Right Wing Round-Up - 12/6/12

Right Wing Leftovers - 12/6/12

  • Sen. Jim DeMint is resigning from the Senate to become the next president of the Heritage Foundation and FRC's Tony Perkins is thrilled: "We are proud to partner with Heritage on numerous projects, including our annual Values Voter Summit and our recently completed national bus tour. With a good friend like Jim DeMint joining this great organization, I look forward to that partnership deepening even further."
  • Speaking of the Values Voter Summit, regular VVS speaker Stephen Baldwin has been charged with tax evasion.
  • We'll see how the Religious Right feels about Sheldon Adelson spending hundreds of millions of dollars on elections when they learn that he considers himself to be "basically a social liberal."
  • The Barna Groups analyzes the role of faith in the 2012 election and finds that "Notional Christians — the large segment of voters who consider themselves to be Christian but are not born again — voted decisively in favor of Mr. Obama." Of course, this will not stop the Religious Right from insisting that all Christians share their views and must vote Republican.
  • Rick Green is not happy with Bob Costas' commentary on gun violence, telling him to "study up on this issue, learn the facts, and apply some common sense."  If only he'd give the same advice to David Barton.
  • Finally, FRC prays that the Supreme Court will protect "traditional marriage": "God, our nation is flooded with sin and debauchery. Move upon our Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution, the laws of Congress, the will of the people, and 'the laws of nature and of nature's God.' Cause us to return to you. Send revival to your Church and awakening to our nation and a turning of the cultural tide, including our laws, politics and policy. Make us, yet, a City on a Hill and a light for You to the nations. Help us fervently to pray until our courts preserve natural, historic, biblical marriage just as You intended it!"

Bryan Fischer Defends Ban on Women in Combat by Lying about the Israeli Military

Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association today dedicated his radio show to railing against the American Civil Liberties Union for filing a lawsuit against the ban on women in combat. He got most heated in responding to the claims from ban opponents who point to Israel’s policy towards women, arguing that Israel actually excludes women from combat roles and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.

Don’t let people lie to you that the Israelis use women in combat, they do not. They tried it for three weeks in 1948, they scrapped it, it doesn’t work and they’ve never done it again. Now women still serve in the Israeli military, they serve as secretaries, clerks, communications specialists, nurses, teachers and army social workers. They do not serve in combat. They don’t serve as pilots, they don’t serve on ships, they don’t pump gas, they don’t even drive trucks. Now they do receive a minimal amount of weapons training but they receive no training in how to use weapons in combat and they don’t even practice shooting at combats. In fact the only time, and this is what perpetuates the myth, the only time that Israeli female soldiers carry weapons is on parade.

However, this is simply not the case.

“Women have served in combat roles in the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) since the mid-1990s,” the BBC reports. “During the 2006 Lebanon conflict, women fired artillery, served on warships, and piloted aircraft.”

Apparently Fischer doesn’t believe the IDF’s own website which clearly states that women in “some of the most combative, extreme roles” in the military.

Everywhere in the IDF, women play a vital role in all positions, both combat and administrative. In the Air Force, Navy, and Ground Forces- these women man some of the most combative, extreme roles in the IDF.

Today, over 90% of all IDF jobs are available for female soldiers, including a variety of elite positions. Over the last decade, IDF women completed pilot’s course, became naval officers and took on a variety of infantry positions.

The following women fight alongside men, contributing to the security of the State of Israel and proving their immense toughness

The IDF says women serve as weapons instructors, pilots in the air force and soldiers in combat, K-9, field intelligence and engineering units.

 

There is even an entire page about combat options for Israeli female service members.

But Fischer doesn’t have any interest in doing even elementary research into this issue and is much more content with spewing baseless statements that fly in the face of reality.

The Smearing of Planned Parenthood Reaches a New Low

Earlier today, Erick Erickson of Red State retweeted a tweet from Kristina Ribali, the Director of New Media at FreedomWorks, linking to a "disgusting" LifeNews.com article accusing Planned Parenthood of promoting a video that shows young women "how to cover up those nasty cuts and bruises that result from a beating."

The video in question does, in fact, appear to be a demonstration from an obviously abused young woman attempting to conceal the bruises and lacerations on her face with make-up until she hears a noise off-screen and quickly turns off the camera ... at which point a message appears that reads:

65% of women who suffer domestic violence keep it hidden.

Don't cover it up.

Share this and help someone speak out.

A URL for the London-based domestic abuse helpline that produced the ad is then provided.  Obviously, the entire purpose of the ad is to juxtapose the scene presented against the real message of speaking out against domestic violence, and LifeNews even eventually admits this, yet still presents the video as if Planned Parenthood is encouraging young women to conceal abuse:

But the way Planned Parenthood headlines it—with “How to look your best the morning after,” teens are mislead by Planned Parenthood into the cover up mentality. On the anti-domestic violence site, the video is introduced with the headline: “Don’t cover it up.” That headline makes a world of difference to young teens who run across the video.

Presumably, the reason Planned Parenthood headlined the video "How To Look Your Best The Morning After" is because the video is titled "How To Look Your Best The Morning After."  The title is intentionally misleading in order to drive home to real message. 

And, of course, LifeNews was not alone as the geniuses over at Twitchy are likewise outraged about the video because they are apparently equally clueless: 

The video, which is from a legitimate organization fighting against domestic violence, does end with “don’t cover it up.”

But the way Planned Parenthood framed it, the message is just the opposite: “You probably had it coming, girls. May as well try to doll yourselves up afterward.” Appalling.

But, what else can one expect from an organization that routinely aids and abets the purposeful selective aborting of female babies, and covers up statutory rape?

...

Heartbreaking and beyond repugnant ... Where is the feminist outrage at teaching young women to “look their best” after being violently beaten? So far, crickets. Abortion trumps all, you see.

Planned Parenthood had nothing to do with this video, other than posting it on one of its Facebook pages ... but the hatred of the organization has become so pathological that even simply linking to a video urging women not to cover up domestic abuse is portrayed as an effort to encourage women to cover up domestic abuse! 

Liberty Counsel Unveils Meme Likening Gays to Drug Addicts

As more conservatives argue that Religious Right groups need to take a more aggressive stance against the gay community in the wake of a disastrous election cycle, Liberty Counsel has come out with a meme maintaining that the government should treat gays and lesbians just like drug addicts. The group goes on to claim that gays cannot be Christian or find love in their “unhealthy interactions” as “their actions are damaging both to themselves and to society as a whole.”

This should really swing the debate!

Republicans Continue to Spin Election Results to Claim Obama Lacks Mandate

While Obama had a larger popular vote and Electoral College margin than George W. Bush, who claimed to have a mandate after he won re-election in 2004, now Republicans keep insisting that Obama doesn’t have a mandate because his election victory was too thin a margin. For example, while Dick Morris predicted that Mitt Romney would win a 325 electoral vote “landslide,” he then said Obama’s 332 electoral vote victory was merely a “squeaker.”

J.T. Young in the Washington Times today makes the case that Obama’s win wasn’t all that great because if you play around with the numbers and reduce the turnout numbers from Democratic-leaning groups like women then Romney would’ve won! Plus, the conservative share of the electorate was up in 2012 and Ronald Reagan posted huge margins when he ran for president so Americans must still be looking for Republican leadership, or something. 

Multiplying exit-polling participation percentage by preference percentage gives a good approximation of what the Kerry or Gore electoral impact would be on these groups so crucial to Mr. Obama’s victory. The average drop in support for Mr. Obama in 2012 from the higher of either Mr. Kerry or Mr. Gore among the five groups is 2.4 percent. Delete women from the calculation, and the average decline is 2.8 percent — almost enough to have allowed Mr. Romney to win by Mr. Obama’s 2012 popular vote margin.

Even the decline in votes for Mr. Obama by 18- to 29-year-olds compared to Mr. Kerry or Mr. Gore — 2.2 percent — is still more than enough to flip the popular vote to Mr. Romney. The declines in other demographics — blacks (2.4 percent), Hispanics, (2.8 percent) and liberals (3.7 percent) — are far greater.

Furthermore, vote totals for both Mr. Kerry and Mr. Gore came against George W. Bush, who hardly racked up Reagan-sized Republican margins.



Republicans also retain a real ideological advantage. Exit polling showed conservatives made up 35 percent of voters in 2012 and went 82 percent for Mr. Romney — hardly a conservative favorite. Liberals made up 25 percent of 2012 voters — their highest level among the past four elections and 3 percent more than in 2008 — going 86 percent for Mr. Obama. That means Republicans need only a little more than one-third of the remaining Independents to win, while Democrats need a bit less than two-thirds.

The American Family Association’s Buster Wilson even had a post-election rant arguing that even though Obama won the election 51-47 percent, Romney tied him in geography and therefore Democrats don’t have a mandate. “There’s an awful lot of red there,” Wilson claimed. He even wondered if Harry Reid is mentally unbalanced because he said that Democrats had a mandate to raise tax on top-earners.

Of course, since Democrats typically lose the rural vote, if we were simply to judge election mandates according to the colors on maps then Democrats will almost never have a mandate.

Steve Deace on his radio show yesterday was flummoxed that Obama won re-election while capturing just 22 percent of counties. Ignoring the fact that county size has little to do with population rates, he maintained that because Romney carried far more counties than Obama, America still has a conservative majority but freedom-hating liberal elites have “infiltrated the population centers” and ruined everything.

“If we fought this like the Revolutionary War was fought at times where the Red Coats stood on a line and the Colonials stood on a line and they just fired at each other, we would overwhelm them in sheer numbers,” Deace gloated, “we would steamroll them.”

What has happened here is we’ve been outflanked. Enemies of freedom and liberty, what they have done is infiltrated the population centers so that they run the editorial boards of almost every major newspaper in your city, they ran the government school board in almost every major city in America, they run even things to the point like the art center, who is on the board of your city’s art center? The statists are, the secularists are, the progressives are. They are running—they have outflanked us. If we fought this like the Revolutionary War was fought at times where the Red Coats stood on a line and the Colonials stood on a line and they just fired at each other, we would overwhelm them in sheer numbers. First of all, most of them don’t believe in guns, that’s one advantage. The other thing is we would overwhelm them in sheer numbers, we would steamroll them, I mean they could not defeat our sheer numbers. But what has happened is the enemies of freedom and liberty have outflanked us, they have been strategic in their thinking and that’s where they have concentrated their resources. So we are a mile wide but an inch deep, they are the exact opposite, they are about a foot wide and a mile deep.

Basically, Obama can only claim to have a popular mandate if he wins the least populated areas of America.

'Barack the Destroyer': Bryan Fischer's Grand Unified Theory of Obama

On yesterday's program, Bryan Fischer responded to a caller who asserted that President Obama is "a very evil man" who wants to turn American into an Islamic state by laying out a wide-ranging theory about how Obama is not a Christian but rather a Muslim sympathizer who believes that the United States is fundamentally racist and evil and must be destroyed.  And that is exactly what Obama is trying to do, Fischer asserted, by entertaining ideas about capping tax deductions on charitable giving for high-income donors  because he wants to wipe out private charity so that people will become dependent on the government.

In fact, when companies lay off workers, Obama rejoices because "he wants to see America and Americans suffer" because "he is Barack the Destroyer; he is out to punish America for our misdeeds, to punish us for our racism, to bring us to our knees, to humble us in the dust so he can rebuild some kind of a socialist utopia on the ruins of what used to be the United States of America":

WND: Gun Violence part of Obama's Marxist Plot

WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush recently appeared on Hannity where, during a debate over Bob Costas’ commentary on gun violence, he got into a shouting match with radio host Leo Terrell and repeatedly yelled at him to “shut up.” Writing at WND, Rush claims that the left is to blame for urban crime: “It is the destructive social policies of the left that have precipitated the dysfunction that leads to violence in the black community…. Societal dysfunction fostered by the left has led to increasing levels of violence, some of which is perpetrated with firearms.”

Rush concludes that “radical Marxists” in the Obama administration hope to “foster” gun violence to justify their plan to “disarm Americans,” which will allow them to “manifest their decades-long dream of a Marxist America.”

While this argument that Obama is intentionally increasing gun violence in order to take away guns is absurd on its place, even Mitt Romney and House Oversight Chair Darrell Issa have given a nod to the conspiracy theory that the Fast and Furious operation was intentionally botched in order to give the administration an excuse to pursue gun control policies.

Liberal blacks who defend gun control on the basis of violent crime in the inner cities are also off base in overlooking that these urban areas have been under the complete political control of liberals for decades. It is the destructive social policies of the left that have precipitated the dysfunction that leads to violence in the black community.

Indoctrinated blacks, of course, do not see the method behind the madness and thus eagerly embrace the simpleton’s impossible fix: Erase guns from the equation. Like so many other Americans, blacks also accept at face value politicians’ feigned concern for our safety.

As we have seen from years of tedious gun-control arguments and activism – some of which have resulted in significant capitulation even from ostensible defenders of the Second Amendment – it matters little that there is no correlation whatsoever between the availability of guns and violent crime. Guns have always been plentiful in America – so why the increasing drive to control them? Simple: Societal dysfunction fostered by the left has led to increasing levels of violence, some of which is perpetrated with firearms.

Once again, we have a problem liberals have created, and which they now intend to “solve” through the stultification of our civil liberties – always for our own good.

The bottom line is that Americans need to wake up to the fact that (as I also said on “Hannity”) all gun-control measures are efforts on the part of the political left to disarm Americans. As governments have known for millennia, unarmed populations are infinitely easier to control than armed ones. This effort will continue to move “Forward,” particularly since Barack Obama was re-elected.

The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America was intended to facilitate citizens’ protection from a tyrannical government should the occasion ever arise. In layman’s terms, this means militarily engaging the operatives of a criminal regime – with guns. The current administration is bristling with radical Marxists, and I would wager that 80 percent of Americans aren’t even capable of conceptualizing the lengths to which they are prepared to go to manifest their decades-long dream of a Marxist America.

Right Wing Round-Up - 12/5/12

Right Wing Leftovers - 12/5/12

  • Oh good, James Dobson is now publishing a fiction trilogy "in the dystopian tradition of 1984, Brave New World and The Hunger Games."
  • Dick Armey received an $8 million buyout after resigning from FreedomWorks. I'll resign for half that! 
  • Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff were seen having lunch together.  Maybe Abramoff was giving DeLay some pointers on how to handle prison?
  • Fox News has benched Karl Rove and Dick Morris for being spectacularly bad at their jobs, which must be some sort of first. 
  • Gary Bauer warns that the "war on Christmas" is a sign of "cultural rot [that] is really quite dangerous. A civilization that is afraid to defend its values will not survive."
  • Sen. Marco Rubio is still "not a scientist, man" but he now has an opinion on the age of the Earth: "Science says it is about 4.5 billion years old. My faith teaches that's not inconsistent. God created the heavens and the Earth, and science has given us insight into when he did it and how he did it. The more science learns, the more I am convinced that God is real."
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious