July 2007

Richard Viguerie sees warning signs "that Thompson may be a lot like Bush. Remember when Bush was running, a lot of good people thought he was a conservative. Boy, were they taken in!" Viguerie says Thompson is "no different from a lot of other candidates who'd like conservative support without firmly committing to conservative positions. I'm going to do my best to see that doesn't happen."

Sameh Khouzam, an Egyptian national who has been accused, and convicted in absentia, of murder in his native country has been fighting efforts by the U.S. government to deport him, claiming that he will be tortured if he returns because he is a Coptic Christian who refuses to convert to Islam.  

Rallying to Khouzam’s side is Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice, as well as its European affiliate, The European Centre for Law and Justice:

As a Coptic Christian, Khouzam effectively has no rights in his native Egypt and quite frankly because of his religious beliefs is certain to be denied the most basic of human rights and protections. The U.S. government repeatedly has stated its opposition to torture and should do what's right -- keep Khouzam out of the hands of a government that is likely to do just that."

…

In its amicus brief, the ACLJ and ECLJ contend that Egypt's assurances that it won't torture Khouzam are simply not credible.

…

The brief also contends that the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT) should apply in this case. CAT states that "no State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture."

The brief asserts that "where the receiving country has a poor human rights track record, like Egypt does, diplomatic assurances should carry almost no weight."

Obviously, there is nothing wrong with the ACLJ/ECLJ’s effort to prevent Khouzam from being tortured – in fact, it is quite laudable.  What makes the ACLJ/ECLJ involvement in this case interesting is the fact that both organizations have close ties to Former Attorney General John Ashcroft – the very same man responsible for the “extraordinary rendition” of Canadian citizen Maher Arar to Syria, where he was reportedly tortured:

The BBC notes that, thanks to groups like Concerned Women for America, the US and Iran are "two of only eight countries that have not joined the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women [CEDAW]."

Richard Land says evangelicals won't write off Mitt Romney over his Mormon faith, but warns the campaign against "trying to sell Mormonism as an acceptable orthodox Christian faith is a huge mistake. It’s not going to work with evangelicals."

Vision America is carrying out a "70 Weeks to Save America" Campaign leading up to the 2008 election. So far, they've only held three of their "One Day Crusades" but they are already losing money: "Our first three crusades have been a success, but they have not been fully self supportive--meaning that we have had to subsidize them from our ongoing operational budget. We could really use your help at this time. If God has blessed you and you can afford to help us, I would be most grateful ... Gifts there are not tax deductible but they are God-Blessable."

As the judge wrote: "The genius of our Constitution is that it provides rights even to those who evoke the least sympathy from the general public. Hazleton, in its zeal to control the presence of a group deemed undesirable, violated the rights of such people, as well as others within the community."

Phyllis Schlafly is weighing in on the Brownback-Tancredo fight, recording phone messages for Tancredo targeting Iowa voters: "I want to go on record as saying I've known Tom Tancredo for 30 years and I know for sure he has always been a champion of the right to life of the unborn," Schlafly says in the calls.

Norma Gabler, who founded Educational Research Analysts with her husband, was long regarded as one of the "most effective textbook censors in the country."

Max Blumenthal provides an inside look at the recent Christians United for Israel Conference in DC, saying "I have never witnessed any spectacle as politically extreme, outrageous, or bizarre as the one Christians United for Israel produced last week in Washington."

The Committee for Justice, Family Research Council, Focus on the Family and others come together to write [PDF] to the Senate, telling them to start confirming Bush's judges and ensure "that each and every judicial nominee is given a hearing and is reported out of committee for consideration by the full Senate in a timely manner." Of course, this standard was nowhere to be seen during the Clinton administration.

For years now, the Right has hewed to the same cheap rhetorical and intellectually dishonest argument that there is some sort of substantive difference between a president having a so-called “litmus test” for judicial nominees versus, say, a pledge merely to nominate “strict constructionists.”   

Whereas having a “litmus test” for judges tends to mean that the president will only nominate individuals who will rule in a certain way on specific issues or cases, usually Roe vs. Wade, pledging to nominate “strict constructionists” or some other euphemism merely means pledging only to nominate individuals who hold a specific legal philosophy – one that just so happens to be fundamentally hostile to, and seeks to overturn, Roe vs. Wade.   

According to the Right, the latter is good while the former is bad – which is how we end up with this sort of thing:

Litmus tests for judges might be on the horizon if Democratic presidential hopefuls like Senator Barak Obama (D-Illinois) are elected to office -- so says the nation's largest women's pro-life activism group.

Obama recently told abortion advocates at a Planned Parenthood conference that the ban on partial-birth abortion was a concerted effort to roll back legalized abortion. He also informed the gathering that if elected, he would only nominate judges who "have empathy to recognize what it's like to be a young pregnant teenager." But Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, warns that what Obama and others are proposing is frightening -- a litmus test for judicial nominees.

"It is a bit shocking of an admission that a presidential candidate would say that they would have an abortion litmus test for Supreme Court nominees," says Wright; "that only if someone believes in abortion-on-demand could they be able to get an appointment onto the Supreme Court."

Since “litmus tests” are so bad, presumably CWA is equally concerned about Sam Brownback’s blatant one:

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.

Strangely, CWA hasn’t voiced much concern about Brownback’s “shocking of an admission that a presidential candidate would say that they would have an abortion litmus test for Supreme Court nominees.” 

One also wonders if CWA will soon be backing Rudy Giuliani, since he has explicitly stated that he would have no abortion litmus test for his judicial nominees and is busy running around the country telling everyone who will listen merely that he will “will nominate strict constructionist judges with respect for the rule of law and a proven fidelity to the Constitution – judges in the mold of Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito and Chief Justice Roberts.”

Or maybe not:

The decision about whether to support Giuliani will be difficult for conservative evangelicals, said Janice Shaw Crouse, senior fellow of Concerned Women for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute.

"When evangelicals have to weigh in the balance his obvious leadership skills as opposed to his stance on abortion," she said, "and when they have to weigh his public confidence alongside his personal divorces—this will be the real litmus test."

One of the most notoriously anti-gay groups on the Religious Right has taken its “traditional values” in an unusual direction – joining the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers to counter a bill in Congress that would set stricter fuel-economy standards. From the AP:

The lawmakers were joined by leaders with the United Auto Workers, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Rev. Lou Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition, who said families needed roomy, safe vehicles.

We’ve seen the Religious Right’s expansion of their agenda -- to pension policy, terrorism, and tax cuts – before, at least around election time, when right-wing activists worked to promote the Republican Party. But this issue isn’t so clearly partisan, making the participation of Sheldon – called “Lucky Louie” by corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who allegedly sent TVC tens of thousands of dollars to work on behalf of his clients – all the more mysterious.

As recently interpreted by Focus on the Family and the Culture and Media Institute, polls judging attitudes toward equal workplace rights demonstrate that the American people are a bunch of suckers:

According to Gallup, 90 percent of Americans believe gay people should have equal workplace rights, but only 47 percent think being gay is “morally acceptable.” To bridge the gap, the gay strategy is to spotlight themselves as credible and professional, and provide business leadership with gay-friendly misinformation.

“The bottom line is they are using the power of money and position to promote an agenda that these people acknowledge that half of Americans still feel is immoral,” Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Media Institute in Alexandria, Va., told Family News in Focus.

Apparently, this “gap” couldn’t have stemmed from the American public’s ability to develop nuanced views with regard to ideas of equality and their own personal moral convictions... No, the gap must have come from a successful disinformation campaign that somehow managed to fool the public into believing that gay people can be capable workplace employees.

Last November, Missourians voted to amend their state constitution to put a halt to attempts by their own state legislators to ban embryonic stem-cell research. Proponents of the amendment overcame a protracted – and sometimes vicious – right-wing campaign, and the Religious Right was dismayed by the results: “[W]e stand on the precipice of grave judgment if America does not repent,” said Rick Scarborough, who held several rallies throughout the state. “[G]overnment should never be able to veto the inviolable dignity of human life,” wrote David Prentice of the Family Research Council, warning that “democracy devolves into tyranny.” Opponents of stem-cell research vowed to continue the fight.

In a way, they are succeeding. The Stowers Institute for Medical Research is scrapping plans to expand its Kansas City facility, citing the hostile political environment, including a number of actions in the state legislature:

Sen. Matt Bartle’s unsuccessful filibuster of the nomination of Warren Erdman to the UM system Board of Curators because of his support for embryonic stem cell research.

The failed launch of a ballot item meant to overturn voter-approved Amendment 2. The ballot item would have banned somatic cell nuclear transfer, a process deemed critical to harness embryonic stem cells for research.

The withdrawal of life science-related projects from a $350 million plan to use sold loans from the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority for capital improvement projects at public colleges.

Gov. Matt Blunt’s appointment of Rep. Bob Onder, R-Lake Saint Louis, an opponent of embryonic stem cell research, to the Life Sciences Research Board.

As one scientist explained:

Scientist Kevin Eggan had once considered packing up his lab at the Harvard Stem Cell Institute and moving to Missouri. Now he's reluctant.

"I couldn't possibly come to a place where I thought the potentially lifesaving research I want to do could become illegal," said Eggan, who works on degenerative nerve disorders like Lou Gehrig's disease.

Since the unveiling of the Alan Keyes-backed “We Need Alan Keyes for President” movement back in early June, the effort hasn’t made much progress, with only 1100 or so people signing the petition urging him to run.  At this rate, it’ll take Keyes nearly 4700 years to generate enough support to match the 62 million votes President Bush garnered in 2004. 

But all hope is not lost for the Draft Alan Keyes movement, as they have a secret strategy to make a strong showing in the upcoming Iowa Straw Poll – not by winning it mind you, because Keyes can’t participate since he’s not a candidate.   

But they have a plan:

[The] straw poll [is] a unique opportunity to get literature into the hands of a large number of the state's voters, many of whom are already very supportive of the possibility of a Keyes candidacy (since Alan got 14 percent in the 2000 Iowa Caucus and is still remembered fondly by grassroots Iowans, we keep hearing from reliable sources).

To distribute literature, we're required to reserve a table — so we're lining one up in the best location still available. We'll use our table as a base of operations for our volunteers.

Thus, they are asking for volunteers and, more importantly, donations so they can print up fliers to hand out and maybe even t-shirts, all of which will “boost our national movement and possibly give Alan the kind of support he needs to announce his candidacy:” 

Besides funds for the Iowa Straw Poll, we need seed money to get our movement fully off the ground. All of us are volunteering our time and effort — but like any political movement or campaign, we have a significant list of things we'd like to utilize in order to be effective. This includes high-tech servers for our website; state-of-the-art computer programming; professional guidance with FEC rules compliance; improved press release capability; means for advertising, mailings, literature, and travel expenses; supplies of bumper stickers, T-shirts, DVD's, and other gear — and everything else normally used by a political movement or campaign.

Of course, as we noted last time, the donation page carries a disclaimer explaining that if Keyes decides not to run, all the money raised gets handed over to an organization deemed “consistent with the vision and Declarationist ideals of Alan Keyes” by the organizers of the effort – both of whom happen to work for Keyes’ own RenewAmerica organization. 

All in all, a very novel fundraising scheme. 

But that it not to say there is nothing in it for those who agree to volunteer at the Iowa Straw Poll:

The GOP candidates will have tents for giving out free food, so there should be plenty to eat.

Ave Maria town center, with 1,100-seat church at center. Photo from Ave Maria Development

When we last checked in on Ave Maria, the Florida development dreamed up by Domino’s Pizza founder Thomas Monaghan, developers were backing down from early word that the town’s laws would reflect its founder’s moral edicts – such as making contraceptives and pornography unavailable.

"I'm not going to break the law," Monaghan told [The New Yorker]. "We want to be a family town. But if there's an openly gay couple living next door to some family, and those kids would have to be subjected to that, I don't know. In the first place, I don't know how many gay couples are going to want to come live in the town. And if we can't prevent it, well, we'll tolerate it."

The AP caught up with Monaghan, who wistfully recalled the vision he held before U.S. laws intruded:

Monaghan now says that Ave Maria University, the school he is also bankrolling, will follow strict Catholic guidelines, but the town will be largely allowed to grow uninhibited -- except for no adult novelty stores or topless clubs. The developers say they will merely suggest that merchants not sell contraceptives or porn, and cable TV offerings will not be restricted.

Even with that, Monaghan seems disappointed. If he had his way, Ave Maria would be God's town.

"I thought we owned the real estate, so we can lease to whoever we want and put things in the contract, but there are laws and there were lawsuits out there," Monaghan said.

Threatens to run, and crashes Ames straw poll.

Says Dobson, others inculcate blame-the-victim perspective.

The European Centre for Law and Justice, sister organization to the Pat Robertson-founded American Center for Law and Justice, has been granted special consultative status by U.N. Economic and Social Council: “This special designation enhances our ability to shape the global debate on religious freedom and human rights and dignity. With the special consultative status, the ECLJ will now be in the unique position to file legal briefs and memorandums with UN governing bodies on a wide range of global issues. This designation is the next logical step in the development of our global outreach and will empower the ECLJ in the ongoing struggle to influence the world’s decision-makers to recognize the concept that freedom and liberty are universal, God-given and inalienable rights that must be protected.”

In his latest column, Chuck Norris launches into a familiar gripe of the Right, warning parents that college campuses today into hotbeds of “liberal bias” and “indoctrination.” One example employed by the Right is the recent failure of an Iowa State professor to be granted tenure, supposedly due to his advocacy of “Intelligent Design” creationism. (That’s leaving aside a more obvious explanation: Perhaps if he spent more time on astronomy than creationism, he would have been able to bring in more outside grant money.)

It seems at least one creationist is fighting back – and apparently threatening to use Chuck Norris methods.

An anti-evolution activist who has been targeting biology professors at the University of Colorado at Boulder is implicated in distributing threatening letters two weeks ago, calling teachers of evolution “child molesters” and “terrorists” and repeating the line “every true Christian should be ready and willing to take up arms to kill the enemies of Christian society”:

Last weekend more than a dozen envelopes bearing the image of skull and crossbones and containing letters threatening the lives of CU-Boulder evolutionary biology professors were slipped under the doors of CU-Boulder buildings. …

“EBIO (evolutionary biology) professors are terrorists against America and … intellectual and spiritual child abusers of their young and impressionable students … the EBIO department not only blasphemes God, who is invisible, but it blasphemes His Only Begotten Son and our Messiah, Jesus Christ, which is more unforgivable … for all these reason all God-fearing and Truth-loving persons must say, They must go!”

The evolution blog Panda’s Thumb has more information, including excerpts from the letters.

The Express-News profiles the recent Christians United for Israel conference in DC, where they toned down their end-time theology a bit as members lobbied 279 lawmakers, including 57 senators, to press the idea that "that Israel must not give up any land to Palestinians for peace," among other things.

Among the handful of Christian Coalition chapters that parted ways with their national affiliate, the Alabama chapter has had the most acrimonious divorce. Not only did the old chapter – now called Christian Action Alabama – publicly disagree over a gambling measure with the replacement chapter, the two were embroiled in a lawsuit. Randy Brinson’s newly-formed Christian Coalition of Alabama claimed John Giles and Christian Action Alabama had absconded with Christian Coalition assets.

Now, Brinson and CC of Alabama are prepared to let bygones be bygones. “We dropped the lawsuit because basically we were getting such bad press out of it," he explained.

It’s been said that bad press is better than no press, however, and it may be a while before we hear from either faction again. While Brinson’s still trying to get the new CC of Alabama – which then-rival Giles had called “one man and a name” – off the ground, the old group appears to be moribund. Giles, who used to be its president and full-time lobbyist, found a job in the private sector, and says Christian Action Alabama will be “in an idle position” for the time being.

Meanwhile, anti-abortion activists are bringing another factional dispute to the state.

After a long silence, Manuel Miranda writes to David Brody to defend Fred Thompson: "I remembered the several conference calls nearly two years again which some questioned John Roberts' nomination because of the clients to whom he had given professional advice while he was a partner at a large firm. I remember explaining then that the nature of law firms is that you are on call to assist your partners to help with their clients. It is hardly a moment of conscience. And it is hardly enough to undo an unchanging political position on a defining issue."

Family Policy Network, Defend the Family International to fly banner plane, while "ex-gay" activist James Hartline protests city hall. Earlier: Hartline boycott of baseball game "fizzled."

Sen. Brownback talks to WorldNetDaily: "I think I want to be the president that appoints the justice that's needed vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade."

He merely "thinks" he wants it? He'll never win the GOP nomination with that lack of conviction.

The National Tax Limitation Committee and the National Center for Policy are hosting an awkwardly worded “The ‘Optimal (Right) Size of Government’ Conference” (PDF) tomorrow that will bring together “more than 20 of the leading free-market experts will convene in Washington to discuss whether there is and can be an objective standard to determine the proper size and role of government.”

Among the participants is Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform – and it is not hard to figure out what his view of the proper size of the government will be:

“My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.”

Ken Blackwell’s far-right campaign for Ohio governor in 2006 was structured around intensive “Patriot Pastor” church organizing, but nonetheless failed by a large margin. Since then, Blackwell has joined the ranks of right-wing activists at the Family Research Council, the Club for Growth, Ohio’s Buckeye Institute, and Townhall.com.

Now, there’s a rumor that Blackwell is eyeing a future Senate run. The next Ohio Senate election is in 2010, but the incumbent is a fellow Republican, George Voinovich. A primary challenge is not out of the question, though: Blackwell’s associates at the Club for Growth specialize in right-wing challenges to “Republicans in Name Only,” and he has a history of disagreement with Voinovich.

CRM says it has gathered some 33,000 petitions against Hate Crimes legislation to be delivered to Sen. Mitch McConnell: “This is the single most dangerous piece of legislation we have seen in the recent past, because of its threat to silence the Church on the subject of homosexual behavior,” said Jerry Newcombe, senior producer of The Coral Ridge Hour, CRM’S TV broadcast. “I shudder to think what the impact on free speech will be if this law is enacted.”

Almost from the moment he entered the Republican Primary, Rudy Giuliani’s campaign has come under fire from the Right.  

In large part because of his marital history and his views on reproductive choice, several high profile right-wing leaders – including James Dobson, Richard Land, Richard Viguerie, and Tony Perkins - have already publicly declared that they will not, under any circumstances, vote for Giuliani or support his campaign.  In addition to this pressure, Giuliani is also coming under attack from grassroots organizations such as Catholics Against Rudy, which seeks to expose his “abysmal record on non-negotiable ‘Culture of Life’ issues.”

Faced with this mounting opposition to his candidacy, Giuliani has recently launched a concerted effort to neutralize these efforts and perhaps even entice a fair number of so-called “values voters” by appealing to their desire to see the Supreme Court utterly controlled by ultra-conservative justices.

Dominance of the Supreme Court has long been a right-wing goal and it is no secret that the confirmation of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the court has been one of the most significant and, for the Right, most gratifying and highly-praised  accomplishments of the Bush administration.   

Going into the 2008 election, the future of the Supreme Court is going to be a central issue and those on the Right know, in the words of Tony Perkins, “that next vacancy is just so incredibly important” – which is exactly why Giuliani is currently in the midst of pledging to just about anyone who will listen that, if he wins the GOP nomination and is elected, he will deliver for the Right:

As President, I will nominate strict constructionist judges with respect for the rule of law and a proven fidelity to the Constitution – judges in the mold of Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito and Chief Justice Roberts.

Giuliani’s commitment to nominating Scalia and Thomas-like judges has recently become a centerpiece of his campaign and is even listed as one of his “12 Commitments” that frame his campaign.  To demonstrate just how much Giuliani is banking on this pledge, his campaign recently unveiled a “Justice Advisory Committee” designed to signal to the Right just how committed he is to filling the bench with hard-right ideologues.  

Consisting of the likes of former Solicitor General Ted Olson, failed DC Circuit nominee Miguel Estrada, and Federalist Society co-founder Steven Calabresi, among others, Giuliani’s “Justice Advisory Committee” exists primarily in order to assure conservatives who may have qualms about him that he can and will deliver to them their ultimate prize: the Supreme Court.   

As Miguel Estrada stated during the unveiling of the committee:

[W]e need to make every effort we can to have the quality judicial appointments that we have had in Justice Alito and Chief Justice Roberts. And Rudy has stated in no uncertain terms that those are the models for what he looks for in his judges. He will be what our court system needs, is what our litigation society needs, and I am confident that with all of our help and your help he will be able to bring that home.”

For his part, Calabresi did his part to drive home the message:

 “The next President of the United States could easily end up making four appointments to the Supreme Court and I think the future of our 25 year struggle to rein in judicial activism is at stake. I’m convinced that Rudy Giuliani is the man who can win that fight. It’s an honor to be here and to be a member of his campaign advisory committee.”

Giuliani may not be the Right’s favorite candidate, but with no clear front-runner emerging, he appears to be seeking to position himself as the candidate most committed to fundamentally and lastingly shifting the balance on the Supreme Court in favor of the Right – a temptation he hopes just might be enough to weaken the resolve of even his most hardened right-wing foes.  

The Potter books are not fostering 'anti-Christian bigotry" - they actually "tell a Christian story in the unexpected disguise of a witchcraft tale – people who would never pick up an overtly Christian story are reading Potter by the millions, attracted to it by its modern themed packaging. Christianity has always produced great writers. Tolkien, Lewis, Percy, Chesterton to name just a few. I believe J.K. Rowling is a Christian writer."

Max Blumenthal reports on connection between Romney charges and Thompson defense.

Writing for Pajamas Media, Giuliani vows to "nominate strict constructionist judges with respect for the rule of law and a proven fidelity to the Constitution – judges in the mold of Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito and Chief Justice Roberts." Also says he'll push the Senate to vote on judicial nominees within 90 days.

In 2004 and 2006, the Club for Growth emerged as a major factor in a number of Republican primary races, specializing in challenging incumbents from the Right. The group spent millions in direct contributions and independent advertising to nearly unseat Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter in 2004 and Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee in 2006, and they succeeded in ousting Michigan Rep. Joe Schwarz. Chafee, who narrowly survived the brutal primary challenge only to lose in the general election, accused the Club of backing a hidden social agenda, but the group insisted it was strictly business, with a public focus on advocating for policies like tax cuts on investment income.

But Club for Growth President Pat Toomey struck a different chord speaking at a recent meeting of a Christian conservative group in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, where he said the Club continues to “scour” for right-wing challengers:

The featured speaker was former U.S. Congressman Pat Toomey, who provided the crowd with an update on the conservative movement.

Toomey lost in the primary Senate race against U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter. He is also the president of the Washington-based conservative group The Club for Growth, which promotes economic freedom and raises funds for conservative candidates.

"It's all about protecting our Christian heritage," Toomey said. "And, a culture that is under assault."

Gordon Klingenschmitt made himself a martyr of sorts, but new Navy stint would interfere with full-time activism.

The anti-immigrant group NumbersUSA is crowing about its amazing growth: According to the New York Times, the group’s membership has reached 447,000, compared with less than 50,000 in 2004.

The “little-known” outfit has become a key player in the immigration debate, according to the Times, coordinating daily with well-known groups like Eagle Forum and the Heritage Foundation and working closely with Congress. “We’re involved in weekly discussions with Numbers USA and other immigration-control groups as part of a team effort,” said Rep. Brian Bilbray, the successor to Tom Tancredo as head of the Immigration Reform Caucus.

NumbersUSA’s success in capitalizing on opposition to comprehensive immigration reform bills considered in Congress recently stems in part from its efforts to channel raw anti-immigrant sentiments, which congeal around NumbersUSA’s explicitly restrictionist stance, into what Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center calls a “kinder, gentler” movement:

“Numbers USA initiated and turbocharged the populist revolt against the immigration reform package,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant advocacy group. “Roy Beck takes people who are upset about illegal immigration for different reasons, including hostility to Latino immigrants, and disciplines them so their message is based on policy rather than race-based arguments or xenophobia.”

But it also stems from a savvy – and numbers-intensive – use of the Right’s Internet marketing industry. During the debate over immigration, it’s been hard for conservatives on the Internet to avoid NumbersUSA. Those who subscribe to right-wing e-mail lists – such as those of GOPUSA, NewsMax, and Human Events – have received countless “sponsored” or “third-party” e-mail messages from NumbersUSA over the past months, sometimes multiple copies in the same week. Here’s one received via Human Events, and another similar message sent through GOPUSA. Both feature an “instant poll” on whether “Kennedy’s Illegal Alien Amnesty Should Fail” (95 percent of respondents agree), taking you to a site where you can send a fax to Congress and join NumbersUSA.

These spurts of faxes and e-mails, driven by NumbersUSA e-mail, can have a heady impact on members of Congress. “You have to give them credit: The phone calls, the faxes, the people who show up at town halls and meetings — you have to say NumbersUSA is behind a fair amount of that,” said Sharry of the National Immigration Forum.

Sharry acknowledged NumbersUSA's influence on lawmakers, pointing to Georgia's two Republican senators, Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss. The two, who helped write the immigration bill, were immediately in NumbersUSA's crosshairs. Both have withdrawn their support, saying the bill fails to provide adequate border security.

The Dallas Morning News follows up on the recent “One Day Crusade” in Lufkin, Texas held by Rick Scarborough, Alan Keyes, and Gordon Klingenschmitt to organize “Patriot Pastors” and register “Values Voters” through the 2008 election. The question asked by the article is whether “traditional-value voters” will be a driving force in 2008, in the way religious-right leaders claimed them to have been in 2004.

Rudy Giuliani, anathema to these activists for his positions on social wedge issues, remains at the top of polls of Republican primary voters, and, as a 2006 Center for American Values in Public Life survey showed, abortion and gay marriage were never the determining factors for the vast majority of Evangelical voters, much less voters in general. And as the Morning News notes, some conservative Christian activists are even broadening their agendas to issues that fall outside their traditional place in the right-wing coalition.

We’ve noted here a few times in the past that John McCain has admitted to meeting with Armageddon advocate John Hagee of Christians United for Israel, though such admission have also been buried in news articles chronicling McCain’s difficulties winning over the Right.

Well, it looks as if McCain and Hagee are about to bring their relationship into the open, judging by this press release from CUFI:

***MEDIA ALERT***PHOTO-OP***INTERVIEW OP***

 

SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN  TO MAKE SURPRISE APPEARANCE AT CHRISTIANS UNITED FOR ISRAEL WASHINGTON SUMMIT

 

Senator John McCain will make a surprise appearance at the Christians United For Israel Washington Summit in a strong show of support for Israel

 

Who: Senator John McCain, Pastor John Hagee, Founder of CUFI; Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Newt Gingrich, Ambassador Dore Gold, Senator Joe Lieberman

What: CUFI has emerged as one of the most important Christian grassroots organizations in America. CUFI has held over 55 Nights to Honor Israel in different cities across America.  Last July, CUFI rallied over 3,500 constituents to Washington for its first DC Summit.

 

Visuals: Leading experts in Middle East affairs will be leading panel discussions. 4,000 individuals will gather together to show their support for Israel.

 

Where: Marriott Wardman Hotel

            Washington, D.C. 

When: Tuesday, July 17 at 1:30 PM

Why: To introduce the association to Senators and Congressmen, expressing concern for Israel’s security and CUFI’s support of Israel’s right to the land by biblical mandate.      

Press Contacts: Kara Silverman 212-584-4331 or ksilverman@5wpr.com

It’s not much of a “surprise” appearance if CUFI is announcing it a day in advance, now is it?  In fact, the only thing surprising about this at all is that McCain and Lieberman would agree to share the stage with a man who wants to bring about Armageddon and the subsequent return of Jesus Christ by launching a military strike on Iran.   

Lying about Hate Crimes legislation, Vision America warns that "a pastor who preaches about homosexuality being sin could be prosecuted if someone who has heard his message commits a crime against a homosexual. The implications for conservative biblical pastors who have broadcast ministries are staggering."

Fox News reported today that "GOP frontrunner Rudy Giuliani will unveil his 'Justice Advisory Committee' this week on a two-day swing through heavily Republican western districts of Washington, D.C., home of the first presidential caucuses in 2008." Do they know something we don't?

Citizen Outreach and Americans for Tax Reform plan Conservative Leadership Conference for October in Nevada. Gingrich, Thompson, Tancredo, Giuliani, McCain, Romney invited.

Jay Sekulow decries that the "judicial confirmation process has been tainted by political obstructionists" and proclaims that he has "directed our Washington team to engage in the effort to get Judge Southwick the up-or-down vote on the floor of the Senate that he deserves."

As we noted the other day, the Religious Right was none-too-pleased that Rajan Zed, a Hindu clergyman, was scheduled to deliver the opening prayer in the United States Senate yesterday. Some were so opposed to it, in fact, that they got arrested for disrupting Zed’s prayer by shouting and calling it an “abomination” [see the video here.]

The Carpetbagger Report has a good post on this issue which notes that, several years ago, the Family Research Council likewise objected when similar situation arose:

Back in September 2000, I took on a highly entertaining project while working at Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Venkatachalapathi Samuldrala, a Hindu chaplain, was invited to be the very first Hindu in American history to lead a congressional chamber in prayer. AU opposes official congressional prayers, but nevertheless believes that if lawmakers are going to have one, they better be even-handed about it.

The Family Research Council didn’t see it that way. The group flipped out, said Samuldrala’s prayer could lead to “moral relativism and ethical chaos,” and explained its belief that religious liberty “was never intended to exalt other religions to the level that Christianity holds in our country’s heritage.” In other words, as the FRC saw it, minority faiths are separate and unequal, First Amendment be damned.

I had a blast mocking the FRC for this, calling reporters and making the far-right group look pretty silly for demanding more religion in the public square and then balking at a religious invocation on the House floor. Eventually, the FRC not only backpedaled, it said the announcement condemning Samuldrala’s prayer was distributed by accident.

It appears that FRC either didn’t learn its lesson from this previous incident or has completely forgotten about it, as FRC is now fretting that Zed’s prayer is a sign that the U.S. Senate has taken "just one more step away" from America's Christian heritage and FRC president Tony Perkins just released this “special publication”:

There is no question that under the first amendment Zed enjoys freedom in this country that Christians do not enjoy in his home country. But does that mean it is appropriate for him to open the nation’s highest elected body in prayer? I think not … No one can legitimately challenge the fact that the God America refers to in the pledge, our national motto, and other places is the monotheistic God of the Jewish and Christian faith. There is no historic connection between America and the polytheistic creed of the Hindu faith. I seriously doubt that Americans want to change the motto, “In God we Trust, which Congress adopted in 1955, to, “In gods we Trust.” That is essentially what the United States Senate did today.

While we are on the subject, it should be noted that, according to various news sources, the three protestors were members of Operation Save America, which makes this quote all the more ludicrous:

The Rev. Flip Benham, director of Operation Save America/Operation Rescue, lambasted the decision to turn the prayer ceremony over to a non-Christian.

He said that the protesters recited the First Commandment and offered prayers. They were not part of an organized group but were Christians who happened to be in Washington to fight the hate crimes bill. They did not know there was to be a Hindu prayer, Benham said.

Three members of Operation Save America just happened to be in the nearly empty Senate chamber yesterday morning at the very time that a Hindu clergyman was scheduled to deliver a prayer, yet they had no idea it was taking place despite the fact that various right-wing news outlets had been writing about it for weeks? Wow, what an amazing coincidence. Good thing they were there or else this “abomination” would have simply taken place quietly and Operation Save America would have completely missed out on an opportunity to generate some press coverage for itself.

So says the Reverend Rob Schenck (pronounced SHANK) of Faith and Action and the National Clergy Council: "In fact, I'll show that America's abortion tragedy is in many ways worse than what's happening in Darfur." See this post for our take on Schenck's trip to Darfur.

Adding to charges by MassResistance and others that Mitt Romney “bungled” gay marriage when he was governor of Massachusetts, the candidate is now getting grief about his business career. Romney, in his effort to secure support from social conservatives, has cited pornography as among the things he stands against, but some religious-right activists are questioning his anti-porn credentials.

Yesterday, a collection of extremist right-wing groups, including BOND and Repent America, along with former Navy chaplain and fringe-right folk hero Gordon Klingenschmitt, held a press conference at the U.S. Capitol to protest Senate hate crimes legislation. The event continued the right-wing’s on-going effort to falsely portray an upcoming Senate bill that would add sexual orientation, gender, and disability to the existing federal hate crime law, as an attack on Christianity.

BOND’s Jesse Lee Peterson puts the legislation into perspective:

“If Christians don’t wake up to what is happening, they will look around one day and realize that they cannot even mention the name of God or disagree with homosexuality.”

Klingenschmitt then more specifically describes the threat:

“If this bill passes, they will come into our churches, they will grab your sermon notes, they will go after your congregation if any pastor preaches against the sin of homosexuality and then a nut in the crowd later goes out and commits a crime. They will accuse him as a codefendant and charge him with a hate speech crime.”

Of course there’s no such thing as a “hate speech crime” in this bill or the existing federal hate crimes law, which targets only violent crimes that cause people bodily harm.  In fact, the “Hate Crimes Prevention Act” already passed by the House includes explicit language protecting the First Amendment rights that Klingenschmitt and his colleagues claim are being threatened.

Repent America’s Michael Marcavage says that the bill’s focus on violent acts is somehow part of a secret strategy:

“[Hate-crime legislation proponents are] doing this in a strategic manner because they say it only applies to violence or violent acts.”

Sure, the law may SAY it only applies to violent crimes, and sure, it may include clear protections for religious leaders and anyone else to speak out against homosexuality, but it’s all part of a slippery slope that will lead to preachers being dragged from their pulpits.

Ah, the old slippery slope argument. Remember then-Senator Rick Santorum insisting that overturning laws against sodomy would lead to acceptance of man-dog sex? Coincidently, this contention also happened to be presented during the press conference by Rev. Jonathan Hunter of LEARN:

“Pastors not only have a right, but an obligation to state emphatically that, according to scripture, a man or woman should not perform a sex act with a person of the same sex, nor with a dog, nor with a snake, nor with a hamster or any other creature.”

As we previously noted, even the urban legend website Snopes.com has debunked the Religious Right’s claims about the hate crimes law. And a group of religious leaders held their own press event in support of the law a day earlier.  But when it comes to portraying supporters of legal protection for gay Americans as enemies of religious liberty, right-wing leaders don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story.

The AP reports that Bobby Schindler will be traveling with Brownback through Iowa.

CNS reports that "three Christian protestors were removed from the U.S. Senate chamber's observation gallery Thursday when they disrupted the morning prayer -- being delivered for the first time in history by a Hindu chaplain." UPDATE: The AP identifies them as Ante Nedlko Pavkovic, Katherine Lynn Pavkovic and Christan Renee Sugar.

Politico reports CWA, FRC, and others met with Sen. Specter "to plot strategy for pushing President Bush's nominees, including former Mississippi Judge Leslie H. Southwick." The Hill has more.

Tomorrow, a Hindu chaplain is scheduled to deliver the opening prayer in the United States Senate and the Right is not happy about it:

"In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods," [David Barton of WallBuilders] explains. "And certainly that was never in the minds of those who did the Constitution, did the Declaration [of Independence] when they talked about Creator -- that's not one that fits here because we don't know which creator we're talking about within the Hindu religion."

But while Barton is merely concerned that such a thing only offends the Founding Fathers, The American Family Association is setting of alarm bells and warning of dire consequences:

Buddy Smith is a spokesman for American Family Association, which opposes the non-Christian prayer and urges citizens to call their Washington legislators to take action.

"It is a watershed day in that it brings to mind some of these precedent-setting events like the day that we took prayer and Bible-reading out of school in our country [and] the day that we legalized abortion," Smith offers. "I fear that while God has been so merciful with our country in the past, events such as are about to happen, like this in the U.S. Senate, is angering a just God. I fear that we bring judgment upon our country with such acts."

From Brody: In 1996, described as "pro-choice defender," complained of "distracting issue."

ACLJ's Jay Sekulow pleased as punch with the newest Supreme Court Justice.

FRC's Perkin's voices support for Vitter, provided he's "moved on" from indiscretions, as does LA Christian Coalition leader.

While Fred Thompson’s presumptive candidacy for president has been bolstered by right-wing activists dreaming of finding a perfect match in the “Law & Order” star, some in the conservative movement are taking a skeptical look at his political career, and chinks in his image are emerging to match those of the other leading Republican contenders.

First, James Dobson came out early on to say of Thompson that “I don't think he's a Christian; at least that's my impression” (a statement he later tried to back away from). Then, a video clip from his Senate campaign was released in which he appears to show support for abortion rights. And the Supreme Court’s recent decision to strike down a provision of campaign finance reform – FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life -- reminded many anti-abortion activists of his critical role in passing the legislation that they strongly oppose, as well as his investigative subpoenas into the finances of interest groups, which raised hackles among religious-right groups targeted.

On Saturday, the Los Angeles Times reported that, when he worked as a lobbyist in Washington, Thompson took a job from a pro-choice group to convince the first Bush Administration to lift the “gag rule” on federally-funded clinics mentioning abortion. A former colleague called Thompson’s denial of pro-choice lobbying “absolutely bizarre.”

And yesterday, the Times reported more on right-wing outrage at Thompson during his campaign-reform days, not only from McCain-Feingold and his subpoenas – which James Bopp, a lawyer who represented the groups back then and who now works for Mitt Romney’s campaign, called an unconstitutional “fishing expedition” – but also for failing to dig up dirt on a supposed fundraising scandal involving President Clinton. Larry Klayman – founder of Judicial Watch and a key figure seeking Clinton’s impeachment -- put the Tennessee senator on a “wanted” poster.

Longtime conservative movement activist Richard Viguerie is calling on the Right to “Beware Fred Thompson”: “Fred Thompson plays a tough guy in the movies and on television, but in real life he is a marshmallow who would pose no threat to the Big Government Establishment that continues to dominate Washington.”

At the same time, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins has come to Thompson’s defense on the lobbying charge, and he received an enthusiastic response at a Young Republicans this weekend.

“With all the [candidates] who keep changing their minds on abortion, that's got to be unsettling,” Paul Weyrich said of these reports on Thompson and abortion. But Thompson’s star power and personality will likely allow him to keep pace with the other leading GOP candidates, who have their own issues with the finicky right-wing base. For example, while John McCain’s campaign reform work has apparently made him a permanent enemy of the Religious Right, former Sen. Rick Santorum said that he and others might forgive Thompson for the same because, unlike McCain, Thompson has not “made a career of poking conservative colleagues in the eye.”

After nine months, Janet Neff has been confirmed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan.  As we’ve chronicled here several times, Sen. Sam Brownback opposed her nomination simply because she attended the commitment ceremony of a family friend who is a lesbian back in 2002.

Over the past nine months, Brownback’s explanations as to why he was delaying her nomination, as well as the demands he made in order to let the nomination move forward, have been constantly shifting and “possibly unprecedented.”

But yesterday, with Neff scheduled to receive a vote on the Senate floor, Brownback took one last opportunity to make his opposition known: 

Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote against Judge Neff going onto the bench for a lifetime appointment. I have met directly with her. I have been present for two hearings where she has spoken on the controversial issue of same-sex marriage, which we all agree should be decided by legislative bodies and by the people, not by the courts. She has an activist view on this issue. She participated in a ceremony herself. Then, when asked about her view toward same-sex unions, she said she considers it a continuing legal controversy. Her words: I really don't have an understanding of it, concerning the Michigan law. In Michigan, the State has defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman, both by the legislature and the people. She says it is not entirely settled. Here is an activist on a core issue, a difficult issue, one I think we all believe should be decided by legislative bodies and not by the courts. She would be one who would have a tendency to rule from the bench.

I urge my colleagues to vote against Judge Neff.

Exactly four Senators voted against Neff – all Republicans: Brownback (R-KS), Bunning (R-KY), Kyl (R-AZ), Martinez (R-FL).  

It is extraordinarily rare for any Republican to vote against any judicial nomination made by President Bush, especially to the lower-profile district court seats.  But apparently, for these four Republican Senators, anti-gay hostility runs deeper than the tradition of defending and supporting their own President’s judicial nominees.

The American Civil Liberties Union has reportedly filed a lawsuit in Louisiana over a painting of Jesus that hangs in the lobby of the Slidell City Courthouse, saying it violates the First Amendment. 

Not surprisingly, the anti-ACLU (aka the Alliance Defense Fund) has stepped in to defend the painting:

The painting clearly delivers an inclusive message of equal justice under the law,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Mike Johnson … “The ideas expressed in this painting aren’t specific to any one faith, and they certainly don’t establish a single state religion,” Johnson explained.  “The reason Americans enjoy equal justice is because we are all ‘created equal, endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable rights.’  This painting is a clear reflection of the ideas in the Declaration of Independence.”  

All well and good, but since we as a nation are governed by the Constitution rather than the Declaration of Independence, that is not really the issue.

As for the claim that the “painting clearly delivers an inclusive message” that isn’t “specific to any one faith”:

When David Vitter ran for a seat in the Senate in 2004, he made passage of the Federal Marriage Amendment a centerpiece of his campaign:

We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts's values.  I am the only Senate Candidate to coauthor the Federal Marriage Amendment; the only one fighting for its passage.

Vitter eagerly signed the Family Research Council’s “Marriage Protection Pledge,” vowing to FRC as well as to the “families of the state of [Louisiana] and to all the American people that I will protect the inviolable definition of marriage.”

And seek to “protect” marriage he did, by regularly speaking passionately about the need for passage of a Constitutional amendment:

Voters in Louisiana and at least 44 other states have shown their support for traditional marriage by voting to protect it. But these laws are being attacked in courts across the country, and activist judges should not be able to suppress the will of the American people. This is why we need a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage.

Marriage is a core institution of societies throughout the world and is a bedrock institution for our own society because it has provided permanence and stability for our very social structure.

All of which is undoubtedly making this extremely awkward for him:

Republican Louisiana Sen. David Vitter, whose phone number was linked to Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the so-called "D.C. Madam," says that he is sorry for a "serious sin" and that he has already made peace with his wife.

Palfrey is awaiting trial on racketeering charges related to a prostitution ring she allegedly ran.

"This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible," Vitter said Monday evening in a printed statement. "Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling. Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way."

Until his disclosure Monday, Vitter had been a rising star in the Republican social conservative movement.

A strong showing in the Iowa Republican caucus is key to Sam Brownback’s long-shot campaign for president, and he’s certainly spent a lot of time building support among state-level religious-right activists, even touring with celebrity “Christian nation” proponent David Barton. Today, the Kansas senator announced the formation of a Faith and Family Leadership Committee, corralling endorsements of 50 Iowa-based activists. “I don't want to overstate it, but some of these are pretty well known in their circles of faith leaders,” boasted Chuck Hurley, head of the Iowa Family Policy Center, who chairs Brownback’s new committee.

While the list is certainly overshadowed by Mitt Romney’s own list of 50 names – headlined by national star activists – that he announced last month, Brownback’s concentration in Iowa suggests he is hoping to duplicate televangelist Pat Robertson’s surprise second-place showing in Iowa in 1988. In fact, as conservative columnist George Will wrote back in 2005, Brownback’s plan all along has been to ride on the network of activists built by Robertson.

Still, if Brownback wants to be perceived as a real contender, he could do better than to attack his fellow long-shot candidates: Last week he lashed out at Tom Tancredo – who is running only to promote his anti-immigrant politics – for accepting contributions from someone involved with Planned Parenthood. (Of course – as Tancredo alludes to – that contributor, John Tanton, is the nation’s leading funder and founder of anti-immigrant and English-only groups.)