Chris McDaniel Closes Out Senate Race By Campaigning With Bryan Fischer And Wayne Allyn Root

Republican Senate candidate Chris McDaniel spent this weekend rolling around Mississippi on the Tea Party Express bus, along with a motley assortment of fringe right-wing extremists.

McDaniel’s fellow travelers in his last tour before today's runoff election against Sen. Thad Cochran included Wayne Allyn Root, who told audiences that President Obama is a “Manchurian candidate” who lied about his resume; a songwriting duo known for the anti-immigrant song “Press 1 for English”; and notoriously anti-gay, anti-Muslim, anti-many-other-people American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer, who granted McDaniel what he said was his very first public endorsement of a candidate for office.

At the group’s stop in Biloxi, Root — a one-time Libertarian Party nominee for vice president — regaled the crowd with his theory that President Obama is a “Manchurian candidate” who “cut his Afro” in order to infiltrate the government, collapse the economy and create a permanent Democratic majority.

Strangely, although Root implies that President Obama did not actually attend Columbia University, he also claims that the president learned this “Manchurian” strategy at Columbia.

Root also told the crowd that “we’re the makers and Obama’s voters are the takers,” claiming that conservative radio exists because conservatives are listening to the radio on their way to work, while liberals are “home collecting their checks watching Oprah and Jerry Springer and ads for personal injury attorneys.”

At the bus’s Tupelo stop, Fischer made a surprise appearance to give McDaniel what he said was his first-ever public endorsement of a candidate for office, citing McDaniel's "Mississippi values." 

Also joining McDaniel on the Tea Party Express bus were Ron and Kay Rivoli, who the Tea Party group proudly notes are “best known for their hit song, ‘Press 1 for English,’ which has over 16 million views on YouTube.”

The Rivolis didn’t sing "Press 1 for English" at the McDaniel rallies, opting instead for a song about how welfare is turning the U.S. into the “USSA.” But here’s a look at their hit song, in which they announce, “I do not live in China, Mexico, no foreign place, and English is the language of these United States.”

As a bonus, here’s the Rivolis' song complaining about how liberals are always playing the “racist card.”

If you really want to, you can also listen to their anthem in support of Arizona's notorious anti-immigrant bill, SB1070.


Larry Klayman Censured For Breaking Ethics Rules, Will Go Back To Saving America

Larry Klayman, the right-wing lawyer whose bizarre diatribesrelentless lawsuits and frequent threats to overthrow President Obama are routinely featured here on Right Wing Watch, today “agreed to accept a public censure for violating attorney ethics rules” dealing with a long-running dispute with the group he founded, Judicial Watch.

Ever so modest, he said he acquiesced to the censure agreement so he can back to his fulltime job of trying to “protect the American people.”

The Legal Times reports:

“I wanted to put [the ethics case] behind me because I have a lot of important things to do to also protect the American people,” Klayman said on Tuesday.

The agreement with bar counsel is still subject to review. If a hearing committee accepts the deal, it will recommend approval to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, which makes the final decision. If the committee rejects the agreement, the case will be sent back to bar counsel for prosecution.

Bar Counsel Wallace Shipp Jr. declined to comment. Judicial Watch President Thomas Fitton, who filed the ethics complaint against Klayman in 2008, said he would reserve any comment for the hearing committee’s review.

Klayman founded Judicial Watch and served as its chairman and general counsel from 1994 to 2003. According to the agreement Klayman signed with bar counsel, he represented three individuals suing Judicial Watch between 2006 and 2008. He didn’t get Judicial Watch’s consent to take those cases, as required by the local ethics rules when there are conflicts of interest involving a former client.

Klayman has clashed with Judicial Watch since leaving the organization. Earlier this month, a federal jury in Florida awarded Klayman $181,000 in a defamation suit he brought against the organization. Klayman, in a June 20 brief defending his actions against the ethics charges, claimed the bar proceeding was “yet another attempt by the directors of Judicial Watch to sabotage and damage” him.

Bar counsel and Klayman, who represented himself, agreed “that a public censure strikes the correct balance of protecting the public and deterring future misconduct.”

NC Lt. Gov. Dan Forest: America 'Must Decide For Or Against God'

North Carolina Lt. Gov. Dan Forest followed Texas Lt. Gov. candidate Dan Patrick to the microphone at the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s 2014 Road to Majority conference. Forest joked about following another “Lieutenant Dan” and said he’d been backstage crossing things out because Patrick was already saying them. Indeed, Forest’s comments about the Constitution being grounded in “biblical truth” echoed Patrick’s Christian-nation address. “My friends,” Forest said, “America is at a great crossroads where it must decide for or against God.”

Excerpts from Dan Forest's remarks:

Forest quoted George Washington and Abraham Lincoln writing about the nation relying on God’s aid, and he said that the Declaration of Independence’s assertion that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness was “one small declaration from tyranny, one giant declaration of dependence upon Almighty God.”

American leaders, he said, continued to rely on God until Supreme Court rulings on church-state separation:

In America, as time moved on, our leaders sought the help of the Lord through the great and terrible Civil War, through a Great Depression, through two great world wars and numerous other conflicts. Then, in 1947 our Supreme Court separated church and state and placed a high wall between the two. In 1962 our Supreme Court removed prayer from our public schools. In 1973, our Supreme Court ruled that it was OK to kill children still in the womb. In the span of a mere 25 years, we, the people allowed our nation to turn its back on God in the name of independence and freedom.

And he began a litany of ways he said America had turned its back on God:

We have forgotten God and we call it freedom.

We kill our children for convenience, and we call it freedom.

We enslave our poor in welfare and call it freedom.

We take from the hard working and give to the sluggard in the name of income equality and call it freedom.

We allow our children to become addicted to pornography in the name of free speech and we call it freedom.

We rack up mountains of debt on the backs of our grandchildren and we call it freedom.

We reward the criminal at the expense of the victim and we call it freedom.

We take God out of our schoolhouse, out of our statehouse, out of our courthouse and we call it freedom.

We allow a few individuals in the courts to determine the moral standard for all and we call it freedom.

Forest said the country must choose between “policy band-aids” and getting at the root of problems, which is that we as a nation have taken our eyes of God, “who is the giver of truth, virtue, and a moral compass.”

The heart of the matter is we have forgotten God. We have kicked him out of our house, out of our schoolhouse, out of our courthouse, and out of our statehouse, and now, out of our nation. We call it everything but what it is, we call it everything but sin, the turning away from God.

He said that the national focus on rebuilding after the 9/11 attacks was done in the name of freedom and security, but that we did it by our own strength rather than relying on God.

We don’t just need, my friends, to rebuild the walls of America. We need to rebuild the biblical foundation upon which the walls sit. We need to trust God. Fear only comes when we don’t believe that God is who he says he is. If God is the creator of the universe, if he allows our hearts to beat and our lungs to breathe, why do we not trust him? If we trust God, my friends, there is nothing we can’t accomplish. With him we can do anything. Apart from him we can do nothing. Seek first his kingdom and all these things will be given.

We continue to declare ‘God Bless America’ without doing our part, without prayer, without fasting, and repentance as a nation, without recognizing the sins we commit and humbling ourselves before the sovereign ruler of nations, and asking for forgiveness.

It is time for America to recognize that freedom does not come from being a nation of wealth, power, influence, abundance, and ease – but rather it comes from being a humble nation on its knees. It behooves us then, to humble ourselves before the offended power, to confess our national sins, and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.


Linda Harvey Explains Why Gay Parents Will Probably Abuse Their Kids

Mission America’s Linda Harvey is committed to “helping” families shield their children from gay people, even going so far as to say that parents should refuse to allow openly gay doctors or nurses to care for their kids.

In her radio bulletin today, Harvey offered yet another commentary about the how gay people will likely molest kids, including their own children, because “when you are open to sinful, God-defying behavior in one profound way, violating other boundaries happens more easily.”

We have to consider at all times the effect of homosexual activism on children and the open and proud homosexual adult is a terrible influence on children. Yes we must keep trying to witness to such people but we’re at the point where protection from their harmful influence is at least as important. Homosexual adults are harmful role models as they promote sinful behavior while calling it something to be proud of.

It’s not just the openly homosexual teacher, but kids raised in a homosexual home have this influence in triple intensity and intimacy. These adults are living a big lie and kids know this in their hearts. Even if their intentions are good, their framework is seriously wrong. And yes there are adults who molest children. It’s not every adult in this lifestyle, of course, but it certainly seems acceptable to some. Where are the built-in protections? Homosexual groups are busy dismantling them in schools and in public places with parents seen as obstacles. Why? When you are open to sinful, God-defying behavior in one profound way, violating other boundaries happens more easily.

Gohmert Cites Deaths In Afghanistan As Evidence Obama Doesn't Want Soldiers To Be Able To Defend Themselves

Rep. Louie Gohmert was the guest on the "WallBuilders Live" radio program today, where he was hailed by hosts David Barton and Rick Green as the voice of "common sense" in Washington, DC as he promoted his effort to repeal the policy prohibiting military members from carrying weapons while on base.

The repeal effort is difficult, Gohmert explained, because "we're battling an administration that is determined to keep out military from being able to defend themselves properly" and, as proof, he cited the fact that the number of US soldiers killed in Afghanistan has increased during President Obama's administration:

Look at the fact that even though this Commander in Chief has only been in command of the battle in Afghanistan for five and a quarter years where [George W.] Bush was about seven and a quarter, President Bush was commander when there was really quite a war and there were 625 precious American lives that were taken in that seven and a quarter years. President Obama comes in and he's trying to wind things up, wrap things up but people end up being killed in his five and a quarter years - going back, halfway through May - it was 1,628; so over a thousand more deaths under Commander Obama than there were under Commander Bush in Afghanistan. There are many times more seriously wounded military members under Obama than there were under Bush, so this is serious stuff.

Of course, the reason there were more casualties and injuries in Afghanistan under President Obama than there were under President Bush is because there were tens of thousands more soldiers in Afghanistan under Obama than under Bush:

By November, 2001 there were 1,300 troops in Afghanistan, a month later those numbers would double to 2,500.   The footprint of U.S. forces would remain small for years, not rising above 10,000 until 2003 and not reaching 20,000 until 2006.

By then a resurgent Taliban brought requests from military commanders for additional forces.  By late 2008 the Bush administration met some of those requests so that by the time that President Obama entered office in January, 2009 there were 34,400 U.S. military forces in Afghanistan.

But military commanders requested even more forces of the new Obama administration which had campaigned on a platform to end the war in Iraq and re-focus the military fight in Afghanistan.

By March, 2009 President Obama had ordered 21,000 additional forces to Afghanistan.  Six months later months later he ordered an additional 33,000 surge forces to meet a request by Gen. Stanley McChrystal for more troops to focus on a counterinsurgency mission.

U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan eventually peaked at 100,000 in August 2010 and from March to May of 2011.  Nearly ten times the number of forces there almost a decade before.

But President Obama had placed a timetable for the presence of the elevated surge numbers setting July, 2011 as the beginning of the draw-down of those forces.  By the end of 2012 American troop levels had returned to pre-surge levels of 68,000.

In his State of the Union address in February, 2013 President Obama announced that in a year’s time the size of the U.S. force would be reduced by half.

Mars Hill Church To Cure Mental Illness With 'Demon Trials'

Warren Throckmorton has uncovered more troubling practices at right-wing pastor Mark Driscoll’s megachurch, Mars Hill, this time thanks to an account from a former member about “demon trials” and “emotional and spiritual abuse” during her time at Mars Hill.

Driscoll is a proponent of such demon trials, which according to the website can be used to tackle matters such as “bestiality, habitual lying, physically unhealthy, masturbation, lying, pornography, ongoing depression, suicidal thoughts, alcohol abuse, drug use, anger, blasphemy, violence, self-inflicted injury, rape, incest, eating disorders, mental illness, pedophilia, and anything else that comes to mind.”

After asking members if they hear strange voices or know if their ancestors were involved in witchcraft, the conductor of the trial asks questions of the demon:

• establish our authority over Satan and demons delegated to us by the Lord Jesus Christ

• bind the strong man

• command that you convey your answers to _____________ and they will convey your answers to me. You will not speak to me because you are on trial and under the authority delegated to me by the Lord Jesus Christ.

• command that you not change your authority structure, hide, duplicate your identity, or change your name

• there will be no profanity

• you will answer every question directed at you clearly, concisely, immediately, completely, and truthfully

• command that you will not have any outside help or reinforcement during this trial

• You have responded to the name ______, we bind you by that name and upon command you will go to the pit bound by that name with all of your works and effects and all of your associates and their works and effects as well.

• When did you come?
• Will that stand as truth before the White Throne of the Lord God Almighty?

• What work were you commissioned to do?
• Will that stand as truth before the White Throne of the Lord God Almighty?

• By what means do you hope to destroy them?
• Will that stand as truth before the White Throne of the Lord God Almighty?

• What habitual lies have you told them?
• Will that stand as truth before the White Throne of the Lord God Almighty?

• Who sent you?
• Will that stand as truth before the White Throne of the Lord God Almighty?

• How many associates are working under you?
• Will that stand as truth before the White Throne of the Lord God Almighty?

• What effects have you had on them?
• Will that stand as truth before the White Throne of the Lord God Almighty?

• Do you still hold any ground against (name) that would keep you from leaving him/her upon command?
• Will that stand as truth before the White Throne of the Lord God Almighty?

Michael Peroutka Explains How Marriage Equality Invalidated All Maryland Laws

Michael Peroutka — the former League of the South board member who recently donated a million-dollar dinosaur skeleton to the Creation Museum — is also on the ballot for county council in Anne Arundel County Maryland, in today’s Republican primary.

If Peroutka is elected, it seems that he may feel no need to follow the laws of the state of Maryland. In an Institute on the Constitution video released yesterday, Peroutka claims that the Maryland General Assembly is “no longer a valid legislative body” and as a result, none of the laws that it has passed are “legally valid and legally enforceable.”

This is because, Peroutka argues, the Maryland Assembly has passed laws that “violate God’s law” and therefore have violated the Constitution and moved toward “despotism.” The laws that have invalidated Maryland’s entire state government in Peroutka’s estimation are a marriage equality bill, a transgender rights bill, an assault weapons ban and a stormwater runoff fee .

“Is it possible that those who are sworn to uphold the law, such as police and sheriffs and judges and prosecutors, may soon come to the conclusion that the enactments of this body should be ignored because they are based not in law, but in lawlessness?” he asks.

Excerpt from Peroutka’s transcript of the video:

In order for an enactment of a legislative body, such as Maryland’s General Assembly, to be legally valid and legally enforceable, it must satisfy two standards.

Firstly, the enactment must not violate what our Founders, in the Declaration of Independence, called “the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” Another way of saying this is that an enactment must not violate God’s law. (For example, an enactment that allowed the taking of innocent life would violate God’s Commandment “Thou shalt not murder,” and would, therefore, not constitute a law – even if it were enacted and signed.)

Secondly, the enactment must not violate the limits placed on the government by the Constitution of the United States or the constitution of your State. Another way of saying this is that the legislature of Maryland cannot do what it has no authority to do.

When we review the behavior of the Maryland legislature against this background, we are faced with overwhelming evidence that neither of these legal standards is followed by them, or even considered by them on a regular basis.

For example, in recent legislative sessions they have, among other things:

1) Tried to redefine “marriage,”
2) Tried to restrict the right of the people to keep and bear arms, (SB281)
3) Declared that little girls must share bathrooms with older men who are “gender confused,”
4) Placed a tax on the rain.

In earlier times, our Founders referred to such enactments as “pretended legislation.”

When the people of Maryland consider this pattern of behavior, are they justified in declaring that the Maryland legislature is no longer fit to do the job they are sworn to do?

Are they justified in declaring that the Maryland legislature has engaged in what the Declaration characterizes as a “long train of abuses and usurpations,” which is designed to reduce them to despotism?

Is it possible that those who are sworn to uphold the law, such as police and sheriffs and judges and prosecutors, may soon come to the conclusion that the enactments of this body should be ignored because they are based not in law, but in lawlessness?

Indeed what can the people do – what should the people do when those who are entrusted with making and enforcing the law actually become the lawbreakers? What happens when they use the “law” to break the law?

Rick Santorum Will Run For President Because Republicans Aren't Conservative Enough

Yesterday, Rick Santorum appeared on “The Capitol Hill Show” with Tim Constantine to tout Chris McDaniel’s campaign in the Mississippi Republican primary against Sen. Thad Cochran, a race he described as part of a larger battle within the GOP to weed out supposed moderates.

Santorum said that Republican leaders have silenced conservative figures like himself:

You look at our side and it’s, ‘You got to be quiet about this issue, you can’t talk about this issue, you got to stay away from this issue.’ When you do that, you’re not making the argument to the American public as to why you’re right and of course you’re going to lose on that issue if you never talk about it. That’s the problem, is that we have a bunch of people who run the Republican Party from the financial point of view who don’t believe in the party platform and have been trying to cow us into walking away from it.

“Will you run again in 2016? Will you carry the mantle of the conservative movement?” Constantine asked.

In response, Santorum strongly hinted that he will in fact run: “Well, I’m in South Carolina today.”

Congressman Debunks Tony Perkins' Claim That The Obama Administration Refuses To Help Imprisoned Christian In Sudan

Over the past several weeks, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has relentlessly criticized the Obama administration’s handling of the imprisonment of Meriam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman who is married to a U.S. citizen. Ibrahim, a Christian, was put on death row in Sudan for apostasy. She was recently released from jail after an appeals court voided her conviction, but according to reports today she has been rearrested while attempting to leave the country.

It is no surprise that Perkins has used the shocking human rights violation as an excuse to attack the Obama administration, but now even his Republican allies aren’t backing him up on it.

Yesterday, when Perkins invited Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., to discuss the case on his radio show “Washington Watch,” Meadows completely undermined the FRC leader’s thinly veiled partisan attacks.

Asked if the State Department was working to help Ibrahim and her children, Meadows reported that the U.S. has in fact worked vigorously behind the scenes to free Ibrahim: “I got off of a call not more than an hour or so ago and a number of agencies across the board are working hand-in-glove to make sure that this is handled quickly and efficiently. And I am heartened by what I heard on that phone call and really encouraged that this is a government that cares about people. Sometimes I wish they would speak up louder and quicker, but I can tell you behind the scenes a number of agencies are working to make sure that they are safe.”

Just minutes later, however, Perkins completely discarded the congressman’s assessment and once again accused the Obama administration of doing little to help secure Ibrahim’s release.

Bizarrely, he cited the case of Abdul Rahman — an Afghan convert to Christianity who faced imprisonment and death threats during the Bush administration — to criticize Obama, saying the president is “not just sympathetic to but I think extremely supportive of these Islamic nations.”

Gina Miller Warns LGBT Rights Will Lead To Communism

Far-right columnist Gina Miller is convinced that the LGBT rights movement is ushering in communism, which gay advocates advocates fail to understand since they are spiritually blinded to the demonic agenda behind their efforts.

Now, she warns, “Barack Obama (or whatever his name is)” is having policies like the Employment Non-Discrimination Act “shoved down our throats” to benefit “sexual deviants” and the “mentally disordered” transgender community.

We have seen in the past several years under the Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) administration a militant homosexual movement on steroids, running at warp speed. Many of us have been warning you that this movement is not what it seems, what it's being sold as to the American public. While its proponents claim it is simply about gaining "marriage equality" and "civil rights" for homosexual, "transgender" and other sexual deviants, that is not the case.

At its core, this movement is about tyranny. It's about subverting the rights of people who hold traditional moral values, which are antithetical to immoral, centralized government control. It's about silencing the dissent of those who oppose the destruction of marriage and the mainstreaming of deviancy. It's about deconstructing the foundations and truths of our freedom-based, constitutional Republic. This movement's goals are in line with the goals of the communists, and I'm certain that many homosexual activists, who are only useful pawns of this movement, do not see this.

The latest front to aggressively emerge in the radical homosexual movement's war against God, truth, reason and freedom is in the area of expanded, special rights for people suffering from "transgenderism," which is a mental (and spiritual) disorder. Those who labor under it believe they are members of the opposite sex, which is a biological impossibility, thus it has always, until recently, been rightly observed to be a disease of the mind. In our twisted age of "political correctness," some heavily politicized "scientific" and medical "professionals" have abandoned truth and reason and lent their credibility to the lie that it's somehow possible for a man to be a woman. This is pitiful, mob insanity.

The push for special rights for "transgenders" is finally shaking awake many people who have ignored the steady progress of the radical homosexual movement. When it comes to the prospect of federal "employment non-discrimination law" favoring sexual deviants being shoved down our throats, and the reality of what it would mean for business owners and others, people are starting to understand the despotism such an edict would be. It would mean, for instance, that a businessman could very easily be successfully sued by a mentally disordered man who insists on dressing like a woman, if that businessman turned him down for a job. There are myriad bad scenarios you can imagine that would result from such a federal law.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious