X-Men #51, issued by Marvel Comics last month, gained immediate attention as it centered on a wedding between Northstar and his boyfriend. Northstar came out as gay in 1992, but for the anti-gay Florida Family Association, his marriage to his long-term boyfriend “has crossed the line by attempting to legitimize same-sex marriage and asking kids to fantasize about their own homosexual wedding.” The group is urging members “who do not want their children targeted with immoral propaganda through comics” to email Marvel Comics to pull the X-Men #51. Earlier, the American Family Association’s subgroup OneMilionMoms blasted Marvel for trying to “desensitize and brainwash” children with the comic and the Religious Right magazine Charisma wondered if “the rise of gay superheroes” is “just another example of the spirit of immorality waging war on young souls.”
Marvel’s X-Men #51 comic issue has crossed the line by attempting to legitimize same-sex marriage and asking kids to fantasize about their own homosexual wedding.
It is shameful that two companies like Marvel and Disney would deliberately create a superhero homosexual wedding for our children to embrace and mimic.
PLEASE have more respect for the overwhelming majority of families who do not want their children targeted with immoral propaganda through comics.
My family and I urge your company to pull X-Men #51 from distribution.
People For the American Way Foundation applauded the news today that Hewlett-Packard Co., CVS Caremark, Deere & Co., MillerCoors LLC and BestBuy have become the latest major corporations to announce their exit from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), bringing the number of corporations leaving the organization to 25.
“Supporting ALEC’s extreme agenda is never justifiable,” said Michael Keegan, President of People For the American Way Foundation. “ALEC hurts Americans on a daily basis by promoting policies that suppress the vote, hurt working families, attack public education and destroy the environment.
“The decision by these five companies to leave ALEC is an important step to do right by their customers. Their competitors who have yet to quit should know that the American people won’t forget who continues to underwrite ALEC’s agenda at our expense. Fortunately, more and more corporations, nonprofits and organizations are withdrawing their memberships. As a result, ALEC’s ability to push its dangerous agenda through our statehouses diminishes every day.”
A petition drive and phone campaign led by People For the American Way Foundation, Color of Change, the Center for Media and Democracy, CREDO Action, Progress Now, SumOfUs and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee has resulted in over 500,000 signatures and calls to ALEC’s corporate members, demanding that those companies end their membership with ALEC.
Mitt Romney raised a lot of money this weekend at a gala fundraiser in the Hamptons, where guests such as the Koch brothers paid up to $50,000 to attend. But according to the Huffington Post, one particular presence that weekend was not on the official guest list: Karl Rove.
Rove was in town to speak at a luncheon promoting his super PAC, American Crossroads, and his affiliated nonprofit group. Because American Crossroads spends its contributors’ unlimited donations on ads supporting Mitt Romney (or attacking President Obama), the Romney campaign and Rove are prohibited by law from “coordinating” with each other.
As far as the law is concerned, however, “coordination” is defined narrowly at best. With the Romney event unable to sponsor Rove’s luncheon, Solamere Capital, a private equity firm founded by Romney’s son Tagg along with Romney’s chief fundraiser Spencer Zwick, footed the bill. Many of the attendees at Rove’s luncheon, scheduled the day before the official retreat weekend, were also at the campaign fundraiser. As one fundraiser who was at the retreat noted, “It was not a coincidence that the Solamere conference took place in the same city just before the retreat began.”
Thanks to Citizens United, corporations and wealthy individuals and special interests can bypass the $2,500 maximum that campaign committees can accept and instead give unlimited amounts to super PACs like American Crossroads, which in turn spent about $300 million this year to support the GOP. Although in its flawed ruling the Court may have intended such outside groups to be independent, the facts just don’t support that notion:
"This kind of activity [by Rove] is the last thing the Supreme Court had in mind when it ruled that spending by an outside group had to be 'totally independent' and 'wholly independent' from a candidate the group is supporting with expenditures," Fred Wertheimer, the president of Democracy 21, said in an interview. "The FEC lives in a pure fantasy world in the way it attempts to define coordinated activities as not being coordinated activities."
Citizens United has left us in quite a campaign finance mess – and a constitutional amendment to overturn that decision and related cases is the only path forward to fairer and more transparent elections.
Recently, John Hagee unveiled a new internet endeavor called Global Evangelism Television (GETV) which seems to be a one-stop destination for all your John Hagee Ministries-related needs. The website features live events along with music videos, short messages, looks behind the scenes, and current and archived sermons.
In addition, it seems that Hagee has started producing Glenn Beck-like programs, such as this recent video entitled "The Agenda to Destroy America" in which Hagee spent a half-hour talking directly to the camera about how Communists have succeeded in taking over America, just as Beck's favorite philosopher W. Cleon Skousen had predicted in his 1958 book "The Naked Communist."
As Hagee explained, today hard-working Americans are having their money confiscated by a "massive socialist government" that is giving their money to "deadbeats who can work but won't work." This type of government, Hagee warned, "eventually leads to civil violence [and] you're seeing some of that civil violence with the Occupy Wall Street group" and creates an environment that eventually gives rise to ruthless political leaders like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and even the Antichrist:
Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) appeared on WallBuilders Live today alongside hosts David Barton and Rick Green to discuss the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the health care reform law. The congressman maintained that the law “removes the very freedom and liberty that our founders fought for at its very core” and if it is implemented then America will no longer be “the America that you and I love” and that “our founders fought for.” Price went on to cite a sham, Tea Party study heralded throughout conservative media, to claim that “around eighty percent of the physicians surveyed would say if this comes to its full conclusion, that is Obamacare becoming fully implemented, they don’t see how they could practice.” He said that doctors following rules under the reform law will be violating their professional oath, representing the “subjugation of a free citizen, a formerly free citizen.”
Green: It’s allowing government to take over these very personal decisions.
Price: It removes the very freedom and liberty that our founders fought for at its very core. Nothing is more personal, as a physician I can tell you when I would treat patients they understood that it was either an insurance company or the state or federal government that were dictating to them what might be available to them in terms of treatment or diagnosis, they’d bristle, as would I. This is just turning that into the system for every single American and that is a system where Washington decides what you can get, what kind of treatment you can get for yourself and for your family. That’s not America, that’s not the America that you and I love, that’s not the America our founders fought for, that’s not the America that recognizes that our liberty and our freedom comes from God almighty and not from the federal government.
Green: Amen. It looks like as the White House begins to spin this it looks like we’ll be where we were in 2009 where both sides are trying to say whether or not this is a good idea as we go into the 2012 elections. It looks like a lot of doctors are actually saying, ‘If this thing goes forward I’m out of here, I can’t even practice medicine under this system.’
Price: You all have been following this very closely and there’s a recent survey that puts it at somewhere around eighty percent of the physicians surveyed would say if this comes to its full conclusion, that is Obamacare becoming fully implemented, they don’t see how they could practice. The reason is, it’s important for people to appreciate the reason for this, it’s not that things just get too difficult it’s that as a profession we take an oath, physicians take an oath, to provide the highest quality care they are capable of for their patients. If the federal government is going to come in and say ‘we know that you believe Mrs. Smith deserves this and needs this for her treatment but we don’t believe that that’s what Mrs. Smith needs and we will tell you what to give Mrs. Smith,’ that’s no longer a profession, that’s a subjugation of a free citizen, a formerly free citizen, that physicians will not tolerate and I think that’s why you’re seeing that kind of response that you’re seeing from doctors across the land.
Frank Gaffney is out with another extremist anti-gay and anti-Muslim rant, writing in the Washington Times today that President Obama intends to ruin the military. He said that Obama is intentionally “losing wars” and trying to “throw in the towel,” which will be “a formula for disaster,” while at the same time make the military submit to the “doctrine of Shariah” and become “a vehicle for advancing the radical homosexual agenda.” Obama’s policies will precipitate “the collapse of the all-volunteer force, as many of those who are serving decline to do so and fewer and fewer new, high-quality recruits enlist,” Gaffney concludes:
Unfortunately, under President Obama, service members’ rising fears of being prosecuted for acting to protect themselves and their missions are among many ways in which the military is being “fundamentally transformed,” to use Mr. Obama’s now-infamous turn of phrase. Consider a few examples:
Losing wars: Few things can have a more corrosive effect on the morale and esprit de corps of the armed forces than being ordered to participate in and sacrifice - not least by risking life and limb - in protracted conflicts, only to have political authorities throw in the towel. Add in the repeated combat tours pulled by many service members, with all that entails for both them and their families, and you have a formula for disaster for the U.S. military.
Worse yet, our troops are seen by the enemy in these and other ways to be submitting to the latter’s doctrine of Shariah. According to that supremacist code, its adherents are compelled, when confronted with evidence they are winning, to redouble their efforts to make us feel subdued. This generally translates into more violence against our troops and us, not less.
Assault on the culture of the military: Last, but not least, President Obama’s use of the military as a vehicle for advancing the radical homosexual agenda in the larger society has demonstrated for many in uniform civilian indifference to the unique attributes of the armed forces. That message can only have been reinforced by the Supreme Court’s ruling allowing fraudulent claims to military decorations as protected free speech.
Unfortunately, these sorts of assaults on the U.S. military are likely to “fundamentally transform” it, all right. Perhaps that transformation will manifest itself, among other ways, by precipitating the collapse of the all-volunteer force, as many of those who are serving decline to do so and fewer and fewer new, high-quality recruits enlist. We can ill afford such an Obama legacy in an increasingly dangerous world.
Google announced a new international campaign called Legalize Love “to decriminalize homosexuality and eliminate homophobia around the world,” and of course, the American Family Association is now weighing a boycott of Google products since the organization is already “boycotting efforts similar to this with other businesses,” like Home Depot and Oreo cookies. Buster Wilson, the general manager of the AFA’s radio network, said on AFA Today that a Google boycott “is going to be a hard one for a lot of us” but will “test the meat of our convictions.”
If the AFA goes ahead with its Google boycott, the group will also have to boycott Google’s rival Microsoft as the company recently endorsed marriage equality.
On yesterday's installment of "WallBuilders Live," David Barton and Rick Green complained that government regulation was destroying the free market system ... not too much government regulation, mind you, but any government regulation.
In fact, Barton declared that the mere existence of federal regulatory agencies represent "the most dangerous attack on our liberties since the British" while Green explained that there was no need for federal agencies to prevent companies from dumping toxic waste because the truly free market will hold them accountable when they get sued:
Barton: What's going on right now in DC is government at the regulatory level, particularly at the cabinet level, whether it's the Department of Agriculture or Health and Human Services or whatever, those are now pretty much unaccountable agencies. And what they're starting to do to the country, they have no sense of accountability, they fear no one - they don't fear the President, they don't fear Congress, they sure as heck don't fear the people because we don't elect them. the stuff that's now going on with those agencies is, I think, unprecedented and the most dangerous attack we've had on our liberties since the British, quite frankly.
By definition, a free market means there is no government intervention or regulation. So the more these agencies get involved, the less you have the free market and the less prosperity you will have and the less freedom you will have.
Green: You know, people say if you don't have [regulatory agencies] you're gonna have some company that dumps toxic waste or whatever; well then you the company and you go through the civil courts and there's accountability there.
Yes, I am sure that if some company recklessly dumped toxic waste that ended up making one of Green's children seriously ill, he's response would be "thank goodness our truly free maket has no agencies in existence that can prevent things like this from happening so that now I have the opportunity to sue this company and hold them accountable for gravely injuring my child."
Earlier this year, a virus infected millions of computers around the world that caused the infected computers to visit fake websites and prevented owners from visiting security websites to remove it. In an effort to stop the virus, the FBI set up several clean servers so that those infected would still be able to access the internet and remove the virus from their computers.
The FBI's efforts were only temporary and today the clean servers it had set up were scheduled to be turned off and therefore any person with an infected computer that had not gotten rid of the virus by today risked losing access to the internet.
So how is Janet Porter and her Faith2Action organization reporting this news? By suggesting that the FBI is trying to take away your internet access:
Speaking at the Epicenter Conference in Jerusalem, radical evangelist and daughter of Billy Graham, Anne Graham Lotz, elaborated on her belief that the end times are here. Quoting from Joel 1:6, she compared the locust plague with the pornography industry, saying that it constitutes an “invasion” upon our land.
The locust invasion that destroyed the land, was like an army, but was not a human army. So then I was asking myself, what non-human army is invading our world and destroying it? Just like that I could think of pornography. Invading our land and our nation – just subtle, seeping corruption, destroying the fabric of society, tearing apart healthy relationships and families, the very bedrock on which a nation is built. Pornography makes more money in a year, than apple, Microsoft, Google, eBay, amazon, combined. That’s a disaster.
James Dobson is holding feminists responsible for the objectification of women in American culture, quoting from a 2007 article from Marc Gellman in his latest column that maintains that the feminist movement “surrendered women to predatory men who have taken women’s newfound freedom as the perfect opportunity to surrender all sexual responsibility, respect and gallantry.” He laments that women rich and poor now “become bimbos,” pointing out that he sees “the bimbofication of young girls all the time in my affluent suburban synagogue.” After setting up a false dichotomy between the Taliban’s oppression of women and the “the latest exploits of Paris, Lindsay and Britney,” Gellman says it’s wrong to let women begin “embracing their sexuality in any way they desire” because it “supports porn, which coarsens our culture.”
Anna Nicole was stigmatized as poor white trash. However, it is a cruel illusion to believe that only poor, pretty women must become bimbos, strippers and gold diggers to get out of the trailer park. I see the bimbofication of young girls all the time in my affluent suburban synagogue. Sadly, some of the brightest adolescent girls around the age of 12 suddenly try to dumb themselves down so that they can attract a boy- friend who will not be scared off by their intelligence. I also see echoes of Anna Nicole in the successful twentysomethings and thirtysomethings, whose little black cocktail dresses are meant to both reveal their cleavage and conceal their desperation at the thought that pursuing a career means abandoning the pursuit of love and family. The feminist movement has won important victories for egalitarianism, but it has also surrendered women to predatory men who have taken women's newfound freedom as the perfect opportunity to surrender all sexual responsibility, respect and gallantry. One can rejoice at newfound freedoms without distorting their cost.
The problem with treating women as meat is that many of the solutions offered up are far worse than the problem. The Taliban had an easy and perverse solution, and that was to treat women as prisoners. Completely covering up the female form with a burqa and shutting women out of Afghani public and professional life is even worse than being forced to hear about the latest exploits of Paris, Lindsay and Britney. On the other hand, making the case that there is nothing wrong with women freely displaying their bodies and embracing their sexuality in any way they desire is equally perverse because it supports porn, which coarsens our culture, degrades women and led to the death of a woman whose infant daughter needs her now. We need to find a place between prudes and porn. The future of our culture and the dignity of both men and women depend upon us finding such a place now.
** This post has been updated for clarity. In his column, Dobson didn't note where the quote from Gellman's article begins or ends.
It is no exaggeration to say that we have watched or listened to several dozen of the pseudo-historical presentations that David Barton delivers to church groups and political gatherings alike. And we continue to watch them because Barton is constantly adding new unverifiable and downright false claims to his speeches.
But it turns out that even some of the claims that have long served as the foundation for his presentations are also problematic. Over the last week, we have watched two recent presentations that Barton delivered in which made a point that, while today we may only know a bit about a handful of our nation's Founding Fathers, the Founding Fathers themselves regularly pointed to preachers as having played an extremely important role in the founding of this nation.
And to "prove" this, Barton routinely cites a letter that John Adams wrote to a man named Hezekiah Niles in 1818 responding to a question from Niles about which people were most responsible for the ideas and principles upon which the nation was founded. In Barton's telling, Adams' reply was that it was preachers like Samuel Cooper, Jonathan Mayhew, George Whitefield, and Charles Chauncy who must be placed at the top of any such list:
Of course, if you actually bother to take a look at the letter Barton cites, here is what you find:
This produced, in 1760 and 1761, an awakening and a revival of American principles and feelings, with an enthusiasm which went on increasing till in 1775 it burst out in open violence, hostility, and fury.
The characters the most conspicuous, the most ardent and influential in this revival, from 1760 to 1766, were first and foremost, before all and above all, James Otis; next to him was Oxenbridge Thatcher; next to him Samuel Adams; next to him John Hancock; then Dr. Mayhew; then Dr. Cooper and his brother.
That's it. So not only are the individuals Barton's cites not listed "right up front," but two of the people (Whitefield and Chauncy) are not even mentioned in Adams' list, or anywhere in the letter, at all!
We have heard Barton make this claim regarding this Adams letter several dozen time only to discover today that, like so much else that he says, it is fundamentally untrue; thereby proving once again that just about every factual assertion Barton makes needs to be checked simply because so many of them turn out to be undeniably false.
Unable to comprehend why Chief Justice John Roberts found the health care reform law to be constitutional, Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman is now calling for an investigation into whether “whether Roberts was bribed or blackmailed into precipitously turning tail and casting his lot with the socialists.” Maybe the money came from Iran, as Klayman earlier claimed that “Iran has paid off Obama with campaign contributions to win the next election.”
What explains Chief Justice Roberts' conversion from one who had decided to strike down Obamacare to a justice who dishonestly twisted and perverted the law to uphold it as constitutional? Was it simply a desire, as some political and legal pundits have speculated, to allegedly "save" the institution of the court by caving in to the left — which in recent years had railed against the conservative majority — and kissing the derriere of President Obama himself? In this way was Chief Justice Roberts painting "his" court as the court for all people, be they left, right, black or white ? Or was it something more sinister? Given real-world realities, you have to ask whether Roberts was bribed or blackmailed into precipitously turning tail and casting his lot with the socialists.
Decades ago, no rational person would have even dared to think such a thought. But with each passing decade since the 1950s — which it now appears were the pinnacle in America's post-war rise to power and greatness — the ethics, morals and honesty of our public officials in particular have decayed into the slimy free fall the nation now finds itself in. So why is this such a far-fetched proposition?
Was Chief Justice Roberts was bribed, blackmailed or just playing political games with his Obamacare change of heart? As the old proverb goes, "Where there is smoke there is usually fire." Since judges and, in this case, justices should not be treated as royalty, and certainly are not above the law, is it not reasonable for Roberts to be thoroughly investigated over his lawless actions?
Instead, it again turns to We the People to investigate and, if Chief Justice Roberts was bribed or blackmailed, mete out justice. As I have been writing about in recent weeks, one way to do this is through the Citizens Grand Jury, which our Founding Fathers bequeathed to us to use in trying times like these.
Apparently, we can pick and choose parts of the Bible after all, says Pat Robertson. When asked on the 700 Club today why some believe “America was founded as a Christian nation” even though it allowed slavery, Robertson said, “like it or not, if you read the Bible in the Old Testament, slavery was permitted.” But Robertson concluded that despite what the Bible says, “We have moved in our conception of the value of human beings until we realized slavery was terribly wrong.” Of course, when Dan Savage made a similar point about the Bible (albeit with saltier language), the Religious Right was irate.
As Brian noted in the previous post, Buster Wilson, general manager of the American Family Association’s radio network and host of the program "AFA Today," declared on his radio program on Friday that he carries a "great inward burden about the truth and validity of the things that I say" because he knows he will be held accountable by God while, at the same time, spreading false information.
The burden is so great, in fact, that Wilson felt it necessary to warn his audience, like Bryan Fischer did earlier this year, that the Department of Homeland Security is buying up millions of rounds of ammunition, possibly with plans to launch some sort of war against American civilians.
In particular, Wilson pointed to an executive order that President Obama issued back in March that updated policies for dealing with national emergencies, including the National Defense Executive Reserve (NDER), a program that has existed for decades that allows private and public sector experts who are not full-time government employees to fill executive positions in the federal government in the case of a national emergency.
But for Wilson, "these NDER units are basically the President's version of the Brownshirts," no different than "Hitler's own private civilian army," and people who don't believe it just need to "go read it and tell me how crazy I am":