Fighting the Right

Peter Brimelow: States Like Texas Must Consider Secession To Protect 'White Rights'

Speaking at the white nationalist American Renaissance conference last month in Tennessee, conservative author and onetime CPAC speaker Peter Brimelow argued that instead of promoting unity, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day “has just turned into anti-white indoctrination.” Unless “cultural Marxists” who are behind “political correctness” and “the war on Christmas” are resisted, Brimelow contends, the U.S. will collapse.

“Whites have rights,” demanded Brimelow as he advocated for the secession of Texas from a failing U.S.

Brimelow described a modern Red Terror in which “cultural Marxists” are now in control and the victims of discrimination and condemnation are white nationalists. The mission of these “social justice warriors,” he said, is to “keep white consciousness suppressed and keep Americans generally divided.”

Fischer: We 'Will NEVER Capitulate To Any Nazi-esque Order' To Recognize Gay Marriage

On his radio program today, Bryan Fischer called on social conservatives "to prepare for a post-apocalyptic world" when the Supreme Court strikes down gay marriage bans and to stand united in declaring that they will "NEVER capitulate to any Nazi-esque order" requiring them to recognize gay marriage.

"This has got to be a non-negotiable red line for us," Fischer said. "It is absolutely imperative that that we categorically, unambiguously, and publicly declare that we will NEVER ... accept the normalization of homosexual marriage, and will NEVER capitulate to any Nazi-esque order from any government at any level to violate either conscience or biblical principle on this matter."

"They can’t arrest us all, they can’t prosecute us all, they can’t lock us all up, they can’t shut down every Christian-run business, they can't shut down every Christian school, they can't shut down every Bible-believing church, they can't shut down every Christian ministry," he concluded. "They can't lock us all up, but our determination to resist moral tyranny must be resolute enough to prompt them to try":

Richard Spencer: Whites Need Their Own MLK Or Gandhi To Save Themselves From Minority Domination

Last month, the white nationalist group American Renaissance held its annual conference in Tennessee, bringing together fringe racist figures like AmRen’s Jared Taylor, the National Policy Institute’s Richard Spencer, and former Klan attorney Sam Dickson with activists who have ties with more mainstream conservative movements, including former National Review columnist John Derbyshire and onetime CPAC speaker Peter Brimelow.

American Renaissance is tied to the leadership of ProEnglish, a regular sponsor of groups such as CPAC.  

The event included a debate about whether “the race problem” can be solved within “the U.S. political system,” with Brimelow and Derbyshire arguing that it can, and Spencer and Dickson arguing that it cannot.

Spencer argued that white Americans are becoming marginalized and victimized by an increasing non-white population, a problem that can only be confronted by finding “a white-advocate Martin Luther King or a white-advocate Gandhi” who can similarly “start from a position of weakness and capture people’s imagination.”

Huckabee: Better To Have A Gun You Don't Know How To Use Than No Gun At All

At a campaign stop at an Iowa gun range yesterday, Mike Huckabee dismissed concerns about lax state requirements for gun permits, saying he wasn’t very worried about a permit-holder “not being as trained as they could be” because “a good guy armed is still better than a good guy unarmed.”

A reporter attending the event at Crossroads Shooting Sports in Johnston, Iowa, asked Huckabee to comment on laws in Iowa that make it “relatively easy to get your permit to carry” without “actual hands-on training.”

“You know, I leave that to the states,” Huckabee said. “[I have] less worry about someone not being as trained as they could be, because I think ultimately a citizen who is going to arm themselves is going to want to avail themselves of significant training to become proficient. I mean, that just makes sense, for their own sake. But if they don’t, a good guy armed is still better than a good guy unarmed.”

He told the audience that he would hope permit holders would pursue extensive firearms training, “but that’s an individual responsibility, so I wouldn’t try to get in the way of what the state thinks is the right way to go about that.”

At the same event, Huckabee told another questioner that the government shouldn't restrict the ability of people to acquire military-grade weaponsThe comments were caught on video by the conservative blog Caffeinated Thoughts.  

 

 

Rick Perry: Nobody Will Worry About Jade Helm-Type Conspiracy Theories When I Am President

Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry promised on Glenn Beck’s radio program today that right-wing conspiracy theorists will have no cause to freak out over things like Jade Helm 15 when he is president.

After Beck said that distrust of the government over Jade Helm among "law abiding, normal citizens" who love America is a sign that "crazy things are happening now," Perry vowed that that would not be a problem if he were to become commander in chief.

"Let's say that I were to become the president of the United States," Perry said. "I think there will be a clearly changed attitude toward that office, what comes out of that office, the messaging that comes out of that office that clearly puts America back on a course where people [trust the government.]"

"I hope people always question government," he continued, "but don't question your military. Don't question the men and women who have put their hands up and sworn this oath to our Constitution to defend this country":

Anti-Gay Pundit: Gays, Like Murderers, Live A 'Dangerous' And 'Deadly Lifestyle'

Bill Muehlenberg, author of “Strained Relations: The Challenge of Homosexuality,” took to BarbWire today to claim that “loving homosexuals means telling them they don’t have to be homosexual.”

He writes that just as it wouldn’t be considered hateful to tell a slave-owner that slavery is wrong or demand that a murderer stop killing people, people who believe that “talking about a ‘cure’ for homosexuality is harmful and hateful are also unbiblical and unhelpful.”

“The only haters here are the activists who want people to stay trapped in an unhealthy and deadly lifestyle, and the confused Christians who reject Scripture for worldly wisdom,” he writes.

When you are loving in the biblical sense, you cannot be indifferent to the lost, to the plight of those heading the wrong way, to those on a one-way trip to hell. To love such people means you will warn them, you will wave [sic] the red flag, you will do everything in your power to get them off the road to ruin.

It is only when you hate someone that you will not think of their welfare – both temporal and eternal. Thus the Christian who pleads with the homosexual to be set free from his dangerous and dead-end lifestyle is acting out of love.



Those pushing this line might as well say opposing the criminal gangs wanting to hook kids on drugs is being hateful. They might as well say Wilberforce was “hating on” the slave owners as he stood up for blacks. Sorry, but to love people means resisting what enslaves them.

By this unhelpful advice, Wilberforce should have just shut up about abolition, and not make people feel guilty about their sinful activities. Loving people always means telling them the truth. Loving homosexuals means telling them they don’t have to be homosexual.

And those who claim that talking about a “cure” for homosexuality is harmful and hateful are also unbiblical and unhelpful. They might as well tell a murderer: “Hey, Jesus loves you, but I certainly won’t try to cure you of your desire to kill. Feel free to keep on doing it. I don’t want you to feel guilty after all, or feel hated on.”



The only haters here are the activists who want people to stay trapped in an unhealthy and deadly lifestyle, and the confused Christians who reject Scripture for worldly wisdom.

Michael Savage Explodes: 'Satan' Obama Acts Like Charles Manson, Wants Race War

On Monday, Michael Savage lit into President Obama for restricting the use of military-style equipment for local police forces, which the conservative talk show host said was part of the president’s plot to cripple the police and possibly impose martial law.

Savage, replying to a caller who told him about Charles Manson’s belief in an impending race war, said that “the rhetoric of Obama and Sharpton and Holder is not too far from that of Charles Manson and Manson’s vision of stirring up the black population to conduct a race war.”

“The devil in the White House went out and attacked the police again, did you hear that today?” he said, referring to a speech Obama delivered at an event for the My Brother’s Keeper initiative. “No one will believe that he did this, he did it again, the Satan did it again. Do you realize what a lie that is? Do you realize he’s justifying the looting, he’s justifying the burglary that triggered some of this, he’s justifying the killing of the police? The very same Satan who just said that, so far as I know, has not apologized for what he did in Ferguson and what he did in Baltimore; instead the Satan is doubling down on fomenting racial hatred.”

He added: “How could a president continue to push such hatred? The rhetoric is no different, by the way, than that of Al Sharpton or that of the grand wizard of the — who is the grand wizard of race hatred in America? The Black Panthers. And who is the number two grand wizard of racial hatred in America? The Nation of Islam.”

Savage said that by “demilitarizing” the police and “militarizing the military,” Obama may be “preparing for something astronomically unbelievable.” This led him to rant about black-on-white crimes while shouting about how the “slick Satan” and “evil liar” in the White House is stirring up “an epidemic of killing police by minorities, by the way.” 

Sandy Rios: Ruth Bader Ginsburg Showed No Honor By Participating In Gay Marriage Case

Earlier this spring, the American Family Association led an unsuccessful campaign to demand that Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan recuse themselves from the marriage equality cases at the Supreme Court because they had officiated weddings for same-sex couples.

Sandy Rios, the AFA’s governmental affairs director, continued the tirade on her radio show yesterday, saying that the fact that Ginsburg officiated at another gay couple’s wedding this weekend shows just how “dishonorable” she is.

“We are living in lawless times where there really is no honor,” Rios said, “and for the left it’s the means to an end, you know the honorable thing to them is getting gay marriage legalized, it doesn’t matter how dishonorable they are in the process.” 

Gohmert: Bush Wouldn't Have Invaded Iraq Had He Known Obama Would Succeed Him And Fight For 'The Wrong Side'

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, said yesterday that President Bush would have thought twice about invading Iraq if he had known that his successor would be “such a total incompetent leader” who is on “the wrong side” in the fight against terrorism.

In an interview with Virginia talk radio host John Fredericks, Gohmert said he opposed an effort led by Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia to pass a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) in the fight against ISIS, saying that “the president has all the authority he could possibly need” in the broad AUMF passed in 2001 and that the proposed new AUMF would “help tie his hands in ways a good president would not need.”

He added that the new AUMF, in addition to giving the president too little authority, would give the president too much authority. “I don’t trust this administration, I don’t want to give them any additional authority that Bush didn’t have,” he said.

“So, thank you very much, Mr. Kaine, but you need to tell your buddy in the Democratic Party to actually start fighting our enemies and quit helping our enemies and help our friends instead and quit worrying about a new AUMF,” Gohmert added. “He would be able to defeat ISIS if he just starts helping our friends and stops helping the enemies.”

“That AUMF, it’s a red herring, it’s a crock,” he continued. “The problem is the president’s on the wrong side. That’s the real problem.”

As Fredericks repeatedly tried to break in with a question, Gohmert continued his train of thought.

“I mean, seriously, John, you think a new AUMF is all of a sudden going to give us a president that will fight with the right people over there and win over there, really?

“Everybody else wants to ask that question of, ‘Gee, would you have gone into Iraq if you’d known what you know now?’ And I think if President Bush had known that he would have a total incompetent follow him that would not even be able to negotiate a status of forces agreement with Iraq and start helping our enemies and just totally put the Middle East in chaos, then he would have to think twice about doing anything if he had known he would have such a total incompetent leader take over after him. That should be the question.”

'This Is A Show By The President': Beck Plows Ahead With His Government Takeover Of Local Police Conspiracy Theory

On Monday, we noted that President Obama was set to announce that new restrictions were being put in place that would limit the use of military equipment by local police forces, which kind of threw a wrench into Glenn Beck's current conspiracy theory that Obama is intentionally militarizing the police ahead of a planned federal take over a police forces all over the nation.

Needless to say, this new announcement has not, in any way, actually undermined Beck's theory, as he spent the opening segment of his television program last night explaining that these new restrictions are nothing but "a show" designed to conceal the fact that Obama is actually implementing more federal control over local police forces.

Ignoring all of the actual prohibitions and restrictions that have been put in place, Beck insisted that this is nothing but cover for a well-coordinated White House plan to use groups like Code Pink, Move On, CAIR, and the New Black Panthers to stir up civil unrest for the purpose of providing an excuse for the government to seize control of local police departments.

"This is a show by the president," Beck said. "Expect to see more protests continue ... Expect sometime between now and I don't know when, these groups are going to be instrumental in setting our cities on fire, getting us to tear each other apart, getting us to cry out, 'Somebody's got to stop the madness,' and the president will be happy to do it with centralized control of police and a national police force":

Matthew Hagee: Waco Biker Shootout Is A Sign Of The End Times

In the last few years, Matthew Hagee has used his weekly "Hagee Hotline" program to warn that the striking down of DOMA, Obamacare, climate change, Ebola, a shooting at the Naval Yard, and a shooting in Canada's parliament were all signs of the End Times.

On yesterday's program, Hagee added last weekend's shootout between rival motorcycle gangs in Waco, Texas, to the list.

"One of the things that I believe is important to point out in this situation is that the Bible says that in the End Times, lawlessness would abound," Hagee said. "When these kinds of events take place, one word seems to describe them: lawlessness":

Rebuffed by Republican Legislators, Bobby Jindal Issues Executive Order on 'Religious Liberty'

In a Republican presidential field crowded with far-right candidates, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is trying to distinguish himself as the far-rightest candidate, especially on issues relating to marriage equality and its supposed threat to the religious freedom of conservative Christians.

Jindal’s latest came at the end of the day on Tuesday. Unwilling to accept the legislature’s failure to pass a so-called “religious liberty” bill (it was voted down 10-2 in a House committee), Jindal issued an executive order designed to protect any person who “acts in accordance with a religious belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.” The order explicitly defines “person” to include for-profit corporations and well as nonprofit organizations.

Jindal has adopted the rhetorical strategy promoted by the National Organization for Marriage and other opponents of LGTB equality: try to turn conversation about anti-gay discrimination “on its head” by declaring that laws protecting gay people are actually a form of discrimination against Christians. His statement about the executive order said it was designed to “prevent the state from discriminating against persons or entities with deeply held religious beliefs that marriage is between one man and one woman.”

Jindal’s order invokes the Supreme Court’s decision in Hobby Lobby, making it the latest sign that the decision – which granted corporations a right to claim legal exemptions based on the religious beliefs of company owners -- poses a threat to nondiscrimination measures and potentially a wide range of laws protecting the interests of workers. Jindal declared that his order is “not about discrimination,” even though its clear intent is to give legal cover to companies, government officials, and others who discriminate against same-sex couples.

Louisiana does not currently give legal recognition to same-sex couples, but Jindal is concerned that the state’s ban on marriage equality may soon be struck down by the Supreme Court, a potential ruling which his order seems to be a legally questionable effort to pre-empt. Jindal should be asked to clarify exactly what actions his legislation is designed to “protect”: a courthouse clerk who refuses to process marriage license paperwork? Religious schools getting tax dollars under Jindal’s education policy refusing to accept children of gay parents? Catholic hospitals refusing to recognize the spousal or parental rights of gay couples during medical emergencies?   

Jindal’s “religious liberty” bill had been opposed by business and tourism leaders as well as civil rights groups. The New Orleans Times Picayune reports that the New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau CEO Stephen Perry had called the bill “a radioactive, poisonous message.”

But Jindal’s primary audience is no longer his Louisiana constituents; it's right-wing activists nationwide. Jindal boasted about the executive order by stopping by the radio program hosted by Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, an anti-gay activist who once suggested that LGBT non-discrimination measures would lead to the Holocaust perpetrated against Christians.

Right-wing pundit and Iowa GOP activist Steve Deace reacted rapturously, proclaiming Jindal his “winner of the week” for standing up to “Republicrats.”

Jindal immediately stepped in and ordered that while he’s governor the state government is not going to be a tool of the Cultural Marxists’ Rainbow Jihad against religion — particularly Christianity….

This action by Jindal is an example of what will be required of the next president if he’s going to truly honor his oath of office to defend our Constitution against all enemies — “both foreign and domestic.”

Let’s face it, the vast majority of alleged conservatives won’t stand up to the Democrats. And almost none of them will stand up to the Republicrats. On perhaps the most important issue of them all — the First Amendment that allows us the freedom to peacefully and publicly stand on principle for everything else — Jindal has done both.

But he didn’t just stand up to them rhetorically, he actually did something about it. There are several potentially exciting presidential candidates this cycle. There’s even a couple that like Jindal have shown they will tell the Republicrats bleeding us dry to stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.

PFAW

Rebuffed by Republican Legislators, Bobby Jindal Issues Executive Order on 'Religious Liberty'

In a Republican presidential field crowded with far-right candidates, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is trying to distinguish himself as the far-rightest candidate, especially on issues relating to marriage equality and its supposed threat to the religious freedom of conservative Christians.

Jindal’s latest came at the end of the day on Tuesday. Unwilling to accept the legislature’s failure to pass a so-called “religious liberty” bill (it was voted down 10-2 in a House committee), Jindal issued an executive order designed to protect any person who “acts in accordance with a religious belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.” The order explicitly defines “person” to include for-profit corporations and well as nonprofit organizations.

Jindal has adopted the rhetorical strategy promoted by the National Organization for Marriage and other opponents of LGTB equality: try to turn conversation about anti-gay discrimination “on its head” by declaring that laws protecting gay people are actually a form of discrimination against Christians. His statement about the executive order said it was designed to “prevent the state from discriminating against persons or entities with deeply held religious beliefs that marriage is between one man and one woman.”

Jindal’s order invokes the Supreme Court’s decision in Hobby Lobby, making it the latest sign that the decision – which granted corporations a right to claim legal exemptions based on the religious beliefs of company owners -- poses a threat to nondiscrimination measures and potentially a wide range of laws protecting the interests of workers. Jindal declared that his order is “not about discrimination,” even though its clear intent is to give legal cover to companies, government officials, and others who discriminate against same-sex couples.

Louisiana does not currently give legal recognition to same-sex couples, but Jindal is concerned that the state’s ban on marriage equality may soon be struck down by the Supreme Court, a potential ruling which his order seems to be a legally questionable effort to pre-empt. Jindal should be asked to clarify exactly what actions his legislation is designed to “protect”: a courthouse clerk who refuses to process marriage license paperwork? Religious schools getting tax dollars under Jindal’s education policy refusing to accept children of gay parents? Catholic hospitals refusing to recognize the spousal or parental rights of gay couples during medical emergencies?   

Jindal’s “religious liberty” bill had been opposed by business and tourism leaders as well as civil rights groups. The New Orleans Times Picayune reports that the New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau CEO Stephen Perry had called the bill “a radioactive, poisonous message.”

But Jindal’s primary audience is no longer his Louisiana constituents; it's right-wing activists nationwide. Jindal boasted about the executive order by stopping by the radio program hosted by Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, an anti-gay activist who once suggested that LGBT non-discrimination measures would lead to the Holocaust perpetrated against Christians.

Right-wing pundit and Iowa GOP activist Steve Deace reacted rapturously, proclaiming Jindal his “winner of the week” for standing up to “Republicrats.”

Jindal immediately stepped in and ordered that while he’s governor the state government is not going to be a tool of the Cultural Marxists’ Rainbow Jihad against religion — particularly Christianity….

This action by Jindal is an example of what will be required of the next president if he’s going to truly honor his oath of office to defend our Constitution against all enemies — “both foreign and domestic.”

Let’s face it, the vast majority of alleged conservatives won’t stand up to the Democrats. And almost none of them will stand up to the Republicrats. On perhaps the most important issue of them all — the First Amendment that allows us the freedom to peacefully and publicly stand on principle for everything else — Jindal has done both.

But he didn’t just stand up to them rhetorically, he actually did something about it. There are several potentially exciting presidential candidates this cycle. There’s even a couple that like Jindal have shown they will tell the Republicrats bleeding us dry to stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.

 

Beck: If Hillary Clinton Becomes President, 'That Means The People Are Dead' And America Will Be Destroyed

Just prior to the 2012 presidential election, Glenn Beck was positive that Mitt Romney would win with a large margin of victory because Romney was being guided by God and "God is not neutral in [the] freedom of all mankind."

Romney simply had to win, Beck warned the day before the election, because the alternative meant that Americans are "so dead inside ... that they can no longer see the difference between good and evil, [and so] we have to be destroyed because we will be a remarkable evil on this planet."

Obviously, the nation has so far managed to survive President Obama's re-election, despite Beck's dire prediction ... so naturally, he is now warning that America will be destroyed if Hillary Clinton is elected president.

"If she is the president of the United States, I swear to you, that is it, we are done," he said on his radio program today. "You can't have all of the scandals that she has and be president of the United States. That means the people are dead. That means we have voted for destruction":

Anti-Choice Leader Admits Rape Exceptions Are 'Political,' Goal Is To Outlaw All Abortion 'From Conception'

A long-simmering debate within the anti-choice movement about whether anti-choice bills should contain exceptions for survivors of rape and incest emerged yet again in the recent debate over a House bill that would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks, had been bogged down twice in the past two years with internal disputes over a rape exception, and finally passed last week with a limited rape exception that included a 48-hour waiting period.

The bill’s rape exception split the anti-choice movement, which has been divided between “incrementalists” who want to ban abortion by gradually chipping away at access and legal protections and “immediatists” who want to swiftly declare that fertilized eggs and fetuses have the full rights of “personhood” under the 14th Amendment.

While some personhood leaders opposed the bill because of the rape exception, the main incrementalist groups, which oppose rape exceptions in principle but not necessarily in practice, lobbied behind the scenes to limit the rape exception while publicly supporting the final bill.

One of those groups was the Susan B. Anthony List, whose president, Marjorie Dannenfelser, spoke candidly about the political calculations behind rape exceptions in an interview Saturday with the Iowa conservative radio program Caffeinated Thoughts.

“Regrettably, there is a rape and incest exception” in the bill, she said. “It is the only way it was going to be allowed onto the floor by the leadership. I mean, I say regrettable, I really mean it. Any child at any stage should be protected from conception, and certainly at 20 weeks excepting anyone is just wrong.”

Host Shane Vander Hart told her that while he’d “love to see abortion completely outlawed and see some sort of a personhood amendment or a human life amendment,” he thought the 20-week ban did “move the ball forward.”

“Well, that’s why this is big,” Dannenfelser responded, adding that the 20-week bill shifted the debate to “talking about the child and his or her rights.”

Later in the interview, the program’s cohost Brian Myers asked Dannenfelser what it would take to make the GOP leadership realize that rape exceptions are “intellectually…inconsistent with the pro-life position.”

“It’s going to take winning,” she responded, citing anti-choice victories in the 2014 elections where “we had unapologetic pro-life people who didn’t talk about rape and incest.”

“I believe that it’s going to take winning the presidency for there to be a little more injection of courage, which will be required to understand the consistency of life that you’re describing,” she said.

“Do you think that at the end of the day that’s what it’s all about for a lot of those politicians, that they realize [rape exceptions are] an inconsistent position to take but they take it because they think it’s a political reality?” Myers asked.

“Yes. I think that’s why,” Dannenfelser agreed. “I think that they think they can’t get, that they will lose if they don’t. Most of them don’t believe in it in principle. Some do, which, as you say, is completely intellectually dishonest, but most of them don’t. And I think that sometimes, especially when you’re in that insular world on Capitol Hill that’s not in touch with reality, you make sacrifices that you don’t need to make.”

“I think you’re right,” she added. “It’s a political judgement. It’s not a principled judgement. And I think they made the wrong judgement, but we would have no bill at all and no 15,000 children saved if we had not allowed it to move forward with the exception.”

Interestingly, Dannenfelser held up Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina as an example of “a joyful warrior going in there and boldly arguing” on the issue. Graham has said he’s “always had exceptions for the life of the mother, rape and incest,” even while acknowledging that opponents of exceptions are being “intellectually consistent.” She also recently wrote a glowing profile of presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, who favors such exceptions.

Rick Santorum: Obama Community College Plan Meant To Create 'Another Layer Of Government Schools'

Rick Santorum, speaking on the Iowa conservative radio show Caffeinated Thoughts in March, argued that President Obama does not want to grant free community college to all in order to raise the number of college graduates and create an educated workforce, but rather wants to “eliminate” private sector programs in order to make way for “another layer of government schools.” 

 “It’s the same old stuff from the president,” he said, “which is, ‘Our schools don’t work, our schools don’t function to educate our children enough so they can get a job, so we’re going to bring in another layer of government schools to try to do this and you’re going to pay for it.’”

During the 2012 presidential campaign, Santorum criticized Obama’s effort to improve access to college as “snobbery” and a threat to “our freedoms.”

Anne Graham Lotz: Terrorism And Natural Disasters Are God's Warning That Jesus Will Return In My Lifetime

Last month, Anne Graham Lotz issued a dire warning on her website that God's judgment is about to fall on this nation, which prompted her to launch an emergency "MAYDAY!" prayer campaign "to delay or soften God’s judgment that is coming on America and on our world."

Today, CBN interviewed Lotz about her effort to save America from God's impending judgment, where she explained that terrorism, natural disasters, economic problems, and social unrest are all warning signs from God that the return of Jesus Christ will happen within her lifetime.

"The signs that Jesus gives, whether it is in the environmental world, or the national world, the wars and rumors of wars, or the persecution of Christians, the persecution of Jews," Lotz said, "when we see that ratcheting up, increasing in frequency and intensity in the same generation that sees the Gospel being preached to the whole world and Israel reborn are a nation, that's the generation that's the last."

"I believe, with deep conviction, that it's my generation," she continued. "I believe that in my lifetime, if I live out my lifetime, a natural lifetime, I believe I will live to see the return of Jesus in the Rapture when he comes back to take us to be with himself. Which means, preceding that, there are going to be some signs, there are going to be some warnings":

Albert Mohler at CNP: Freedom To Preach Gospel Threatened By 'Erotic Liberty'

The secretive Council for National Policy (CNP) and the Conservative Action Project, right-wing coalitions that are trying to figure out how to get conservative evangelicals united around one of the many GOP presidential candidates vying for their support, met outside Washington, D.C. late last week to vet the presidentials and strategize for 2016.

While most of what happens at CNP gatherings is kept behind closed doors, the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS) was happy to brag that its president, Albert Mohler, had received the 2015 Edwin Meese III Originalism and Religious Liberty Award from the Alliance Defending Freedom on Friday. The award was presented by ADF’s Alan Sears and the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins, identified by the SBTS as president of the CNP.

Meese, who played a major role in the rise of the Federalist Society and the right-wing school of constitutional interpretation known as “originalism”— colloquially referred to as “strict constructionism” — was on hand for the event.  According to the SBTS account, Meese said originalism and religious liberty “go hand-in-hand” and asserted that “religious liberty is under attack as never before” in America.

That was also the theme of Mohler’s remarks, which took their title, “The Gathering Storm: The Eclipse of Religious Liberty and the Threat of a New Dark Age,” from Winton Churchill’s account of the period leading up to the World War II. “We are not facing the same gathering storm,” Mohler declared, “but we are now facing a battle that will determine the destiny of priceless freedoms and the very foundation of human rights and human dignity.”

Other excerpts from Mohler’s speech:

A revolution in morality now seeks not only to subvert marriage, but also to redefine it, and thus to undermine an essential foundation of human dignity, flourishing, and freedom….

Already, religious liberty is threatened by a new moral regime that exalts erotic liberty and personal autonomy and openly argues that religious liberties must give way to the new morality, its redefinition of marriage, and its demand for coercive moral, cultural, and legal sovereignty.

A new moral and legal order is ascendant in America, and this new order is only possible, in the arena of American law and jurisprudence, if the original intent and the very words of the Constitution of the United States are twisted beyond recognition….

We are in a fight for the most basic liberties God has given humanity, every single one of us, made in his image. Religious liberty is being redefined as mere freedom of worship, but it will not long survive if it is reduced to a private sphere with no public voice. The very freedom to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ is at stake, and thus so is the liberty of every American. Human rights and human dignity are temporary abstractions if they are severed from their reality as gifts of the Creator. The eclipse of Christian truth will lead inevitably to a tragic loss of human dignity. If we lose religious liberty, all other liberties will be lost, one by one. I am a Christian, and I believe that salvation is found in no other name than Jesus Christ and in no other gospel, but I will fight for the religious liberty of all.

 

Trent Franks: 20-Week Abortion Ban Will Make Americans Realize Legal Abortion Is Like Slavery

In an interview with the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins this weekend, Rep. Trent Franks acknowledged that his 20-week abortion ban, which passed in the House last week, is meant to “completely undermine” Roe v. Wade, and hoped that it would help Americans “realize that as a country, we’ve been here before,” when “African Americans were considered property.”

Franks, an Arizona Republican, lamented that the bill that passed last week included a limited exception for survivors of rape and incest. The exception was first added to the bill in 2013 after Franks implied in a hearing that rape rarely results in pregnancy; a planned vote on the bill in January was scuttled after a group of Republican women raised concerns that the rape exception required women to report assaults to the police. After months of negotiations, the reporting requirement was removed from the bill but a 48-hour waiting period and other hurdles were restored in its place.

“Now, many of your listeners, including this one, Tony, would do everything that we could to protect all unborn children, and the only thing that we would ever say should be an exception to taking the life of a child would be to save another life, which is, you know, a very, very unusual situation,” Franks told Perkins.

But, he added, including the exceptions was all in service of the larger goal of launching a legal attack to undermine Roe v. Wade and making Americans realize that legal abortion is like slavery.

“But the point is, if we protect these children, now we begin to really examine, once again, the development and the humanity and the pain-capable nature of these children to where I think it gives us a chance to completely undermine the Roe v. Wade structure and to realize that as a country, we’ve been here before,” he said.

“We were here, African Americans were considered property, and somehow we rose up as a nation and turned back that evil. And now by the grace of God we’re going to turn back the evil of killing little children before they’re born.”

Franks has previously insisted that African Americans were better off under slavery than with legal abortion.
 

GOP: President Obama's Out to Destroy Our Nation Through His Executive Actions on Immigration

This piece was written by PFAW Political Director Randy Borntrager and originally appeared in the Huffington Post. 

On May 19, part of President Obama’s executive actions to keep DREAMers and families from being deported was supposed to go into effect, but they’ve been temporarily blocked because of a lawsuit brought on by anti-immigrant Republicans. This week, immigration groups and progressive organizations across the country are rallying in support of the President’s executive actions.

After reading so many anti-Obama, anti-immigrant screeds, I began to wonder, what if all the Right’s most extreme rhetoric came together in one place? Behold! The ultimate anti-immigrant op-ed, brought to you by the Republican Party and their extremist base! Included are actual statements from GOP leaders and activists like Former Governor Jeb Bush, Representative Steve King (IA), and anti-immigrant leader William Gheen.

President Obama’s Out to Destroy Our Nation Through His Executive Actions on Immigration

President Obama’s lawless executive actions on immigration that protect DREAMers and families from deportation are an insult to the American people. Obama is acting like a Latin American dictator, King George, a tyrant, and Putin, abusing his power to promote his nefarious agenda.

This literally could be the death of the Republic. The executive actions could cause our country to descend abruptly into an abyss that we have never seen in the history of this country. Or at the least, the executive actions will turn us into a lawless third-world nation. Our Constitution will certainly be torn asunder.

If we stop families from being deported, we open the doors for our country to be invaded by immigrants, one person at a time. Our pockets are being picked and innocent people are being killed by illegal aliens and hurt and robbed and beaten and raped by criminal foreign nationals that are in our country. Most undocumented immigrants are 130-pound drug runners with calves the size of cantaloupes.

They're going to be dependent on welfare and handouts and hence will be dependent on the Democratic Party for their livelihoods. These immigrants just come here for easy acquisition of public support through welfare programs. They’re rushing over here because they’ve heard there’s a bowl of food just across the border. And once they’re here, they’ll raid the Social Security system and lie about their work history.

The impending new Latino majority in the U.S. (which will happen soon because of course immigrants are more fertile than native-born Americans) is dangerous – they could conduct an ethnic cleansing.

We can’t stand idly by as the President does this – he’s not above the law and above the Constitution. The Senate should not confirm a single nominee—executive or judicial—outside of vital national security positions, so long as the illegal amnesty persists. We could also shut down the government again!

But that’s not enough. We have a constitutional duty to stop this runaway, imperial presidency – should we impeach Obama? And at some point, we have to evaluate whether the president's conduct aids or abets, encourages, or entices foreigners to unlawfully cross into the United States. That has a five-year in-jail penalty associated with it. We must also start talking about treason. Obama’s action certainly is an act of treason because it’s aiding and abetting the enemies of America and giving them comfort and aid.

So let’s arrest the president of the United States! If not, there could be civil war.

To see even more anti-immigrant, anti-Obama rhetoric from the GOP – and who’s saying what – check out People For the American Way’s recent memos on this issue.

PFAW
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious