« June 10, 2007 - June 16, 2007
|
June 24, 2007 - June 30, 2007 »
June 17, 2007 - June 23, 2007
June 21, 2007
Religious Right Hopes African Americans Will Help Defeat Hate Crimes Bill
Bishop Harry Jackson’s High Impact Leadership Coalition ran an ad in the D.C. newspaper Roll Call last week to oppose the Hate Crimes Prevention Act under consideration in Congress. Raising the tired right-wing canard that “prosecutors and anti-Christian groups will use loop holes in this proposed legislation to muzzle the church,” the ad sought to drive a wedge between blacks, who are covered by federal hate-crimes law now, and gays, who seek the same protection against violent crime motivated by hatred:
We are African Americans, though we represent thousands of Christian leaders of all races. We understand more clearly than most that racially motivated violence can be a form of internal terrorism.
The Black community needs a free pulpit. Indeed, ALL Americans need free pulpits.
(View a higher-resolution PDF of the ad.)
As PFAW has explained – the Hate Crimes Prevention Act only addresses violent crimes causing “bodily injury” – not speech, not preaching. Nevertheless, Jackson claims that the bill, backed by “the evil one,” will “shut [the church] down.”
Jackson has been a frequent ally of the Religious Right, especially in efforts to combat equal rights for gays – he wrote that the “wisdom behind” the “gay agenda” is “clearly satanic.” He wants black churches to end their acceptance of gay members. The D.C.-area pastor has often claimed that African Americans are at home on the far Right, from opposing “tax-and-spend policies directed at the poor” to focusing the church on abortion and gays, and he’s also urged blacks to vote for Republicans such a George Bush, whom he endorsed in 2004.
Jackson has also leant his support to right-wing efforts to push Bush’s extreme judicial nominees. At “Justice Sunday II,” a televised rally put on by the Family Research Council, Jackson explained that, because the law targets blacks unfairly, he supports right-wing judges, who will ensure “that justice will be administrated without partiality.”
Several other names on the ad are familiar from religious-right events. Herb Lusk hosted “Justice Sunday III” at his Philadelphia church. Bill Owens started a group called the Coalition of African American Pastors that emerged to support the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Ken Hutcherson rallied with James Dobson for an anti-gay marriage amendment to the Constitution – just before the 2004 election.
Posted by Ezra at 5:41 PM | Permalink
Far Right Stands Behind Bush in Stem Cell Veto
When President Bush again vetoed funding for embryonic stem-cell research, he did more than earn praise from the Religious Right – he invited them to the veto ceremony. His guests included members of Concerned Women for America, the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, and the National Right to Life Committee.
Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, who was not at the White House event, said that “President Bush has proven once again that he's not just a man who talks about preserving a 'culture of life' as political rhetoric -- he's a man who deeply cherishes the sanctity of all human life. His veto today of a bill that would have led to dissection of young innocents in the name of suspect science solidifies his already-strong record as one of our nation's most pro-life presidents.”
Focus’s Jim Daly, who was there, applauded Bush for his rhetoric. "The quote that really caught my attention was, 'I will not allow our nation to cross this moral line,’” Daly said. “He was very forthright about it -- very staunch, no equivocation. I think it really shows, on the core issues, this president really gets the pro-life agenda."
Posted by Ezra at 5:38 PM | Permalink
AFA Takes on Urban-Legends Web Site
For years, Snopes.com has been an invaluable online resource for those wondering whether commonly-told but improbable anecdotes they’ve heard have any truth to them. The famous story of the woman who was charged $250 for a cookie recipe by Neiman Marcus, the one about suicidal lemmings, and whether the Great Wall of China is the only man-made object visible from the moon – these are typical fare for the site. Now, you can add to that list the far-right assertion that the hate-crimes bill would throw pastors in jail for preaching that homosexuality is a sin.
That claim has been a mainstay of opposition to the hate-crimes bill. “Pastors … prepare for jail” warned Janet Folger. Rick Scarborough said it would “criminalize biblical preaching.” Chuck Colson said, “It’s not even about crime. It’s about outlawing peaceful speech -- speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong.” Of course, as we have explained many times, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act targets violent crimes causing bodily injury, and does not have anything to do with constitutionally protected speech or religious practice.
Nevertheless, the American Family Association repeats the claim, asserting in a recent action alert that the bill “would criminalize negative comments concerning homosexuality, such as calling the practice of homosexuality a sin from the pulpit, a “hate crime” punishable by a hefty fine and time in prison. This dangerous legislation would take away our freedom of speech and our freedom of religion.”
Snopes.com received the e-mail and looked into its assertions, concluding, “This claim, as well as the Action Alert's bulleted references to court cases, news items, and current legislation, are gross and misleading distortions of information.” In particular:
The bill addresses "willfully causing bodily injury to any person" (as well as "attempts to cause bodily injury to any person") because of "actual or perceived ... gender, sexual orientation, [or] gender identity." The bill does not "criminalize negative comments concerning homosexuality," nor would it make "calling the practice of homosexuality a sin from the pulpit a 'hate crime'." The bill has nothing to do with the issue of speech; it only prescribes criminal penalties for the willful infliction of bodily injury on others. In fact, the version of the bill passed by the House of Representatives on 3 May 2007 includes a clause that specifically precludes it from applying to conduct protected by the free speech and free exercise of religion provisions of the Constitution[.]
Now, AFA has responded, purporting to refute the popular urban-legends web site.
American Family Association remains steadfast in our claim that if this bill passes, we are confident that liberal judges will rush to make it a federal crime to publicly criticize the homosexual lifestyle.
We remain adamantly opposed to this dangerous legislation that could lay the groundwork for persecution of Christians in America. But even more chilling is the fact that S. 1105 and H.R.1592 pave the way to religious persecution – with “hate crimes” laws inevitably leading to “hate speech” laws targeted specifically at Christians and other faith groups who hold traditional beliefs on homosexuality.
While AFA doesn’t directly address the requirement that the crime involve “bodily injury,” the group refers to a summary of the bill from the right-wing Alliance Defense Fund, which suggests that, contrary to the specificity of the term, “bodily injury” can mean “mental anguish.” ADF also suggests ignoring the section of the bill that explicitly excludes constitutionally protected speech and religious practice.
Posted by Ezra at 4:27 PM | Permalink
June 20, 2007
Bauer References Manhattan Project in Attacking Immigration
In a recent anti-immigration e-mail rant to his supporters, Gary Bauer assailed the federal government for failing to protect the border against a supposed “invasion”:
My friends, this is not the hallmark of a serious nation at war, intent on defending its homeland. If these same bureaucrats were running the government during World War II, America would not have developed the atomic bomb until the 1970s.
Bauer’s position on border enforcement notwithstanding, his remark curiously alludes to one of the greatest immigration success stories in American history. Many of the principal scientists involved in the Manhattan Project and the building of the atomic bomb were foreign-born immigrants, including the Italian Enrico Fermi, German-born Hans Bethe, and Hungary-native Edward Teller. The famous Danish physicist Niels Bohr was here under what one could call a “temporary worker program.”
As Bauer’s own example points out, those born outside of America have made valuable contributions to U.S. society. Who knows, maybe without immigrants, the U.S. might not have developed the atomic bomb until the 1970s.
Posted by Michael at 3:54 PM | Permalink
DeLay Loves Gingrich, He Loves Him Not
In his recent book "No Retreat, No Surrender,” former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay didn’t have a lot of nice things to say about Newt Gingrich:
DeLay admits that the Republican leaders empowered by the 1994 elections -- comprising himself as majority whip, Gingrich as speaker and Armey as majority leader -- "were not a cohesive team, and this hindered our ability to change the nation." He puts most blame "at Newt Gingrich's door."
In describing Gingrich as an "ineffective Speaker," DeLay writes: "He knew nothing about running meetings and nothing about driving an agenda." He adds: "Nearly every other day he had a new agenda, a new direction he wanted us to take. It was impossible to follow him."
DeLay also declares that "our leadership was in no moral shape to press" for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Writing well before Gingrich's admission for the first time last week, DeLay asserts: "It is now public knowledge that Newt Gingrich was having an affair with a staffer during the entire impeachment crisis. Clearly, men with such secrets are not likely to sound a high moral tone at a moment of national crisis."
It is not particularly surprising that DeLay would criticize Gingrich in this manner – he did, after all, seek to topple Gingrich from his position as House Speaker back in 1997 in a coup that failed miserably.
But apparently that decade-old betrayal, as well as the recent attacks contained in his book, are mere bygones – at least for DeLay, who is suddenly heaping praise on Gingrich:
Whatever else can be said of Newt Gingrich, he is not a typical politician.
He applies to public policy a knowledge of history that is simply unmatched in professional politics today. It's cliché to say someone's brain is like a sponge, but in Gingrich's case it applies doubly so -- not only does he absorb and retain almost every piece of information he encounters, but he can, with the slightest squeeze, blurt it back out at you in a different way from which it came in.
He's the closest real-world comparison to the "West Wing's" President Josiah Bartlet -- quirky, unpredictable and almost impossibly brilliant.
…
His presence in a debate up against the trite, over-rehearsed pabulum of his opponents will quickly propel him to the top tier of the field. I think he'll be a fantastic presidential candidate; he'll run circles around the other guys in the debates (and it's a deep Republican field, remember).
DeLay even desperately attempts to recast his own criticisms of Gingrich as strengths. Whereas just months ago, DeLay said Gingrich was so incompetent that he couldn’t run a meeting or drive an agenda, it turns out that Gingrich’s real problem was that he was just too brilliant:
[His] hyperkinetic brain of his generated more ideas than the Republican conference could manage at once. Sometimes Newt's Next Big Idea would change three times in a week. They'd all be brilliant, they'd usually be good, but the unpredictability left many Republicans unsure as to where he was leading us.
With Gingrich toying with the idea of his own presidential run, it sure seems as if DeLay is trying to get on his good side, maybe in hopes of getting a plum job with his administration. Or maybe he’s just trying to lay the groundwork in case he ever needs a pardon.
Posted by Kyle at 8:43 AM | Permalink
June 19, 2007
Protestors Warn Immigration Bill 'Diversion' for 'Fascist One World Order'
“If you continue to believe that the illegal alien invasion is the biggest threat to America, you will never understand that there is something far more dangerous to our country called the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” said Daneen Peterson at a small rally in Washington, D.C. last Friday. Peterson explained that “the overwhelming human tsunami of illegal aliens and MS-13 gang members” will cause “complete anarchy,” which in turn will “allow the shadow government to step forward and visibly take over this country. They will use martial law to install a fascist One World Order, dictatorial government in plain sight instead of operating clandestinely as they do now."
Peterson’s warning is familiar to a significant faction of the anti-immigrant movement, who believe that President Bush, an obscure college professor, and the Council on Foreign Relations are secretly plotting to create a European Union-style government in North America. While the supposedly well-advanced march to a “North American Union,” featuring a new flag and a unified “Amero” currency, has not been taken seriously outside of far-right and nativist web sites and news sources, the theory has had major backing from “Swift Vet” co-author Jerome Corsi, CNN host Lou Dobbs, Phyllis Schlafly, Judicial Watch, Accuracy in Media’s Cliff Kincaid, right-wing news site WorldNetDaily.com, long-shot Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, and the grandfather of right-wing conspiracy-mongering, the John Birch Society.
And while Peterson called the immigration debate a “diversion” from the “North American Union” scheme, many activists see them as of a piece: Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia), who has introduced a resolution to oppose the vaporous plot, has also stated that immigration reform is just the first step: “It will lead us on a path to likely have a North American currency, will further break down the borders between our countries, and it really undermines the concept of the United States of America in favor of something called North America.”
Tom Tancredo and Pat Buchanan have made similar testimonies. Warning that immigration reform would lead to “deep integration” involving “superhighways and railroads,” Buchanan said the legislation “is about the merger of nations into larger transnational entitles and, ultimately, global governance.”
Goode himself appeared at the rally alongside Daneen Peterson to warn that meetings between the leaders of the U.S., Mexico, and Canada “will send us on a glide path to the destruction of our sovereignty, and I always want the United States to be the best country in the world as it is today, and it won't be if we're part of a North American Union.”
Tomorrow, Judicial Watch is holding a panel on the subject, featuring Schlafly, Rosemary Jenks of the anti-immigrant group Numbers USA, and Robert Pastor, the obscure college professor universally cited as at the center of the mysterious scheming among the global elite.
As debate over comprehensive immigration reform continues and the anti-“North American Union” community simmers online, opponents of immigration reform are increasingly linking legalization of undocumented immigrants to an impending clandestine merger of the U.S. and its neighbors. When congressmen arguing against reform cite the “North American Union,” it goes a long way toward legitimizing the fringe operation currently organizing around the conspiracy, but it’s fair to predict that those politicians or more mainstream commentators “connecting the dots” to this conspiracy theory will only make their anti-immigrant cause less credible.
Posted by Ezra at 5:03 PM | Permalink
The Hays Conspiracy
There appears to be a pattern developing regarding the allegedly anti-gay views of Florida Republican legislator D. Alan Hays:
As health-care advocates Friday called for a range of sanctions against state Rep. D. Alan Hays, the Umatilla Republican again refuted accusations that he said his gay cousin deserved to die after contracting the virus that causes AIDS.
…
Minutes after the conference, Hays released a statement denying that he told two nurses and a regional manager for a nonprofit AIDS health-care program Wednesday that his cousin was "queer as a three-dollar bill" and "had that homosexual lifestyle and deserved what he got."
Hays denies making the statement, saying that while he’s “known for being plain-spoken” and speaking his mind, he is outraged that people are “making these claims against me.”
Of course, people might be more inclined to believe him had he not been accused of making another anti-gay remark earlier this year … which he also denied making:
But Wednesday's accusation is the second time this year Hays has come under fire in public for anti-gay slurs. During debate over an anti-bullying bill in March, several students said Hays told them they needed psychological treatment because they're gay.
At the time, The Fort Myers News-Press reported that Hays confirmed his meeting with the students and commenting about them needing psychological treatment. But it also reported that Hays couldn't recall saying he was "repulsed" by homosexuals, which the students claimed at the time.
"The best way that I can explain that [is] I asked them if they wanted to know what I thought and they said 'yes, they did,' and I told them what I thought," Hays said Friday. "They too made false accusations about me."
Hays said Friday he couldn't remember precisely what he told the students.
Remarkable. Apparently there is some conspiracy afoot whereby two separate and completely unrelated groups have just decided to falsely accuse Hays of making off-the-cuff anti-gay statements. What are the chances of that?
Posted by Kyle at 2:33 PM | Permalink
Finally, Some Honesty About The Right’s Litmus Test
Traditionally, Republican presidents and right-wing supporters have claimed not to have any sort of anti-abortion “litmus test” for the judges they intended to nominate to the Supreme Court. For instance, that is exactly what President Bush claimed before he nominated John Roberts to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
In place of the anti-abortion “litmus test,” Republicans and their right-wing allies have hewn to language about nominating judges “in the mold of Scalia and Thomas” – which is basically the same thing. So ingrained has this rhetorical trick become that it is currently being used by the all of the GOP presidential candidates.
Well, at least the frontrunners.
Months ago, Rep. Duncan Hunter stated that “If any judicial candidate comes before me and can look at a sonogram … and not see valuable life, then I will not appoint him.” Now, Sen. Sam Brownback who, like Hunter, is still trying to establish himself as a viable candidate, has apparently decided to follow Hunter’s lead in eschewing the standard “in the mold of Scalia and Thomas” language in favor of openly admitting that he would apply a pretty basic litmus test for his nominees:
Sen. Sam Brownback was one of three Republican presidential candidates to address the National Right to Life convention Friday at a forum for those seeking the GOP nomination. He said that, as president, he would like to nominate the next Supreme Court justice who could provide the fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.
“We're one vote shy on the Supreme Court. I want to be the president to appoint that justice,“ the GOP contender said.
Brownback’s not going to get the chance to appoint that justice, but at least some of the Republican candidates are willing to be honest about the very obvious “litmus test” they have, and always have had, for Supreme Court nominees.
Posted by Kyle at 2:25 PM | Permalink
June 18, 2007
Theologian-in-Chief
One of the key issues facing GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney in the primary is whether evangelical Republican grassroots voters will be willing to cast a vote for a Mormon:
Here's the problem with electing a Mormon president, as Jason Thurman sees it: "I don't believe he would be guided by God."
Thurman, 26, is tidying the annotated Bibles in the Shepherd's Fold bookstore. Over by the rack of Christian CDs, his co-worker Marty Thomas raises a similar concern.
"When it comes right down to it," says Thomas, 40, "a Mormon's strength is human. A Christian person's strength is superhuman. I want [a president] who has that extra on his side."
In an attempt to counter this problem, Romney met with various right-wing leaders last year in an attempt to ease their concerns about his religion:
Romney, who is ramping up preparations for a 2008 campaign, huddled privately at his Belmont home last Thursday with about a dozen evangelicals, including conservative activist Gary Bauer, president of the group American Values, and Richard Land, a prominent leader in the Southern Baptist Convention.
The meetings have touched on several themes, participants say, but two topics being discussed are Romney's religious beliefs and how he should address his faith as the campaign progresses.
…
At last week's meeting at Romney's home, Land said, he told the governor that voters want "a commander in chief, not a theologian in chief."
Romney has continued to emphasize the idea that the President is "commander in chief, not a theologian in chief" and it has obviously paid off to the extent that last week he announced the backing of several high-profile right-wing leaders such as James Bopp, Jay Sekulow, and Lou Sheldon who have quickly begun parroting this talking point:
Sheldon says Romney has "an across the board appeal" to evangelical conservatives, business, and the average American worker. "He's not running for the head of any ministeriam or denomination or the pope -- he's running for a secular office that is called for secular issues," explains Sheldon. "And he has, I think, the moral and ethical basis to be a strong conservative in that office."
So Romney’s Mormon faith shouldn’t be a problem for evangelical voters, or any other voter for that matter, because he’s running for a secular position. Of course, these right-wing leaders only seem to feel comfortable saying this after they’d had a chance to personally grill Romney about his faith:
"He reads the Bible regularly. He has said -- and I asked him -- that he has received Jesus Christ as his personal Savior," [Sheldon] declares. "He believes that Jesus Christ is the divine Son of God, only Son of God divine, and was crucified, buried and raised from the dead for our behalf. So, I think as he addresses those issues, that's certainly going to ignite good feeling [among Christians]."
Or as CBN’s David Brody reported:
Reverend Lou Sheldon, Chairman of Traditional Values Coalition and one of the members of Mitt Romney's Faith and Values Steering Committee, told The Brody File that he asked Mitt Romney point blank whether he would put his hand on the Bible or the Book of Mormon if he is ever sworn in as President of the United States.
His answer? The Bible.
Sheldon told me he spent nearly five hours with Mitt and Anne Romney and came away very impressed.
After all that time grilling Romney about his religious beliefs, it seems a little odd for Sheldon to turn around and dismiss others’ concerns about the candidate’s faith as irrelevant, especially since Sheldon described the presidency as a “secular office” only after having intensely questioned Romney about the tenets of his faith and determining that they meet Sheldon’s approval.
Posted by Kyle at 5:10 PM | Permalink
Romney Names High-Profile Supporters to Religious-Right Committee
Mitt Romney has been aggressively courting the Religious Right for months, slowly recruiting supporters from among the cadre of full-time activists. Earlier this year he scored Pat Robertson’s superlawyer Jay Sekulow, along with Gary Marx of the Judicial Confirmation Network and James Bopp, a prominent anti-abortion attorney.
Last week Romney’s campaign announced the formation of its National Faith and Values Steering Committee, a list of 50 better- and lesser- known religious-right figures. Among the co-chairmen of the committee are Sekulow, Marx, Bopp, Matthew Spaulding of the Heritage Foundation, Barbara Comstock of the Susan B. Anthony List (an anti-abortion PAC), and Jack Templeton, head of the Templeton Foundation and Let Freedom Ring – suggesting the kind of “values” Romney hopes to be absorbing from this caucus.
Most newsworthy was the endorsement of Lou Sheldon, head of the Traditional Values Coalition and one of the most fervently anti-gay activists in the country. Nicknamed “Lucky Louie” by imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who directed a gambling company to donate generously to TVC in exchange for support on legislation, Sheldon is the author of “The Agenda: The Homosexual Plan to Change America,” an agenda he describes as “an attack on everything our Founding Fathers hoped to give us,” consisting of Hitler-like propaganda designed to “recruit” children. “As Homosexuals continue to make inroads into public schools, more children will be molested and indoctrinated into the world of homosexuality. Many of them will die in that world,” he wrote in one “special report.”
"When I give my support for a candidate, I am giving the green light, if he wins, all the way down the line in terms of so many moral and social issues," Sheldon recently said. Sheldon joined other big-name religious-right leaders in a meeting with Romney last fall, and he recently met with the candidate for five hours, leaving with a promise that Romney would swear his oath of office on the Bible, not the Book of Mormon. “My thinking is that Mitt Romney is a person with the experience and with the Jude[o-]Christian moral values,” Sheldon told CBN’s David Brody, adding that he’d “been around Mormons long enough to know that … they are sincere about” Jesus.
Other religious-right activists on Romney’s committee include Christian Coalition board member Drew McKissic, Jay Sekulow’s son Jordan, anti-immigration writer James Edwards, and leaders or activists associated with the Alliance Defense Fund, Iowa Christian Alliance (formerly the Christian Coalition of Iowa), Heartbeat International, Legacy Law Foundation, and Citizens for Traditional Values.
Posted by Ezra at 5:00 PM | Permalink