-studio for his radio program today so that he could discuss his warning to America as well as promote the upcoming prayer vigil that he will be holding outside of the Supreme Court.

Lively told Fischer that America is about to cross "a line with God that hasn't occurred in the entire history of the world since Noah's flood," which he once again asserted was brought about by the celebration of "homosexual marriage."

"The final straw for God was when they started celebrating and engaging in homosexual and bestial marriages," he said.

Lively went on to declare that homosexuality is "the most egregious form of rebellion against God" and is a sin that is "worse than murder and worse then genocide."

"It's not just another sin," he continued. "It's really a harbinger of the judgment of God ... The celebration by the society [of homosexuality] is a harbinger of the wrath of God":

Ken Cuccinelli: 'We're Being Invaded…One Person At A Time'

Former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who now heads up the Senate Conservatives Fund, told talk show host Steve Deace in an interview yesterday that America is being “invaded” by immigrants “one person at a time” and that President Obama is guilty of “encouraging the invasion” with his executive actions.

Discussing the decision of Republican leaders in Congress to ally with Democrats to pass a Department of Homeland Security funding bill, Deace asked Cuccinelli: “Is there any affront to the Constitution this president could commit that would cause the current Republican leaders in Congress to really, substantively attempt to do something about it and stop it? Is there anything he could do? Anything?”

“I can’t think of one,” Cuccinelli responded. “I mean, other than surrendering to everybody — I mean, we’re being invaded. We’re being invaded, right? One person at a time, we’re being invaded. And the president isn’t protecting us from invasion, he’s encouraging the invasion, and he’s doing it unconstitutionally."

“He’s assumed power after power that’s allocated to Congress and they’ve supinely rolled over under the Republican surrendership of Mitch McConnell and John Boehner and Steve Scalise and Kevin McCarthy, and there’s no reason to expect that’s going to change," he continued.

“I mean, what’s more important that’s coming up than what we’ve seen in the last week or two months?" he asked. "Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Not to say that the other things we’re going to deal with in coming months aren’t important, Steve. It’s just that clearly what we’ve been through both constitutionally, in terms of our sovereignty and the rule of law, you’re never going to top that.”

Cuccinelli used similar rhetoric in a Facebook post last year in support of then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s questionable decision to send the Texas National Guard to the southern border to confront Central American child migrants. “The border states that are being directly invaded by illegal immigrants – Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico – may constitutionally deal with the invasion themselves, at least as it relates to attempting to stop the flow across their own borders,” Cuccinelli wrote at the time. “And there is nothing President Obama or those in Washington can do to stop any of these states, if they are determined to act.”

Republicans Stop at Nothing to Attack Immigrants

This op-ed by Michael Keegan, President, People For the American Way was originally published at The Huffington Post.

On March 3, the House of Representatives finally voted for a clean DHS funding bill. Much of the media reported that Republicans saw the irresponsibility of their threats to shut down Homeland Security and passed a clean bill. But they didn't, and no one should lose sight of that.

After trying every trick in the book to scuttle the bill, their leadership allowed the vote to happen, but Republicans never caved. Republicans voted over two to one (167-75)against the bill. It only passed because of full Democratic support.

It's clear that Republicans will stop at nothing to attack immigrants. The fact that national security was on the line was immaterial: Republicans saw an opportunity to display their animus toward all immigrants, and Latinos in particular, and they took it.

This publicity stunt gave Republicans the chance to pander yet again to the most virulent anti-immigrant members of their party. Take, for instance, William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration and his comments during the heat of the DHS fight in mid-February:

[I] wouldn't put anything past [the administration, because] the people who are supporting the organized and well-funded illegal alien invasion of our homeland have the blood of many thousands of Americans on their hands that have been killed, injured raped and robbed by illegal immigrants.

Sure, Gheen is a fringe extremist. But what he's saying is strikingly similar to what we're hearing from the Republican Party.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the architect of Mitt Romney's "self-deportation" strategy, entertained the suggestion that Obama's executive actions could eventually result in Latinos conducting an "ethnic cleansing" of their fellow Americans. Sen. Tom Coburn, Rep. Mike Kelly, and Rep. Louie Gohmert have also warned that the president's immigration policies could lead to violence.

While some in the GOP tried to tell a different narrative -- that this was just about reining in presidential excess and not about their being anti-immigrant -- the fact is that the entire Republican Party is at fault. Not one House Republican signed the discharge petition to allow even a vote on the Senate's bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill. And Senate Republicans who backed that bill, including Sen. Marco Rubio, now say they no longer support it. At this very minute, House Republicans are bringing up even more anti-immigrant legislation, including deportation-only legislation and a bill that would drastically change U.S. asylum and humanitarian protections to put domestic violence survivors and victims of human trafficking at serious risk.

Ultimately, it was Ann Coulter who summed up the Republican position on the DHS debate: Undocumented immigrants (she calls them "illegal aliens [who] have killed, raped and maimed thousands of Americans") pose a greater threat to our nation than does ISIS." While not all Republicans used language as biting as that, it was crystal-clear that Republicans believe that attacking immigrants, not funding DHS, should be the top priority.

Who would have imagined that a national party, never mind the Republican Party, would be so opposed to finding any solution for the almost 12 million undocumented people already here that they would risk our national security during the dangerous time we are in now? Yet that's the reality of the GOP today, and it's our responsibility to hold them accountable.

PFAW

Paranoia-Rama: Muslim Infiltration, Gay End Times And Liberal Killers

Now that gay people and the Muslim Brotherhood have taken over the government, conservative pundits have a lot of thoughts that they want to share — scary thoughts about anti-Christian persecution and a (non-existent) Egyptian court case that may throw two American leaders behind bars.

Glenn Beck Says Ben Carson's Prison Sex Comment Is 'The Dumbest Thing I've Ever Heard'

Glenn Beck has been traveling for the past few days and away from his radio studio, meaning that his daily radio program has been audio-only for most of the week.  On today's broadcast, Beck addressed Ben Carson's recent statement that prison sex proves that homosexuality is a choice and declared that Carson's possible presidential campaign is now over because his statement was "the dumbest thing I've ever heard."

"Goodbye to his presidential career," Beck said. "It's over. It's over. There is no way to recover from that. That just sounds like a lunatic ... That is just a ridiculous statement on a million fronts. A ridiculous statement."

"It's not just that he didn't see [the question] coming," Beck continued. "It's that he just thought that was a good answer. That was good enough for him. Just [imagine] I'm at a cocktail party and I'm talking to a friend and they say 'well yeah, you know, you go to prison and you're straight, you get out and you're gay,' don't you look at your friend — I don't care if he's the guy who works at the 7-Eleven and he's not running for president ever — don't you go, 'That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard'?"

Steve King: Boehner Threw A 'Tantrum' About DHS Vote, Kicked Foes Off 'Very Important Diplomatic Mission'

In an interview with Iowa-based radio host Simon Conway on Wednesday, Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King revealed that House Speaker John Boehner kicked him and fellow anti-immigration Republicans off a “high-profile diplomatic mission” in “retribution” for their votes against a clean funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security.

Conway told King that he was surprised the speaker didn’t step down from his post after a revolt from Republican members handed him an embarrassing defeat, ultimately forcing him to pass a DHS spending bill with the support of just 75 members of his caucus in alliance with Democrats.

“In times gone past, other speakers would have said, ‘That is a vote of no confidence in my leadership from my own caucus, I have to step down,'” Conway said. “I know he’s not going to step down and I don’t think there’s an appetite to challenge him.”

“Well, that appetite is growing here in this conference,” King responded, “and you can tell it by just the dialogue and discussion that’s taking place.”

He added that the speaker is “currently throwing tantrums” and seeking “retribution” against members who bucked him on the DHS votes.

“In the last 30 minutes, I have learned that a very important diplomatic mission that I was scheduled to go on that had been signed off on, certified, authorized, everything all booked, the order came down from the speaker’s office, ‘that shall be rescinded.’ And the people who he most objects to for disagreeing with him are now grounded to the United States of America by order of the speaker,” King told Conway.

That on top of the ads being run against Republicans by the American Action Network, King said, “is retribution on the highest scale that I’ve ever heard of.”

Later in the interview, King complained that undocumented immigrants covered by President Obama’s executive actions would be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit (despite the fact that the actions are projected to increase tax revenues) and that it provides a way for some immigrants to embark on a path to citizenship, which King said meant that “illegal aliens can go to vote and choose the next leader of the free world.”

“And when I say he eviscerated the Constitution, I think everyone who’s listening now understands what that means,” he concluded.

The president has waived the application of the law, he’s made up laws of his own, and now he as an administration that will be sending checks to illegals knowingly and willfully without even a breath of saying that want to try to reverse that. You know, a president who can make up law on his own, as he has done a number of times and gotten away with it, you would think he could also just simply issue an executive edict that they would not be issuing those kind of, writing checks to illegals who have filed under the Earned Income Tax Credit.

So, here’s your driver’s license mandated by the federal government, here’s your Earned Income Tax Credit, here’s your child tax credit that billions of dollars go out of the country every year for people who are living in the United States illegally, and now he’s created a path to citizenship so illegal aliens can go to vote and choose the next leader of the free world. Who would have thought, even three years ago, that this country would have been drug this far. And when I say he eviscerated the Constitution, I think everyone who’s listening now understands what that means.

GOP Rep: Republicans Have 'Stockholm Syndrome'

In an interview with Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “Washington Watch” yesterday, Rep. John Fleming, R-La., berated the House GOP leadership for allowing a vote on a clean bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which passed with the votes of every House Democrats and a minority of Republicans.

“Republican leadership, and really many Republicans in general, they — I don’t agree with them — are in sort of a Stockholm syndrome that whenever there is any discussion about a government shutdown, which is what’s going to happen when we cut funding and the president disagrees because the president feels like it gives him strength and the Democrats are on board, they stick together like glue, and so Republicans now have been conditioned,” Fleming told Perkins. “And the media is the first to jump out there, even the Republican pundits, to say, ‘Well look, you can do whatever you want to fight back against the president but you can’t shut government down.’”

“Once that narrative gets out there, it’s really all over,” Fleming said. “There just isn’t a pathway of success.”

He lamented that “many Americans say we should defund things but don’t shut down government, they don’t really understand that it’s one in the same.”

Frank Gaffney: Was Clinton Aide Huma Abedin Emailing Muslim Brotherhood Spies?

Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney, a right-wing activist notorious for his birther and anti-Muslim conspiracy theories, is using the controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email system while she was at the State Department to resuscitate the Right’s absurd claims about Huma Abedin, a close aide to the former Secretary of State.

Gaffney believes that Abedin is a secret agent for the Muslim Brotherhood, claiming in 2013 that “Ms. Abedin was brilliantly placed to run Islamist influence operations for sixteen years under the recently departed Sec. of State, Hillary Clinton.” His bizarre conspiracy theory helped inspire an ugly campaign against Abedin and other Muslims working in public service led by then-Rep. Michele Bachmann.

He has made similarly bizarre allegations against New Jersey Gov. Chris ChristieCIA Director John Brennanformer Defense Secretary Chuck Hagelprominent conservative activist Grover Norquist, and of course, President Obama.

Gaffney today penned a brief, evidence-free op-ed for the Washington Times where he used the just asking the question style of journalism to claim that Abedin may have been using Clinton’s email system to contact Muslim Brotherhood agents as part of their effort to destroy Western civilization.

One other State Department official evidently violated [the department’s email] policy:Mrs. Clinton‘s deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin.

Her emails are of particular interest insofar as Ms. Abedin has extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s the Islamist organization whose self-declared mission is

The indispensable investigative group Judicial Watch has filed suit in federal court for access to these emails. It remains to be seen if they are provided and, if so, what they reveal about these ladies’ contacts with theMuslim Brotherhood – and their damage-control concerning revelations about Ms. Abedin’s connection to it.

Huckabee: Obama Has An 'Innate Desire To See America A Weaker Country'

Mike Huckabee stopped by Steve Deace’s radio program yesterday to discuss Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress and the ongoing negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program.

Claiming that Obama doesn’t see how dangerous Iran is, Deace asked Huckabee: “Is it because he doesn’t love America? Is it because he has a worldview that blinds him to the realities of good vs. evil?”

“I believe he does not want America to be the superpower that we have been,” Huckabee responded. “It’s almost as if he’s afraid of that. He believes that America would be better off as ‘one of the boys’ instead of the big brother.”

Huckabee went on to blame House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi for turning the American relationship with Israel into “a political and partisan issue, God help us all.”

When Deace claimed that the parties no longer agree that “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” Huckabee agreed: “What has changed is Barack Obama’s influence over foreign policy. What has changed is his innate desire to see America a weaker country rather than a stronger country. And some Democrats are more interested in protecting Obama than they are in protecting America, and that’s the real sad fact.”

Theodore Shoebat Says ISIS Is A Gay Cult And 'Fags' Want To Molest Children

Theodore Shoebat is the sort of viciously anti-gay activist who openly calls for gays to be put to death and who recently became something of a Religious Right hero for his unsuccessful effort to find a bakery that would make a cake for him featuring anti-gay messages.

Earlier this week, Shoebat posted a new article on his website titled "Islam is a homosexual cult, that wants to bring the world into a homosexual pagan empire," which featured a video in which he argued that ISIS is run by gays while asserting that a nondiscrimination ordinance recently defeated in Charlotte, North Carolina, was being pushed by "fags" who want to molest children.

"I love it when people tell me, 'I don't see gay people beheading others,'" Shoebat said, affecting a stereotypical gay voice. "'Why are you fighting against gay people? I don't see gays decapitating people.' Ummm, yeah, there are gay people beheading others. It's something called ISIS. ISIS consists of many homosexuals. Some of their top leaders are homosexual."

Shoebat eventually turned his attention to the proposed anti-discrimination ordinance in Charlotte, which he claimed was designed to allow gay men to gain access to women's restroom so they could molest young boys.

"According to this new bill that these fags want to pass, you will be allowed to go into the woman's bathroom," he said. "The homosexuals want to go into a woman's bathroom so they can molest little boys. That's what this is about. They want to molest children. They want to do so peeping tom stuff on women in the bathroom. They want to be perverts ... The bottom line is that this is nothing but another incremental step to bring the civilized world back to pederasty [and] institutionalized pedophilia."

Why Shoebat thinks that gay men would be seeking access the women's restroom in order to have access to young boys and spy on women is anybody's guess.

Fox News Pundit: Muslim Holidays Discriminate Against Christians

Fox News pundit Todd Starnes appeared on the Family Research Council’s “Washington Watch” program yesterday to chat with Tony Perkins about what they perceive as growing anti-Christian persecution in America, including New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s recent announcement that city schools will now close for the Muslim holidays of Eid al-Adha and al-Fitr.

The two right-wing commentators were outraged, claiming that New York City’s move somehow discriminates against Christians.

“But yet when it comes to Christmas and Easter, two very prominent Christian holidays, they’re not on the school calendar, they’re called ‘winter break’ and ‘spring break,’” Perkins said. Starnes concurred: “Oh yes. For the sake of tolerance and diversity, that normally means the Christians are going to be discriminated against or their holidays are going to be minimalized.”

Easter always falls on a Sunday, which would explain why it is not on a school vacation calendar, while Christmas does in fact appear on New York City’s list of school holidays [PDF]. The city’s schools are also closed for Good Friday, along with the Jewish holy days of Yom Kippur, Rosh Hashanah and Passover.

An anguished Perkins lamented that “when 85 percent of the population identifies as Christian but we can’t have a Christmas holiday because it’s religious but yet we can have Muslim holidays, something is not right there in New York City, ‘The Big Apple,’ something is rotten.”

Starnes responded by claiming that Islam is being elevated over Christianity, and it’s all Obama’s fault.

“You’re absolutely right Tony,” the Fox News pundit said. “How many times have we seen this, where the Islamic faith is being given accommodation and the Christian faith and other religious faiths are being marginalized, not just in the public workspace but also through the Obama administration.”

Perkins also managed to attack President Obama for de Blasio’s decision: “I think the Obama administration has created the environment for policies such as this.”

Joseph Farah Is 'Just Asking': Will Obama Actually Leave Office In January 2017?

WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah personally believes that President Obama will leave office when his second term is up in January 2017, but senses that “there is great concern out there across the fruited plain” that the president will try to stay in office permanently, so he evidently considers it his journalistic duty to explore why this conspiracy theory may be true.

“[W]hy do we assume Obama will step aside willingly from the presidency following an election in 2016?” Farah asks in a column today. “I’m not saying he won’t. I’m just asking why.”

Farah then goes on to cite evidence of Obama’s possible power grab, including that the president that “respects neither the law nor the American tradition of peaceful changes of power,” has said “he and his family might remain in Washington after leaving office,” and, of course, “the ever-present reality that Obama himself may not even be constitutionally eligible for office.”

Question: Why are Americans so certain there will be a presidential election in 2016 and that Barack Obama will leave office in January 2017?

Answer: Because it’s the law and because it’s American tradition.

However, we currently have a man in the White House who respects neither the law nor the American tradition of peaceful changes of power.


And then, of course, there’s the ever-present reality that Obama himself may not even be constitutionally eligible for office. In fact, if he’s telling the truth about his parentage and the “birth certificate” he produced after years of demands from the public is real, he could not possibly be a “natural born citizen” as required by the Constitution.

So with all of this history – and much more, in fact – why do we assume Obama will step aside willingly from the presidency following an election in 2016?

I’m not saying he won’t. I’m just asking why. And judging from the number of questions I’m getting along these lines from the public, I’d say there’s great concern out there across the fruited plain.

Maybe we assume he will respectfully leave office after two terms because he has publicly said he would. In 2013, Obama said he and his family might remain in Washington after leaving office.

But that begs the question of whether Obama is truthful.

Again, do I think Obama will leave office in January 2017? Yes I do.

But, with a track record like this – and, actually much worse – should we simply take it for granted?

Kobach Defends Latest Claim About Anti-White Obama Conspiracy

Back in November, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach took a call on his weekly radio program from a listener who was worried that if Latinos became a majority in the U.S., they would embark on an “ethnic cleansing” of whites. Rather than simply refute the caller’s suggestion, Kobach – a leading anti-immigrant voice in the GOP -- responded by saying that President Obama was eroding the rule of law so while he didn’t “think it’s going to happen in America” he did “wonder what could happen.”

After we reported on the exchange, Kobach claimed that his remarks had been “ripped out of context” and that he was simply trying to be “polite” as the caller presented his paranoid predictions about the consequences of changing demographics.

So we weren’t entirely surprised this week when Kobach was presented with another paranoid prediction of whites as the victims of a government run by people of color and decided to go along with it too. As we reported yesterday, Kobach took a call from a listener who suggested that the Obama administration might be on the verge of declaring an end to the criminal prosecution of African Americans “regardless of the crime.” Kobach responded that while he thought it was “unlikely,” “it’​s already happened more or less in the case of civil rights laws” and “I’ve learned to say with this president, never say never.”

Now, Kobach is being forced again to defend his comments, and this time is standing by them, citing the Obama Justice Department’s decision to drop voter intimidation charges against the Fox News villains of the New Black Panther Party. Despite the claims of right-wing activists, there is no evidence to suggest that the Justice Department dropped the case against the small-time radical group because of the race of its members.

Kobach told the Wichita Eagle  that the New Black Panther Party case shows that the Obama administration has already fulfilled the caller’s nightmares “in one limited context":

Kobach dismissed criticism.
 
“My point was to bring attention to the Obama Justice Department’s position that some civil rights statutes can’t be enforced against people of color,” Kobach said. “For example, one of the Obama administration’s first actions it took in 2009 was to drop the slam-dunk charges against the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation.”
 
Kobach said the Justice Department dropped the charges specifically because of race, a claim that has been disputed.
 
“The point is the Obama administration has already done what the caller suggests in the context of voting civil rights statutes,” Kobach said Thursday. “So it’s already happened in one limited context. No, I don’t think it will happen in other contexts. I made it clear I don’t think that’s likely to happen.”

Correction: This post originally misidentified the newspaper that Kobach gave his response to. It was the Wichita Eagle, not the Kansas City Star.

Fischer: Ben Carson 'May Have Done Fatal Damage To His Campaign' By Apologizing For Anti-Gay Remarks

On his radio program yesterday, Bryan Fischer spent two segments heaping praise upon Ben Carson for his statement that prison sex proves that homosexuality is a choice. But that was before Carson apologized for his remarks and declared that he was simply not going to discuss the issue of gay rights any more.

Needless to say, Carson's retreat is not sitting well with Fischer, who spent two segments of his program today criticizing Carson for his refusal to defend his statement and saying that he may have fatally offended his base with his apology.

"Dr. Carson seems to be not considering the possibility that some people could be offended because he apologized," Fischer said. "They're disappointed in him because he apologized."

He went on to criticize Carson for listening "to the wrong people ... instead of worry about what the base thinks about what they have done and what they have said."

"He may have done fatal damage to his campaign with his apology last night," Fischer said. "The bottom line is that on homosexuality and maybe on everything else, Ben Carson needs to decide right now whether he is going to listen to God or his handlers. His career is in the balance":

Ken Ham Will Be A 'Second Class Citizen' Without Tax Breaks For His Creationist Theme Park

Answers in Genesis (AIG) founder Ken Ham has been on a warpath ever since Kentucky's tourism board denied his group $18 million worth of tax incentives for its planned Noah's Ark theme park, a companion to Ham's Creation Museum. Although the tourism board cited AIG's stated intention to discriminate based on religion in its hiring of theme park employees and to use the taxpayer-subsidized park for religious evangelism, Ham insists that the state has violated his "fundamental rights" and "freedom of speech" by denying him the tax breaks.

On Monday, Ham took his case to the right-wing program "In the Market with Janet Parshall," where the host claimed that Ham is being "treated as a second class citizen" and is the victim of "viewpoint discrimination."

Ham said that the rights of all people of faith are at stake in his case. "If we don't do something about this it's like the old idea of the frog in the water that you can boil it up and boil it to death and it doesn't you're doing it because it keeps accommodating to the temperature around it," he told Parshall. "If Christians just keep accommodating and allowing this to happen more and more, we will lose that free exercise of religion."

"It's more and more of that trying to eliminate the Christian freedom that we have in this nation," he said.

 

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious