Totally Stable Jim Garrow Is Angry That We're Making Him Look 'Crazy'

Right-wing activist Jim Garrow took to Facebook today to call President Obama “The History Retard” and “one sick puppy” who displays “evidence of the psychological effects of malignant narcissism.”

The History Retard: When some one [sic] might say that the President has neither a good grasp on reality nor a good grasp on history they would be making an understatement on a grand scale. What is sad for America is that Mr. Obama is so isolated from criticism that when he puts on full display for the world his very poor understanding of real history no one steps up and corrects him. This President has no clue and presents it sincerely and with aplomb, its [sic] just too bad that he is putting forward clear evidence of the psychological effects of malignant narcissism. This is one sick puppy.

- Dr. Jim Garrow

Garrow’s post was prompted by a Daily Caller article from Obama heckler Neil Munro, who badly distorts Obama’s comments on anti-Semitism and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

In an interview with Erik Rush last week, Garrow argued that Right Wing Watch follows Saul Alinsky’s thirteen “rules for radicals” in an attempt to unfairly make him seem “crazy.”

“Right Wing Watch, which will be reporting on what we just said, relies on the thirteen tactics that are available to them through Mr. Alinsky, they rely on that on how they report on you and I and they will spin what we’ve done so that we are ‘frozen,’ ‘freeze your opposition,’ present it in such a wacko, weird light that you will end up defending it and really being frozen as far as forward momentum and forward progress with whatever our agenda happens to be,” Garrow told Rush.

Because there is nothing crazy at all about Garrow’s assertions that Obama will soon claim to be communicating with aliens, try to kill 90% of Americans with a nuclear EMP attack to help George Soros make money and is part of a nefarious Arab-Chinese/Russian-Canadian conspiracy to destroy America.

In the very same interview, Rush proved his lack of insanity by arguing that someone “should disappear” Obama administration officials for their alleged hostility to the Constitution.

Nugent: 'Put Steve Stockman In Charge Of GOP'

Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) has apparently gone missing and nobody seems to know his whereabouts, but NRA board member Ted Nugent believes the far-right congressman deserves a medal for “common sense.”

Nugent, fresh from another insane anti-Obama rant, writes today that the Texas congressman and primary challenger to Republican incumbent Sen. John Cornyn should win a “GOP Medal of Common Sense” from Speaker Boehner.

In a column entitled “Put Steve Stockman In Charge Of GOP,” Nugent claims that Stockman — who last year invited Nugent to the State of the Union after the singer threatened to kill President Obama — and his colleague Rep. Louie Gohmert represent the future of the Republican party and its mission to defeat “anti-gun numbnuts.”

We can only hope the GOP takes Ted Nugent’s advice.

My good friend and great American, Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas, gives me hope.

You may recall that Congressman Stockman invited me to attend President Obama’s State of the Union address this past January.

Following the Community-Organizer-in-Chief’s masterful smoke and mirrors speech, I held media court where I dutifully played the bongo drums on the empty heads of anti-gun numbnuts with flailing ball peen hammers of truth and logic. Clearly, it’s my “we the people” job, and I’ve honed my delivery to a razor-sharp edge over these many years, practicing relentlessly on clueless hippies and Mao fans across the hinterland. I eagerly await a real challenge.

Congressman Stockman is a legislative street-fighting man who stands solidly for our sacred Second Amendment. Should the GOP leadership ever wish to know how to act like a political party with titanium testicles, they would be wise to give Stockman the gavel and let him hold real conservative court.

Recognizing the proven common sense and fundamental truism of all time that more guns equal less crime, Congressman Stockman introduced legislation to repeal the insane and embarrassing ban prohibiting military personnel from carrying weapons on military bases. Congressman Stockman’s legislation would allow our military heroes, the greatest trained warriors the world has ever known, to adequately protect themselves against various rabid subhuman Hasan-like scum intent on slaughtering them.

It goes without saying that Texas Rep. Louis Gohmert endorses the legislation. Congressman Gohmert stands for all that is good and conservative. He has that special Texas spine of defiance and independence that would make the defenders of the Alamo proud.

This common-sense legislation is long overdue. Those of us honest and aware of common sense know that for any government entity to intentionally disarm anyone is state-sanctioned barbarism and savagery. Only a soulless Fedzillacrat would endorse such lunacy, particularly upon those U.S. military warriors putting themselves in harm’s way to support and defend such rights for the rest of us.



Good on Congressman Stockman. Speaker Boehner should present him with a GOP Medal of Common Sense for introducing this legislation. Of course, the GOP has no such medal, but it damn well should.

Schlafly Claims 'Many Americans' Moving Out of Marriage Equality States In Protest

We’ve all heard anecdotal stories of gay and lesbian couples traveling or even moving to marriage equality states to tie the knot. But according to Phyllis Schlafly, there’s a migration going the other way too. In her latest radio commentary, Schlafly claims that “many Americans are dissenting with their feet, by moving away from same-sex marriage states and into the many states that continue to recognize the value of marriage as being between only one man and one woman.”

The liberal media must be covering up this mass exodus from marriage equality states, because we haven’t heard a single story of someone doing this.

The Court held that because the U.S. Supreme Court had recently ordered that federal benefits be granted to same-sex couples who are married under state law, the civil union law in New Jersey was inadequate to ensure that homosexual couples in New Jersey are able to receive the same benefits as married couples.

There was no dissent from the New Jersey Court’s ruling, not even by Christie’s own judicial appointments. But many Americans are dissenting with their feet, by moving away from same-sex marriage states and into the many states that continue to recognize the value of marriage as being between only one man and one woman.

Erik Rush: Obama Is 'Enslaving' White People

Conservative columnist and Fox News regular Erik Rush writes today that President Obama was trying to “stoke the embers of racial tension” when he cited racism as a reason that some people dislike him.

Obama, Rush writes, is “a subversive, a saboteur, an Islamist-enabler and a Marxist whose objectives are all focused upon destroying this nation as an ongoing economic concern, a world power and a functioning republic.”

Rush urges conservatives to “sever” the “serpent that continually whispers poison into the ears of blacks,” and to buy his book Negrophilia.

“Rest assured also that Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder (who has crafted racist policies within the DOJ and crusaded to make voter fraud an American institution) and other members of the black intelligentsia are magnificently titillated at the prospect of giving whites their ‘just due’ by enslaving and oppressing them as they tear the nation down,” Rush adds.

“Whites ought not take this too personally, though; enslavement is their plan for all of us.”

The idea that racism has played a part in Americans’ dissatisfaction with Obama obviously defies logic. Did the whites who voted for him in 2008 and 2012 suddenly decide to embrace their “inner racist”? No. Of course, Obama knows that there is no logic in this whatsoever – but it doesn’t matter. He is playing to hopelessly propagandized blacks and leftist ideologues – the sorts of people who might vote in an outright communist as mayor of New York City, for example.

Such statements as Obama’s also provide license to prominent race-baiting activists and his racialist surrogates (both black and white) to stoke the embers of racial tension – hence my statement regarding coordination.



And well we should be doing everything we can to get that black man out of our White House – but it has nothing to do with his being black. It has to do with his being a subversive, a saboteur, an Islamist-enabler and a Marxist whose objectives are all focused upon destroying this nation as an ongoing economic concern, a world power and a functioning republic.



I would like few things more than to see black Americans wake up en masse, realizing that they have been shamelessly whored-out by their leaders and progressive elites. Unfortunately (as I articulated in my book “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America’s Racial Obsession”), I do not believe that this will occur until the serpent that continually whispers poison into the ears of blacks has its head severed. That serpent is the radical leftist machine in this country: Career civil rights activists, progressive politicians and the establishment press. While we have these factions purveying their dizzyingly infantile and baseless charges, the epsilons who hold their “blind allegiance to blackness” will continue to do so.

Blacks will also continue to support our treasonous president – simply because he’s black. In the meantime, count on creatures like Wright, Barber, Jackson, Sharpton and hundreds of others to continue jabbering their so-called justifications for blacks’ pain in a never-ending, self-defeating cycle of imposed institutional mediocrity.

Rest assured also that Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder (who has crafted racist policies within the DOJ and crusaded to make voter fraud an American institution) and other members of the black intelligentsia are magnificently titillated at the prospect of giving whites their “just due” by enslaving and oppressing them as they tear the nation down. Whites ought not take this too personally, though; enslavement is their plan for all of us.

Putting Glenn Beck's Stance Against Anti-Gay Bigotry To The Test

Over the last few weeks, Glenn Beck has been confusing just about everybody by loudly and repeatedly denouncing the rise of anti-gay bigotry in Russia and declaring that anti-gay bigots have no right to call themselves fans of his. It has been confusing because, at the same time, Beck regularly pals around with anti-gay bigots and brings them on his show, all while proclaiming that he doesn't even know anybody who is anti-gay.

We are not the only one's confused by Beck's stance, as Bryan Fischer called out Beck yesterday on his radio program, wondering if Beck "has gone over to the dark side on ... sodomy-based marriage." After reading through Beck's statement that anyone who "hates a gay person because they're gay, you have no place calling yourself a fan of mine," Fischer trotted out the standard Religious Right defense that anti-gay bigotry is not based in hatred but rather in love, insisting that he loves gays but hates homosexuality and is simply trying to prevent them from living miserable, disease-filled, drug-addicted, guilt-ridden lives:

Fischer concluded by asking Beck if this means that he is not allowed to be a fan of his ... and that is a question we'd love to know the answer to as well.

Keep in mind that Fischer's "love" for gays involves calling for homosexuality to be criminalized and for gays to be banned from serving in public office, or as judges, or even as teachers. On top of that, Fischer has loudly praised Vladimir Putin as a "lion of Christianity" for his anti-gay crackdown and declared that the laws that Beck has been denouncing are exactly the sort of "public policy that we've been advocating" to enact in America.

And Fischer is not alone in praising the Russian law, as just yesterday Matt Barber and Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel said that "we need to see" laws just like it passed "right here in the United States."

What does this have to do with Beck? Well, both Fischer's American Family Association and Liberty Counsel were sponsors of last year's Values Voter summit, at which Beck spoke. On top of that, the Family Research Council, which is the primary VVS sponsor, employs a man who openly calls for homosexuality to be criminalized and for gays to be exported out of the country.

For weeks now, Beck has taken a very public stand against the anti-gay bigotry in Russia while seeming utterly oblivious to the fact that a lot of the people he associates with happen believe the very same things.

So just what is Beck's standard for unacceptable "anti-gay" bigotry? Does supporting Russia's crackdown qualify? How about calling for the criminalization of homosexuality? The banning of gays from serving in public office? 

In March, Beck is scheduled to speak at a United In Purpose voter mobilization summit, at which Vision America's Rick Scarborough is also scheduled to speak. Scarborough, like so many others, has also defended the Russian law that Beck has denounced, as well as called for a class-action lawsuit to be filed against homosexuality and declared that AIDS is God's judgment for people who engage in immoral behavior while insisting that gays always be referred to as "sodomites."

How much longer can Beck continue to denounce Russia's anti-gay bigotry while remaining totally silent about the fact that a significant number of the Religious Right leaders with whom he regularly associates not only support Russia's law but want to see similar laws enacted in America?

If Beck is really serious about his pledge to stand with groups like GLAAD against anti-gay bigotry, he has an opportunity to start demonstrating it by denouncing the likes of Scarborough and all of the other Religious Right leaders who openly applaud the very things that Beck claims to be taking a stand against.

Harvey: 'Gays Are All Closeted Heterosexuals'

Mission America’s Linda Harvey has finally exposed the secret that all gay people have long sought to conceal: that they are secretly straight and are just pretending to be gay!

Who told?

In a WorldNetDaily column today, Harvey argues that “no one is a homosexual and everyone is a heterosexual.” “‘Gays’ are all closet heterosexuals, terrified someone will find out and blow the lid off [the gay rights] movement,” she adds.

The only reason gay rights advocates oppose Russia’s new propaganda law, she claims, is because it will stop secretly-straight gay people from influencing children “toward harmful behaviors that are unnecessary, unnatural and harmful.”

“‘We can’t let anyone figure this out, not while all this television coverage is going on!’ HRC must be thinking,” she continues. “So the perpetually ticked homosexual movement will screech, prance and whine, accusing everyone in Russia of mob attacks, or human rights violations, or whatever.”

While she never explains why anyone then would “choose” to be gay, Harvey does compare gay people to damaged cars in need of an auto repairman to fix them.

They wonder if they might actually be heterosexuals after all.

With the upcoming Winter Olympics, not only do the Russians have to figure out if/when radical Chechens may incite violence, they have to keep an eye on the “LGBT” folks, too, not necessarily for terrorist acts, but just for generally annoying disruptions.

The international outrage of homosexualists is being unleashed on Russia because of a new law. Russia actually allows open homosexuality among adults, but passed a law recently prohibiting the promotion of homosexuality to minors. So what’s the concern?

Don’t we all want the best for children? Apparently not. The fear of the pink mafia is that the soft underbelly of their movement will be exposed, showing they badly want to influence children and also that there’s no inborn homosexuality. This reality is the backbone of the new Russian law, because children can be influenced toward harmful behaviors that are unnecessary, unnatural and harmful.

Let me repeat that: unnecessary, unnatural and harmful. No teens are born to be “gay.”

Horrors, comrade! “We can’t let anyone figure this out, not while all this television coverage is going on!” HRC must be thinking. So the perpetually ticked homosexual movement will screech, prance and whine, accusing everyone in Russia of mob attacks, or human rights violations, or whatever.

This is how bullies behave. They push others around as a cover for their own weakness. America is just now beginning to see this movement for what it is. When Vladimir Putin said that “gay” Olympic athletes and visitors have nothing to worry about in Russia as long as they “leave children alone,” he has framed the situation with a vital truth missing for years in the West. Children suffer for being exposed to and sold this deviance, because none of them have the “born-that-way” destinies Western and EU activists wish existed.

The infuriated “gays” are all closet heterosexuals, terrified someone will find out and blow the lid off this movement.

Remember that decades-old standby claim of the “gay lobby,” that those who concentrate on exposing and fighting the homosexual agenda must harbor repressed “gay” desires?

Well, no more so than plumbers and auto repairmen might be called “obsessed” with pipes and transmissions. It’s because something is broken and needs to be fixed. And the brokenness is getting in the way of a functioning pipe, car – or culture.



The reality is, no one is a homosexual and everyone is a heterosexual. And those who have developed, fantasized and nurtured those “gay” feelings really don’t like reality. It makes them want to attack. Or it makes them start vicious organizations like GLAAD, to make the lies seem real and respectable.

It makes them stupid enough to try to take on the Russians. All I can say is, good luck with that.

Peroutka's MLK Day Message: Martin Luther King Didn't Actually Support Civil Rights

Talk show host Steve Deace chose to commemorate Martin Luther King Day on Monday by discussing King’s legacy with Michael Peroutka, head of the Institute on the Constitution and "proud member" of the neo-Confederate League of the South.

Peroutka explained to Deace that modern-day civil rights activists have it all wrong and that King never actually fought for civil rights. In fact, Peroutka said, “The term ‘civil rights’ is kind of an oxymoron” because rights come from God not from civil government. King, Peroutka insisted, believed that “rights come from God,” so the term “civil rights” doesn’t apply to his work.

“It’s ironic that many of those who are kind of the modern, welfare-state proponents, they quote or they harken back to Martin Luther King as if he was some proponent of civil rights, and he was not,” Peroutka said.

Peroutka’s King scholarship might be helped by actually reading some of King’s work. In the Letter from the Birmingham Jail, for instance, King refers to “constitutional and God given rights” and “moral law or the law of God,” but doesn’t seem to think this inconsistent with his several references to "civil rights."

Not actually knowing anything about King or the Civil Rights movement didn’t stop King and Deace from further claiming  that King -- who supported a guaranteed middle-class income for all Americans -- would have opposed government assistance for low-income people (what Peroutka calls “a handout” and Deace calls “forms of larceny imposed by government”) or marriage equality (or what Deace calls “the right to marry my car battery”).

Peroutka concluded that King’s message has been “perverted by his quote-unquote ‘followers’ into something that he never said and I don’t think he ever meant.” Deace, for his part, argued that modern civil rights activists – who he claims ignore the Bible – are actually making “the sort of argument segregationists and Jim Crowists made that King was fighting against in his day.”

Peroutka: The idea of a right isn’t consistent with the idea that it would come from man or that it would originate in a civil government. So the very term “civil rights” is kind of an oxymoron. There’s no “right” in the sense of a permanent, fixed, thing that you have, that can be defended, if in fact it comes from the civil government. And it’s ironic that many of those who are kind of the modern, welfare-state proponents, they quote or they harken back to Martin Luther King as if he was some proponent of civil rights, and he was not. He was not.

As we were pointing out, his speeches, the documents don’t reflect that. They reflect his understanding that rights come from God. You know, in that speech, again, that we talked about, the “I Have a Dream” speech, he said, I think, in that speech, that “we’ve come to Washington to cash a check.” He didn’t say, “We came for a handout!” He said, there’s something that’s legitimately owed to us, which is our rights, because we’re equal in the eyes of our creator, we’re equal before the law. He wasn’t saying, “We want you to give us a handout.” He said, you actually owe us the same defense of our rights that you’ve given others. That’s all we’re asking for.

That’s been perverted by his quote-unquote “followers” into something that he never said and I don’t think he ever meant.

Deace: In fact, those same people are the ones that are arguing that they have rights to practice forms of larceny imposed by government or forms of things that were called “depravity” or “immorality” in past eras. And they are using the argument that those are civil rights because a judge told me that I can steal from you. Or a legislator told me that I can take off of your paycheck before you even get to cash it, and that means I have that “right.” Or because a judge told me that I have the right to marry my car battery, that means that I actually do have that “right.”

And what’s funny is that argument, that’s the sort of argument segregationists and Jim Crowists made that King was fighting against in his day. “Well, actually it doesn’t really matter what you think the Bible says, what matters is whether the state of so-and-so thinks you’re a free citizen or not. We decide whether you are a child made in the image of God or not, not God.”

Christian Post: Beyoncé Leading Women Into Sex Trafficking, Death

Christian Post contributed Larry Tomczak is upset that First Lady Michelle Obama is a fan of Beyoncé, who has increasingly come under fire from Religious Right activists.

Tomczak writes in an op-ed that the first lady should distance herself from the singer because, he suggests, Beyoncé’s music will “lead naive young girls on a dangerous path that could lead some even into sex trafficking” and ultimately “abuse, abortions and abasement-sometimes death.”

This past weekend, the first lady turned 50. Prior to a star-studded White House party, ABC News offered "50 Ways to Honor Michelle Obama on Her Birthday." First on the list: "Dance to Beyoncé!"

Michelle Obama and pop music's No. 1 female megastar are BFF (best friends forever). Michelle extols her as a "true role model for children" and thanks her publicly for "being a role model who kids everywhere can look up to."



Having two daughters as Mrs. Obama does, I humbly submit that this singer's persona and music are harmful-not helpful-for emerging young ladies across America.



Before we discover what divine revelation highlights as important in a woman, let's step back and honestly yet charitably consider the one referred to as "Queen Bey." Is she the role model Mrs. Obama acclaims? Should we follow the first lady's example and take our preteen and young teen daughters to one of her concerts, as Mrs. Obama has done? Should girls be encouraged to emulate her? Scripture tells us to train ourselves to "distinguish good from evil" (Heb. 5:14).

Here's the deal: The multitalented Beyoncé has been given gifts from almighty God in song and dance, for which she will one day give an account. Instead of graduating from high school or getting a GED, she chose to develop her persona as a sexy, seductive singer, attired in barely there [sic] clothes doing over-the-top, sensual dance moves. She goes on tour in a see-through bodysuit with a cutout bra and gyrates like someone in a strip club. Her signature song is "Bootylicious," and she goes full throttle in "Bow Down," which instructs those who criticize her to "Bow down, [profanity].



Now let's ask ourselves (not in any self-righteous manner but simply a prudent, mature approach): Is Beyoncé a role model? What message is she communicating to girls about relating to the opposite sex? Is she causing men to lust? Is the focus on virtue and inner beauty or seductively swiveling hips, championing a sensuality that can lead naive young girls on a dangerous path that could lead some even into sex trafficking?

Sex trafficking is a very serious problem in the United States. Remember, the average age of a young girl drawn in is 13, and scores are lured by pimps promising a glamorous life if girls will simply follow the seductive example of many celebrities whom they try to imitate. What follows leads to abuse, abortions and abasement-sometimes death. This is a national scandal in our generation. Proverbs 11:22 says, "Like a gold ring in a pig's snout is a beautiful woman who shows no discretion."

Right Wing Round-Up - 1/22/14

Right Wing Leftovers - 1/22/14

  • Ralph Reed will soon unveil a new book, which Mike Huckabee promises will contain “the ultimate answer to what ails America.” 
  • Televangelist Rick Joyner is convinced that the “overwhelming evidence shows that the 2012 election was not a legitimate election.” 
  • MassResistance’s Brian Camenker wants the three openly gay Republican congressional candidates out of the GOP. 
  • Lastly, the Klansman who wanted to kill Muslims with a “weaponized radiation device” has been indicted.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious