Fighting the Right

Paranoia-Rama: Disney's Gay Demons, Obama's Nazi Plot & The Revenge Of The Illuminati

RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.

The tired old arguments about gay recruitment seem to never die… but maybe our new Illuminati overlords will save folks like Rush Limbaugh from the gay menace.

5. Marriage Equality Makes Kids Gay

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council debated a caller on his radio show, Washington Watch, about why the FRC uses the phrase “natural marriage” since the definition of marriage has fluctuated over history and throughout different cultures.

Ultimately, Perkins tried to make the argument that marriage equality for same-sex couples will ultimately turn kids gay and make children obsessed with sex. The FRC head even worried that students will stop learning about science and reading comprehension as schools morph into sexual instruction laboratories.

That’s funny, because Education Weekly’s 2013 top three states for education — Maryland, Massachusetts and New York — have all legalized same-sex marriage.

4. The Illuminati Runs America

Newt Gingrich seems to be selling his email list to just about anybody, as sponsors seem to be out-competing each other to come up with the most bizarre and conspiratorial email to stir up fear among Gingrich fans.

Recent sponsor emails have purported to expose the “the 7 Deadly Drugs the U.S. Government can’t wait for you to swallow,” the missing gold in Fort Knox, a secret cancer cure hidden by the government and President Obama’s “secret mistress.”

One email, Media Matters points out, claims that the “Illuminati was behind every consequential wealth event of the past year,” warning that the group has “a deathgrip [sic] on America.” “Once on the brink of extinction, the secret society has powerfully re-emerged in the United States. In fact, it now wields more power than ever.”

3. Demons Run The Disney Channel

Gordon Klingenschmitt is worried that Disney is “recruiting our culture into an aberrant lifestyle” after the Disney Channell featured a same-sex couple on the show “Good Luck Charlie,” a move that incensed anti-gay activists.

According to Klingenschmitt, Disney’s attempt “to push a gay agenda upon your family” is the result of the “influence of demonic spirits who want to recruit your children into sin.”

2. Rush Limbaugh Fears Gay ‘Assault’ On Straight People

Right-wing pundit Rush Limbaugh fears that “we’re fast approaching a world where it ain’t cool to be straight,” a revelation he made in response to defensive-end Michael Sam’s decision to come out of the closet.

The thrice-divorced talk show host was upset about Sam’s announcement, fearing that it will lead to a new gay tyranny where the heterosexual majority is “under assault by the 2-5 percent that are homosexual.”

1. Obama Turning America Into Nazi Germany

Right-wing darling Ben Carson is afraid that today’s “secular progressive movement” is doing “what Hitler was doing.” He even envies Vladimir Putin’s Russia for “gaining prestige and influence throughout the world” by “warming to religion,” unlike the “godless” United States.

Carson said that as a result of the work of the “extremely intolerant” left, Americans now “live in a Gestapo age.”

Glenn Beck Is Preparing For 'Success Beyond Our Wildest Imagination'

Glenn Beck has always been one for grandiose and narcissistic proclamations about the mind-blowing impact whatever he is working on at the moment will have upon humanity, such as last year when he was boldly declaring that his Independence Day show was "going to change the way we celebrate the Fourth of July" forever, even though it ended up being nothing more than a cloyingly maudlin stage show.

And he is at it again because, as he said the other day, God has big miracles planned for Beck's network; so much so that Beck has begun telling his wife to start planning for "success beyond our wild imagination" to come their way in the coming months.

"What is coming now is," Beck said today on his radio show, "I really believe, cultural changing. I think we are going to help change the culture." Hinting that the movie studios located on his property will soon be in production, Beck said he is not sure what is coming but "there's some things coming, I can feel it and it's going to be good, it's going to be really, really good":

Right-Wing 'Religious Freedom' Narrative Taken To Its Logical Extreme With Anti-Gay, Anti-Evolution Push

During the controversy over Hobby Lobby’s refusal to provide its employees with contraception insurance coverage and the outrage over Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson’s being denied his supposed constitutional right to appear on television, we witnessed conservative activists stretch the limits of the meaning of religious freedom.

As Justice Scalia put it in Employment Division v. Smith, such an exaggerated view of religious freedom serves “to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.”

The Religious Right has increasingly brought this religious freedom argument into debates over gay rights and the teaching of evolution.

In Missouri, Republican lawmakers contend that public school students should get an exemption from any class on evolution — the bedrock of modern biology — if they think learning about science amounts to an “infringement on people’s beliefs”:

Rep. Rick Brattin, a Harrisonville Republican, said forcing students to study the natural selection theories developed by Charles Darwin a century and a half ago can violate their religious faith.

“It’s an absolute infringement on people’s beliefs,” Brattin said.



“Even though what’s being taught is just as much faith and, you know, just as much pulled out of the air as, say, any religion,” he said.

“The bill is one of several anti-evolution proposals that have already appeared in statehouses across the country,” TPM notes. “The proposals would allow for a range of approaches to evolution, from presenting a ‘debate’ over evolution versus creationism to requiring that local school boards allow intelligent design to be included in biology courses.”

And GOP lawmakers in at least three states are now citing religious freedom to claim that anti-gay discrimination that violates civil rights laws should not face any legal consequences.

Of course, many proponents of Jim Crow cited religious reasons to support segregation.

Now there is a push in states including Tennessee, Idaho and Kansas to allow for legally protected discrimination. Mark Joseph Stern writes of the Kansas bill:

When passed, the new law will allow any individual, group, or private business to refuse to serve gay couples if “it would be contrary to their sincerely held religious beliefs.” Private employers can continue to fire gay employees on account of their sexuality. Stores may deny gay couples goods and services because they are gay. Hotels can eject gay couples or deny them entry in the first place. Businesses that provide public accommodations—movie theaters, restaurants—can turn away gay couples at the door. And if a gay couple sues for discrimination, they won’t just lose; they’ll be forced to pay their opponent’s attorney’s fees. As I’ve noted before, anti-gay businesses might as well put out signs alerting gay people that their business isn’t welcome.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. In addition to barring all anti-discrimination lawsuits against private employers, the new law permits government employees to deny service to gays in the name of “religious liberty.” This is nothing new, but the sweep of Kansas’ statute is breathtaking. Any government employee is given explicit permission to discriminate against gay couples—not just county clerks and DMV employees, but literally anyone who works for the state of Kansas. If a gay couple calls the police, an officer may refuse to help them if interacting with a gay couple violates his religious principles. State hospitals can turn away gay couples at the door and deny them treatment with impunity. Gay couples can be banned from public parks, public pools, anything that operates under the aegis of the Kansas state government.

It gets worse. The law’s advocates claim that it applies only to gay couples—but there’s no clear limiting principle in the text of the bill that would keep it from applying to gay individuals as well. A catch-all clause allows businesses and bureaucrats to discriminate against gay people so long as this discrimination is somehow “related to, orrelated to the celebration of, any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement.” (Emphases mine.) This subtle loophole is really just a blank check to discriminate: As long as an individual believes that his service is somehow linked to a gay union of any form, he can legally refuse his services. And since anyone who denies gays service is completely shielded from any charges, no one will ever have to prove that their particular form of discrimination fell within the four corners of the law.

Uganda President Reportedly To Sign Anti-Homosexuality Bill

A spokesman for Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has announced that the president will sign the country’s draconian “Anti-Homosexuality Bill.”

The legislation was crafted and passed with the help and support of US-based Religious Right activists who have increasingly focused on exporting their anti-gay views abroad.

American groups including the Family Research CouncilAmerican Family Association, Liberty Counsel have applauded Uganda’s anti-gay bill.

J. Lester Feder reports:

Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has decided to sign a law imposing up to a lifetime jail sentence for homosexuality, announced government spokesman Ofwono Opondo via Twitter on Friday. NRM caucus spokeswoman Evelyn Anite confirmed Opondo’s announcement to BuzzFeed.



Museveni made his announcement during a retreat with members of his party, the National Resistance Movement, which has primarily focused on the party’s leadership as it prepares for elections in 2016. Museveni had been facing stiff pressure from his colleagues to accept the bill.

The deciding factor may have been that a panel of party members with medical backgrounds Museveni convened to study the cause of homosexuality presented a report concluding homosexuality is not an in-born trait. Museveni had told lawmakers he would sign the bill if “I have got confirmation from scientists that this condition is not genetic.”

The committee chairman told BuzzFeed on Thursday, “Speaking as a medical doctor … homosexuality is just deviant behavior. It can be learned, and it can be unlearned.”

Religious Right Leaders Rail Against Virginia Marriage Equality Decision

A federal judge’s decision to strike down Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriagehas unsurprisingly stoked the ire of conservatives.

Family Research Council head Tony Perkins offered a typical rebuke of “activist judges” and the “arrogant judiciary,” and once again warned that marriage equality will in fact lead to unprecedented inequality.

It appears that we have yet another example of an arrogant judge substituting her personal preferences for the judgment of the General Assembly and 57 percent of Virginia voters. Our nation's judicial system has been infected by activist judges, which threaten the stability of our nation and the rule of law.

This ruling comes on the heels of Attorney General Mark Herring's refusal to fulfill his constitutional duty to defend the state's marriage law. His lawlessness is an insult to the voters of Virginia who rightfully expected elected officials to uphold the laws and constitution of the state, not attack them as Herring has done.

An arrogant judiciary is only one of the major consequences of the drive to redefine marriage. Increasingly, Americans are being forced to finance and celebrate unions that not only step on free speech and religious liberty but also deny children a mom and a dad. Rather than live-and-let-live, this court by redefining marriage will create a level of inequality that has never been seen in our country as people are forced to suppress or violate the basic teachings of their faith," concluded Perkins.

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel and Liberty University Law School, which is based in Virginia, said the judge must not have ever read the Constitution.

“This decision is outrageous and legally flawed. Judges would be well-served to read the U.S. Constitution and not invent or rewrite it,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “The Constitution cannot be changed by the stroke of a judge’s pen, nor does it bow to a judge’s personal ideology. The overwhelming majority of Virginia voters who make up ‘we the people’ voted to affirm natural marriage. Same-sex marriage, as a policy matter, sends the message that children do not need moms and dads. There is ample evidence that children fair [sic] best when raised with a mother and a father. Same-sex marriage is not the equivalent of natural marriage. Judges should be careful to render decisions grounded in the Constitution and the rule of law. Otherwise, judges and courts will render themselves impotent when the people lose confidence in the judicial system,” Staver continued.

The Family Foundation of Virginia, meanwhile, blamed Valentine’s Day for the ruling, which the group says threatens “our entire social fabric.”

“The timing of this decision certainly calls into question Judge Wright Allen’s objectivity,” a Friday morning statement from the group stated. “This rushed release just prior to Valentine’s Day reeks of political show, making her ruling less a legal argument and more a press release. It’s disappointing that a federal judge would so blatantly expose her personal political agenda at the expense of not just marriage, but our entire social fabric.”



“Regardless of one’s stance on marriage, the people of Virginia were disenfranchised by this ruling as our voice and our vote that amended our Constitution have been rendered meaningless by a single federal judge with the assistance of our own Attorney General,” the Family Foundation statement read. “Protecting a timeless institution for the well-being of children was the will of the overwhelming majority of Virginians and this ruling denies this important state interest as it places the desires of adults over the outcomes of children.”

National Organization for Marriage president Brian Brown said the “terrible decision” must be reversed:

This is another example of an Obama-appointed judge twisting the constitution and the rule of law to impose her own views of marriage in defiance of the people of Virginia. There is no right to same-sex 'marriage' in the United States constitution. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has said that states have the preeminent duty of defining marriage. The people of Virginia did just that in voting overwhelmingly to affirm marriage as the union of one man and woman. That decision should be respected by federal judges and we hope that the U.S. Supreme Court ends up reversing this terrible decision. This case also leaves a particular stench because of the unconscionable decision of Attorney General Mark Herring to not only abandon his sworn duty to defend the laws of the state, but to actually join the case against the very people he is duty-bound to represent.

Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation blasted the “imperious federal judiciary” and the “liberal state apparatus,” warning that they are trying “to advance a social experiment that changes America from the nation that we know into something totally unrecognizable” and “will force you to support homosexual marriage.”

The case, if it can be appealed must be appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The problem is that appellate courts have to rule based on the record from the trial court. The record is the transcript of witnesses’ testimony and other evidence the trial judge heard.

With Virginia’s Attorney General refusing to defend the case, the case might not even be appealed and even if it is, the record may be very limited.

Once again, we see an imperious federal judiciary overruling the voters of a state to advance a social experiment that changes America from the nation that we know into something totally unrecognizable.

And with the striking down of this law, can the liberal state apparatus be far behind? That liberal state apparatus is the one that will force you to support homosexual marriage whether or not it conflicts with your religious beliefs.

Alan Keyes Wants Michele Bachmann To Lead Campaign To Impeach Obama

Alan Keyes claims that Rep. Michele Bachmann’s plan to sue President Obama doesn’t go far enough and may actually aid Obama’s “dictatorship.”

Instead, he wants the Tea Party darling -- who last year accused Obama of “committing impeachable offenses” -- to join his Jesus Christ-endorsed campaign to get congressional candidates to pledge to support the impeachment and removal of the president.

“Bachmann and her colleagues should take the impeachment/removal pledge, and campaign as hard as they know how to get every like-minded Senator and Representative they can to do likewise,” Keyes writes. “Combined with an energetic grassroots mobilization of voters demanding that candidates for either house of Congress take the pledge, their campaign would help to make the 2014 election an effective vote of no-confidence in Obama's lawless, unconstitutional administration.”

One problem with his approach, however, is that Bachmann is not running for re-election.

Let's assume, for instance, that Bachmann and her colleagues succeed in passing the legislation they seek. (All right, it's unlikely given the fact that the Democrats presently control the U.S. Senate. But "for the sake of the argument," as they say, let's ignore that difficulty.) Let's further assume that their case gets to the Supreme Court, which issues an opinion supporting their view that the President's actions are unconstitutional.

What happens next? Perhaps Obama rolls over, bows to the Supreme Court, and retracts his executive orders. That might happen, or it might not. Let's say it doesn't happen. Instead, Obama rejects the Court's view. To support his stand, he argues that his actions are necessary in order to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, and promote the general welfare of the country.

Let's say he further argues that, by failing to pass laws essential for achieving those ends, Congress has endangered the nation, exacerbating a serious situation which, without his timely preventive measures, threatens to plunge the country into a dire state of national emergency. …

The problem is that the whole sequence of events would set a precedent for successful dictatorship that Obama (and the elitist faction he serves) would abuse for the remainder of his occupation of the White House. It would also directly confirm, for better or worse, the ultimate impotence of the judicial branch (especially when dealing with disputes between the other branches), which Hamilton's lucid thinking foreshadows.

Bachmann and her colleagues need to think this through. They need to ask themselves the key strategic question: If we succeed in getting a favorable opinion from the Supreme Court (which is no foregone conclusion) what do we do if Obama simply refuses, on constitutional grounds, to enforce it? … When you think it through, building these impeachment/removal majorities is the only constitutional way to "force" the executive to respect the Constitution. The Courts can't do it. And even the people can't do it, constitutionally, except at election time.

This is precisely the thinking that led me to propose the impeachment/removal strategy for the 2014 election. Instead of spinning their wheels in an ineffectual appeal to a judicial branch that is ultimately powerless to enforce its opinions, Bachmann and her colleagues should take the impeachment/removal pledge, and campaign as hard as they know how to get every like-minded Senator and Representative they can to do likewise. [emphasis his]

Combined with an energetic grassroots mobilization of voters demanding that candidates for either house of Congress take the pledge, their campaign would help to make the 2014 election an effective vote of no-confidence in Obama's lawless, unconstitutional administration. Instead of risking a precedent for ambitious, lawless dictatorship, it would set a precedent that restores government of, by, and for the people, through elected officials honestly pledged to represent them. Given the gravity of the present crisis, this would be nothing short of saving America's liberty, for us and our posterity. Will Bachmann and her colleagues rise to the occasion?

Kengor: People Aren't Mourning Shirley Temple's Death Because They're 'Too Obsessed With Miley Cyrus And Gay Marriage'

Paul Kengor is hoping to create a new faux-scandal surrounding Shirley Temple Black’s passing.

Writing in the perpetual-outrage-machine WorldNetDaily, Kengor asserts that Americans now ignore or actively dislike the child star-turned-ambassador because she didn’t “pole dance or ‘twerk,’” and now they refuse to mourn her appropriately.

“Our culture is too obsessed with Miley Cyrus and gay marriage to give proper recognition to [Temple Black],” Kengor writes, leaving us to wonder who exactly is criticizing the late actress.

I learned only yesterday that Shirley Temple, the iconic child actress, died earlier this week at age 85. Reports on her death were easy to miss. I went through my usual scan of various websites and saw nothing. I fortunately caught a buried “Shirley Temple, R.I.P.” by a writer at a political website.

I was dismayed by the sparse reaction to the loss of this woman who lived a great American life. Had Shirley Temple died 50 years ago, or even 30 years ago, the country would have stopped. People everywhere would have paused to give Temple her due. It would have been the lead in every newspaper.

But not today. Our culture is too obsessed with Miley Cyrus and gay marriage to give proper recognition to a woman who was one of the most acclaimed, respected, and even cherished Americans, a household name to children and adults alike.



In the 1934 classic, “Bright Eyes,” Shirley played a five-year-old who lost her father in an airplane crash and then lost her mother. She is comforted by loving people who would do anything for her, including her godfather, who is identified as just that. The godfather behaves like a true godfather. The movie includes constant, natural references to faith, never shying from words like God, Heaven, and even Jesus—verboten in Hollywood today.

Today’s sneering secular audiences would reflexively dismiss the film as Norman Rockwell-ish. To the contrary, the movie is hardly sugar-coated. Just when your heart is broken from the death of sweet Shirley’s dad, her mom is killed by a car while carrying a cake for Shirley on Christmas day.

That doesn’t remind me of any Norman Rockwell portrait I’ve seen.

What such cynics really mean is that the film isn’t sufficiently depraved for modern tastes. Shirley doesn’t pole dance or “twerk.” She doesn’t do a darling little strip tease for the boys while singing “Good Ship, Lollipop.” The references to God are not in vain or in the form of enlightening blasphemy. And the movie has a happy, not miserable, ending.

Come to think of it, maybe this isn’t a movie for modern audiences!

For 80 years, Shirley Temple’s bright eyes brightened the big screen. They reflected what was good and decent in this country. She embodied what made America great, and she brightened our lives in the process.

Cruz: 'Our Heart Weeps' Due To Marriage Equality Gains

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz joined Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on Washington Watch yesterday to discuss his proposed State Marriage Defense Act, which as we explained earlier would “make it more difficult for married same-sex couples to receive legal recognition.”

Cruz said that the Obama administration’s support for LGBT equality represents an “abuse of power and lawlessness” and chided gay rights advocates for their “litigation approach.”

“Our heart weeps for the damage to traditional marriage that has been done,” Cruz said, warning that marriage is “under attack.”

“We need to stand up and defend traditional marriage and especially do everything we can to prevent the federal government from forcing a different definition of marriage that is contrary to the views to the citizens of each state.”

The Texas senator also agreed with Perkins’ assessment that and Obama administration officials want to “move quick[ly]” on marriage equality “because there will be pushback from the country when people see the consequences of this redefinition of marriage; they are trying to lock this in quickly hoping that it cannot be reversed.”

Linda Harvey Blasts Glenn Beck For Speaking Out In Opposition To Russia's Anti-Gay Crackdown

Mission America's Linda Harvey has been a vocal supporter of Russia's anti-gay "propaganda" law from the very beginning and now she is going after Glenn Beck for criticizing the rise of anti-gay bigotry in Russia and declaring that he would stand with GLAAD in opposing it.

On a radio commentary earlier this week, Harvey said the Russian law was really pretty mild and restrained and that incidents of anti-gay violence are not reflective of the law or those who support it. And the fact that Beck feels the need to speak out against what it happening in Russia, Harvey said, is a sign that he is either "grossly uninformed or he's compromised" on this issue:

The victim posturing of the homosexual playbook claims that gangs of people are now regularly beating up homosexuals in Russia as a result of this law and a Russian celebrity was quoted with an insane comment, something about homosexuals being burned alive.

Now come on, nobody gives any credibility to statements like this, but if you listen to groups like GLAAD, the homosexual pressure group, they claim anyone who applauds the new anti-propaganda law would agree with such an idiotic statement.

It's terribly confused and even Glenn Beck jumped into the fray expressing outrage over this celebrity's comment and saying he stands with GLAAD, the group that is anti-Christian and anti-morality. Beck is either grossly uninformed or he's compromised on this issue. He would not be the first so-called conservative to buy into this horrendous movement even as it jeopardizes the health and future of many kids.

...

This is a distraction, like all the rest of this publicity, which takes the focus off the law, which is that homosexual promotion and public endorsement and school programs do have an influence on kids and it is a harmful one.

There Will Be No Coaching For 'Coach' Dave Daubenmire

As we noted yesterday, "Coach" Dave Daubenmire was the finalist to become the new head football coach at Lakewood High School in Ohio, pending a vote by the Board of Education.

Last night, the Board cast its vote and, by a margin of 3-2, rejected Daubenmire for the position.

Of course, Daubenmire has responded by firing off a press release blaming the decision on outside groups which "used lies, intimidation and threats to bully the school board into rejecting the administration's recommendations" and claiming that he was the victim of illegal discrimination:

It is painfully obvious that the anti-Christian lobby demand not just acceptance but obedience to their far left dogma and will smear anyone who speaks up for Christian values.  The message that the Lakewood Board of Education sent last night is that anyone with deeply held Biblical beliefs is not welcome in our public schools.  The board's actions were both immoral and illegal.  My family has resided in this community for over 50 years. The rejection by this school board is a slap in the face not only to Christians everywhere, but to our family in particular. In America, only Christians can be discriminated against.  Homosexual teachers and coaches would be welcomed with open arms.

As we've noted before, it is amazing how Religious Right activists seem to believe that the First Amendment exists to protect their right to say any bigoted thing they want while simultaneously guaranteeing that they should never suffer any consequences for having said those things.

AFA: Impeach Eric Holder Over Gay Rights Stance

The American Family Association is demanding that the House move to impeach Attorney General Eric Holder for the supposed crime of treating legally married same-sex couples ... as legally married.

United States Attorney General Eric Holder, this week, has again overstepped the boundaries of the law when he arbitrarily ordered that homosexual couples will now receive government benefits reserved only for natural marriage status. This applies even in states that have laws defining marriage as only between one man and one woman.

Taking a nod from the playbook of his boss, President Barack Obama, Holder wielded his own pen and paper, trampling on states' rights and disenfranchising voters in states defining marriage as only between one man and one woman.

It is time for Eric Holder to go!

...

It is the sworn duty of every member of Congress to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Allowing Eric Holder to remain in office unchallenged is a violation of that duty. Action must be taken to stop the abuse of power in the attorney general’s office.

Urge your representative to press for the impeachment of Attorney General Eric Holder for high crimes and misdemeanors.

In a sample email​ for members to send their congressmen, the anti-gay AFA claims that Holder's pro-equality move violates their "rights and freedoms":

There is no room for political corruption in government and when it is discovered, it is the duty of Congress to take immediate and swift action against it.

...

The American people desperately need leaders we can trust. Our district deserves representation that will firmly stand and defend our rights as citizens. And when rights and freedoms are being threatened through poor leadership at the Department of Justice, it is your sworn obligation to take steps necessary to protect our state and its citizenry.

Life Inside The Glenn Beck Bubble

All day yesterday, Glenn Beck was worked up about some article that appeared on The Huffington Post entitled "The Uniting Principles Glenn Beck Should Have Talked About." He railed against the article on his radio broadcast and again during the monologue of last night's television show, repeatedly accusing The Huffington Post of having written the piece, apparently completely unaware that it was little more than a blog post written by a random user of The Huffington Post's "The Blog" forum.

Like many websites, The Huffington Post has dedicated a section of its website to hosting blogs written and maintained by anyone who signs up for an account. The section literally has thousands of users and The Huffington Post explicitly states that the views posted by users in no way reflect the views of the Huffington Post itself:

We are an Internet Service Provider, e.g., We are Not Responsible For and Do Not Necessarily Hold the Opinions Expressed by Our Content Contributors: Opinions and other statements expressed by users and third parties (e.g., bloggers) are theirs alone, not opinions of The Huffington Post. Content created by third parties is the sole responsibility of the third parties and its accuracy and completeness are not endorsed or guaranteed. You acknowledge that by providing you with the ability to view and distribute content through our site, The Huffington Post is not undertaking any obligation or liability relating to the content. The Huffington Post and its affiliates, successors, assigns, employees, agents, directors, officers and shareholders do not undertake or assume any duty to monitor our site for inappropriate or unlawful content. The Huffington Post and its affiliates, successors, assigns, employees, agents, directors, officers and shareholders assume no responsibility or liability which may arise from the content thereof, including, but not limited to, claims for defamation, libel, slander, infringement, invasion of privacy and publicity rights, obscenity, pornography, profanity, fraud, or misrepresentation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, The Huffington Post reserves the right to block or remove communications, postings or materials at any time in our sole discretion.

But apparently nobody at Beck's network understands this rather simple and common practice, because they spent yesterday's morning meeting collectively trying to figure out why "The Huffington Post" would write something like this, eventually concluding that progressives know that there is a massive backlash coming against them and so they are desperately trying to get on the side of the values and principles that Beck has been preaching all along:

What is even more amazing is that Beck's own website has the very same feature where random individual contributors can post their own content, which carries a similar disclaimer:

TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.

In fact, anti-gay activist Matt Barber regularly posts his columns on Beck's contributor network meaning, if we were to operate by Beck's logic, that we could attribute Barber's bigoted anti-gay views to Beck and his The Blaze website.

If we were to attribute to Beck and The Blaze the views of random contributors on his website, he'd laugh in our face ... and rightly so. But that won't stop him from cluelessly doing the very same thing on every program on his network.

WND: Girl Scouts Promote Prostitution

WorldNetDaily's Jane Chastain is pleading​ with readers not to purchase Girl Scout cookies this year, part of a growing Religious Right push against the Girl Scouts.

Why?

Chastain explains that the Girl Scouts should face a boycott due to their "lesbianism" and support for the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, which she falsely claims "would force nations to legalize abortion and prostitution. Guess a girl has to make a living!"

Are you man (or woman) enough to say “no” to a child?

Before you answer this question, consider this: When liberals try to justify more government spending they trot out our youth. “Do it (whatever ill-conceived big government program they are promoting) for the children, boohoo, sob, sob!”

This makes conservative legislators quake in their boots. It is only a matter of time before they cave in to this pressure. I offer our $17 trillion national debt as Exhibit A.

Now, bring it down to a personal level. It is one thing to say “no” to a little boy. It is quite another to say “no” to a precious little girl, looking up at you with those beautiful, big, expectant eyes.

That’s what you will be up against if you join – and you should – the boycott against Girl Scout cookies begun by Pro-Life Waco and now joined by countless pro-life and pro-family organizations.

...

The Girl Scouts adopted a new global agenda and began bemoaning the fact that the United States has not signed the radical U.N. feminist treaty, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, CEDAW, which would force nations to legalize abortion and prostitution. Guess a girl has to make a living!

...

The Girl Scouts adopted a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which was as effective a the one in the military. It wasn’t long before the organization began accepting lesbian leaders and winked at lesbian activity within the ranks. In 1998, Nancy Manahan wrote the book, “On My Honor: Lesbians Reflect on their Scouting Experience.” It is full of coming-of-age stories at Girl Scout Camp, and stories of lesbianism within the paid staff.

Klingenschmitt: Disney Is 'Being Influenced By Demonic Spirits Who Want To Recruit Your Children Into Sin'

"Dr. Chaps" Gordon Klingenschmitt has added his voice to the chorus of outrage over the inclusion of a same-sex couple in an episode of the Disney Channel's "Good Luck Charlie," calling for a boycott of the Disney Corporation because it has fallen under the influence of demonic spirits who want to recruit kids into homosexuality:

If you are a Christian or a moral-minded parent who wants to teach your children that homosexuality is aberrant and wrong behavior, for example, you don't want to model sinful behavior as normative to your kids, your morality and faith, you child's innocence are now being undermined by the Disney Corporation.

And that's why we are inviting you to participate in boycott of the Disney Channel ... Send a message to the Disney Channel: stop recruiting our children into an aberrant lifestyle!

...

Don't you want to have that blessing for your children, that their conscience will not be assaulted, their innocence will not be violated by the corporations who want to push a gay agenda upon your family? ... I believe these tempters now at the Disney Corporation are being influenced by demonic spirits who want to recruit your children into sin ... God bless the children, not just the ones who are actors in this show whose innocence is being violated, but also your children at home who may be having access to this kind of programming.

Erik Rush: Obama Is Murdering Critics

Far-right pundit Erik Rush admits that he doesn't have evidence that President Obama is murdering his critics, but he feels like it is true and that's all that matters after all. Today in WorldNetDaily​, Rush repeatedly claims that Obama is murdering his opponents as part of his plan to create a Nazi/Communist/Islamist government.

"We are in the midst of a takeover of the country and the dismantling of our constitutional republic," Rush writes. "Fellow Americans and patriots, it is time to consider all of our options, and put a stop to this, as well as the political culture that allowed us to get to this point."

In addition to the parties targeted for bureaucratic harassment, patriot groups themselves have been infiltrated and sabotaged. Individuals have had their websites hacked, been harassed by law enforcement and federal agencies, illegally searched and their property seized, had their vehicles tampered with and property destroyed. They’ve endured illegal electronic surveillance, stalking and had false criminal complaints filed against them. It has also been widely hypothesized that journalists and government officials who have died under truly bizarre and unlikely circumstances were in fact murdered.

At the same time, there have been revelations of this administration’s involvement in terrorist conspiracies and international crimes, some of which have their roots in Hitler’s Germany, wealth stolen by the Nazis during World War II and the long-held anti-Semitism of Islamists who actually worked with Hitler, as well as their protégés who are active today in international politics, government and finance.

This is all to say nothing of the numerous domestic scandals, unconstitutional actions and treason in which this president and his collaborators have been involved to date.

The tactics being used by this administration, whether directly or through ideologically aligned surrogates, are intended to disrupt the communication and activities of their enemies – in this case, law-abiding American citizens.

These are, however, not new tactics. Prior to and during World War II, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party employed the same sorts of tactics – although the technology was different – to silence the opposition. It is a matter of historical fact that disinformation, intimidation, sabotage and even murder have been widely employed by ascendant modern socialist and communist regimes.

We are in the midst of a takeover of the country and the dismantling of our constitutional republic. Why many prominent conservatives shy away from articulating this, I am not certain, but every one of Obama’s policies, actions and, lately, edicts have negatively impacted the United States of America in precisely the way communists have stated for the last hundred years that they would bring about an oligarchical collectivist state in America.

Those who are reporting the facts (not “conspiracy theories,” but facts) of these matters have been dubbed paranoid fringe elements by the left – so why are these precisely the people who are being so vigorously – and might I add, illegally – targeted by the current administration and its minions?

I’ll tell you why – because they are dead-on correct. Citizen journalists, retired military officers and patriotic intelligence community assets have the facts, know full well what this administration is up to and that left unchecked, it will not end well. The plans of this regime are so malevolent that most Americans in their comfort and distraction cannot even conceptualize what lies ahead.

But we do. And we are not going to be silenced. Fellow Americans and patriots, it is time to consider all of our options, and put a stop to this, as well as the political culture that allowed us to get to this point. You may already be aware of the organization of patriots and patriot groups that is currently under way, and that many disparate patriotic forces are joining to work together. This is a good thing.

Like all communist, Nazi, or fascist thugs, the people we’re up against are punks; mediocre, spoiled, arrogant little punks who crave power. They have little to contribute to society, but they want to run the show anyway – so they con the masses. That’s how it has always worked with their ilk – but enough is enough. The harder this regime pushes, the harder we must push back. The Founding Fathers may have been a minority, but we are not.

Coulter: Treat DREAMers Like Suicide Bombers

Ann Coulter, who recently lamented the end of the racist immigration quota system​, writes today that America soon "won't exist anymore" due to "the current rate of immigration."

According to Coulter, immigration is destroying the GOP and thus America itself, because apparently only "real Americans" vote Republican. She's particularly offended that immigration means she has to "hear about soccer all the time."

"We’re living in a different country now, and I can’t recall moving!," she writes.

Coulter also lashes out at proponents of the DREAM Act, claiming that their arguments would also protect rapists, murderers and suicide bombers.

If we have to excuse lawbreaking so as not to “punish the children,” there’s no end to the crimes that have to be forgiven – insider trading, theft, rape, murder and so on.

How do you think kids feel when their father has to “live in the shadows” because he committed a rape? The kids did nothing wrong, but they have to go to bed every night wondering: Is tomorrow the day Dad is going to be caught?

...

With illegal aliens, the parents are more like gypsies teaching their kids to beg and pick pockets. The parents forced the kids into being lawbreakers.

Similarly, Palestinians use their children to commit acts of terrorism against Israel, so that when Israel responds, the parents can wail, “They’re bombing children!”

(I thought only liberals couldn’t do analogies.)

Americans are under no moral obligation to admit huge numbers of people who have no particular right to be here just because the Democrats need 30 million new voters.

Why shouldn’t Republicans oppose mass immigration on the grounds that immigrants will vote Democratic? The only reason the Democrats want mass immigration is because they know immigrants will vote Democratic. (Also for the cheap nannies and gardeners.)

Immigration is the “single issue” that decides every other issue. If this country were the same demographically today as it was in 1980, Romney would have won a bigger victory in 2012 than Reagan did against Carter. And we wouldn’t have to hear about soccer all the time.

We’re living in a different country now, and I can’t recall moving! Had I wanted to live in Japan, I could have moved there. Had I had wanted to live in Mexico, Pakistan or Chechnya – I could have moved to those places, too.

(Although maybe not. They all have stricter immigration policies than we do.)

I’m sure they’re lovely, but I wanted to live in America. Now I can’t. At the current rate of immigration, it won’t exist anymore. The Democrats couldn’t win elections there, so they changed it.

Pluralism & Prejudice: Catholic Bishops, Mormons, Evangelicals Unite To Oppose Equality

On Monday, five religious organizations filed an amicus brief urging the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold bans on same-sex couples getting married in Utah and Oklahoma. According to the Associated Press, the brief was written by lawyers for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and was joined by the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention and the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod.

The thrust of the brief is to argue that there are sound social policy reasons to oppose marriage equality, and to attack the notion that opposition to gay couples getting married is grounded in anti-gay prejudice, or “animus.” Says the brief, “The accusation is false and offensive.”

“Our faith communities bear no ill will toward same-sex couples, but rather have marriage-affirming religious beliefs that merge with both practical experience and sociological fact to convince us that retaining the husband-wife marriage definition is essential.”

No ill will toward same-sex couples?  Let’s review.

We can start with the Southern Baptists, who have officially declared that “homosexual conduct is always a gross moral and spiritual abomination for any person, whether male or female, under any circumstance, without exception” and that they even oppose businesses extending benefits to domestic partners.  OK, to be fair, that was 1997. The SBC voted in 2003 to “call upon all judges and public officials to resist and oppose the legalization of same-sex unions,” and in 2008 called for constitutional amendment to prevent same-sex couples from getting married anywhere in the U.S.

Richard Land, who was for 25 years the voice of the Southern Baptists’ Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission until his retirement last fall, has said the Devil takes pleasure in the destructive homosexual lifestyle.  In 2012, Land said, “God is already judging America and will judge her more harshly as we continue to move down this path toward sexual paganization.” A year earlier he accused gay rights activists of “child abuse” for “recruiting” children in elementary school.

Land’s retirement was expected to shift the ERLC’s tone; but the group still opposes ENDA, a proposed federal law to protect LGBT people from discrimination on the job.

Let’s see, who else opposes ENDA, domestic partnerships, civil unions, and marriage equality? That would be the US Conference of Catholic bishops. The bishops have said they oppose “unjust discrimination” against people with same-sex attractions, but they define the term “unjust” in a way that applies only to people who remain celibate. So if you are a gay couple and you are having sex, workplace discrimination against you is justified, as is a refusal to legally recognize your relationship.

A number of prominent U.S. bishops signed, and urged other Catholics to sign, the Manhattan Declaration, which compared liberals to Nazis. It declares conservatives’ positions on marriage to be "inviolable and non-negotiable," and pledges that conservatives will engage in civil disobedience, and may even need to prepare for martyrdom, in order to avoid recognizing legally married same-sex couples.

Let’s not forget Bishop Thomas Paprocki, from Springfield, Illinois, who told Catholics in 2012 that voting for the equality-supporting Democratic Party would put their eternal souls in jeopardy, and who responded to the passage of marriage equality in Illinois by conducting an exorcism.

The Mormon Church was a driving force in opposition to early marriage equality moves in Hawaii and Alaska and was crucial to the success of California’s Prop 8, providing tens of thousands of volunteers and a flood of cash. After a post-Prop-8 backlash from both inside and outside the church, LDS officials seemed to have abandoned the anti-marriage-equality crusade. The church says it supported Salt Lake City ordinances banning discrimination in housing and employment and has supported same-sex couples’ rights regarding “hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights” – sounds good – “so long as those do not infringe of the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches.” Hmm.

How about the National Association of Evangelicals?  In 2008, Richard Cizik, the longtime public policy face of the NAE, was forced to resign after he publicly expressed support for civil unions.

Unlike the more progressive Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA), the more conservative Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod (LCMS) strongly opposes LGBT equality. In a statement after the Supreme Court overturned the Defense of Marriage Act, the church insisted, “Same-sex unions are contrary to God’s will, and gay marriage is, in the eyes of God, no marriage at all… no matter what the courts or legislatures may say.” The conservative Lutherans have backed HJR 6 in Indiana, which is attempting to add a ban on marriage equality to the state constitution.

In January, the LCMS announced it was entering formal discussions with the Ethiopian Evangelical Church Makane Yesus, which cut its longstanding ties with the ELCA last year over sexuality issues. The Ethiopian church was so disturbed by the ELCA’s pro-equality positions that it has declared its members may not share communion with ELCA members.  Ethiopia’s churches and government, with the encouragement of American missionaries, have, in the words of a recent disturbing Newsweek article, “declared war on gay men.”

So, maybe it depends what you mean by “ill will.”

FRC Preposterously Blames 'Left-Wing Extremists' For Most 'Incidents Of Domestic Terrorism In This Country'

Tony Perkins and Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council are attacking the Obama administration over a Ohio National Guard training drill last month that simulated a threat from “two school employees who are disgruntled over the government’s interpretation of the Second Amendment.”

News of the drill started circulating in conservative media this week, feeding anti-Obama paranoia (even though last year’s drill simulated a threat from a radical environmentalists).

On yesterday’s edition of Washington Watch, Blackwell and Perkins said that the drill must have been the idea of the federal government, and argued that there is no reason at all to fear any danger from right-wing extremists. “When you look back at incidents of domestic terrorism in this country, it’s not done by right-wing, conservative people or organizations, it’s done by left-wing extremists,” Perkins said. Blackwell concurred: “Absolutely, that’s been the factual history of domestic terrorist attacks and efforts.”

That is completely false, of course.

The nonpartisan New America Foundation found that the pool of “‘non-jihadist’ terrorists” is “overwhelmingly made up of right-wing extremists.” The Director of Terrorism Studies at the West Point-based Combatting Terrorism Center found attacks by right-wing extremists up “more than 400%” since 2000.

John Tirman of the MIT Center for International Studies notes that in “the START database on terrorism in America,” from “1990 to 2009, START identified 275 ‘homicide events’ that killed 520 people and were committed by right-wing ideologues. There were many more incidents of destruction of property, nonfatal attacks, and other acts of thuggery by white supremacists, private militias, and the like.”

“Fifty-six percent of domestic terrorist attacks and plots in the U.S. since 1995 have been perpetrated by right-wing extremists, as compared to 30 percent by ecoterrorists and 12 percent by Islamic extremists,” writes Ken Sofer. “Right-wing extremism has been responsible for the greatest number of terrorist incidents in the U.S. in 13 of the 17 years since the Oklahoma City bombing.”

Since Perkins and Blackwell were already just making things up, why not one more? The two FRC leaders proceeded to accuse the Southern Poverty Law Center of being listed on “the domestic terrorism list. ”

“It’s not conservatives,” Perkins said. “If it were conservatives who were doing that kind of stuff we would never hear the end of it.”

Beck: God Told Me To Sit Down And Shut Up Because He Has 'Absolute Miracles' In Store For The Blaze

On his radio broadcast today, Glenn Beck delivered a cryptic message to this listeners, hinting that God has some pretty big plans in store for his The Blaze network in the coming months.

Beck revealed that, last summer, he received an "extreme message" from God telling him to "shut up, sit down, zip your mouth" and stop asking questions and just "know that I am God" because that has The Blaze's future all mapped out.

And when it all comes to fruition in a few months, Beck said, we are going to see "miracles, absolute miracles":

Perkins: Same-Sex Marriage 'Will Create A Level Of Inequality That Has Never Been Seen In Our Country'

The anti-gay Family Research Council is unsurprisingly dismayed by a federal court ruling that will require Kentucky to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where such unions are legal.

FRC president Tony Perkins said in a press release today the decision represents a “deep betrayal of the judicial system infected with activist judges who are legislating from the bench” and threatens the freedom of speech.

Perkins even said that marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples “will create a level of inequality that has never been seen in our country as people are forced to suppress or violate the basic teachings of their faith.”

That’s right, Perkins seems to think that legalizing same-sex marriage will produce more “inequality” than slavery, Jim Crow, the subjugation of women and any other injustice in American history.

This ruling is another example of the deep betrayal of a judicial system infected with activist judges who are legislating from the bench. If these judges want to change duly enacted laws passed by the people and their representatives, they should resign their life-time appointments to the bench and run for the state legislature or Congress. Judge Heyburn is elevating his own ideology over that of three-quarters of Kentucky voters who voted to preserve marriage in their constitution as it has always been defined.

This ruling comes at a time when the consequences of marriage redefinition are mounting. Increasingly, Americans are being forced to finance and celebrate unions that not only step on free speech and religious liberty but also deny children a mom and a dad. Rather than live-and-let-live, this court by redefining marriage will create a level of inequality that has never been seen in our country as people are forced to suppress or violate the basic teachings of their faith.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious