October 2008

The Washington Post has a long profile of Liberty University students going all out to help John McCain win Virginia and how the volunteering for the campaign is preparing many for their own eventual entries into politics:  

Besides taking a full load of classes, [Claire] Ayendi has been putting in 40-hour weeks on behalf of McCain. She makes phone calls, canvasses, operates a database of student volunteers, uses Facebook as her bully pulpit and will talk to anyone about how she thinks that Obama's promise to redistribute wealth is an affront to the Constitution. The campaign has galvanized her friends and served as an excellent primer on what lies ahead in their adult lives.

Ayendi and [Meghan] Allen playfully dog one of their Liberty friends for wanting to go into the seminary.

"If you want to get anything changed around here, you have to go through the courts," Ayendi says. "You gotta be a lawyer."

Totally, Allen agrees. "My goal is not to make laws Christian but to make government as small as possible so you can be as biblically Christian as you so choose," she says.

Both plan on spring internships abroad and then law school. But an Obama victory would not send these them into the wilderness. To the contrary, the fight would begin anew.

I don’t even know what it means to create a country where people are free to be as “biblically Christian” as they choose, but when students from Falwell’s university say that is their ultimate goal for America, I’m pretty sure I’m not going to like whatever it is they have in mind.

John McCain and Sarah Palin haven't even lost yet, but it looks like the blame game has already started, with Gary Bauer blaming the campaign for failing to make more of Barack Obama's multitude of nefarious ties to America-haters and terrorists. That's right, Bauer is mad they didn't make it more of a focus in their campaign:

American Values president and McCain supporter Gary Bauer agrees with Palin that the McCain campaign should have made a concerted effort in the general election to highlight the Democratic nominee's ties to his longtime mentor. Bauer says the McCain camp missed some opportunities while zeroing in on Obama's associations with Wright and former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.

"These associations would have explained to us the economic philosophy we're now hearing from Senator Obama," Bauer explains. "That is, William Ayers is a socialist. Pastor Wright is a black supremacist, but also a socialist.

"And so the fact that Barack Obama was comfortable spending time and being allies with those individuals makes a lot of sense when we realize now -- from Barack Obama's own words -- that he believes in socialism."

Bauer contends that the country is on the cusp of electing "the most radical candidate for president in American history."

Considering that the Right is already plotting how to grab the reins of the GOP and make the "culture war" the centerpiece of their agenda moving forward, this sort of myopic focus suggests that we could be in for a long four years if Obama wins next week.

At least that seems to be the message of this mailer, posted by Jonathan Martin, being sent out by the Susan B. Anthony List:

So a word of warning to all of those intending to abandon their babies on the railroad tracks with the expectation that Barack Obama will come along and save it: don't do that.

A valuable parenting tip from the good folks at SBA.

[You can see the PDF of the mailer here.]

You know, for a guy who, not too long ago, was planning on sitting out this election, James Dobson and his organization sure have gotten active in the last week:

And not to pat ourselves on the back or anything, but last year when Dobson first started pretending that he was going to sit on the sidelines, we called his bluff and noted that issuing empty threats was becoming a pattern for him but that, when it came down to it, he always fell back in line. And, once again, Dobson has not disappointed us.

Last week Gary Bauer warned that at some point down the line, God will "take his hand of protection off of America" if the country doesn't get its act together and stop coddling gays, finally outlaw abortion, and elect John McCain.

And it looks as if that GOTV strategy is being picked up by others on the Right, judging by Jane Chastain's latest column in WorldNetDaily.

Chastain admits that many Christian voters might be confused about things like the economy, healthcare, or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so they should just get "back to basics"

Examine the stands of these two candidates —and more important, their records – on the moral issues, and vote accordingly. Then, you can rest assured that this country will be in good hands.

The Ten Commandments given to Moses are not suggestions. They represent God's moral law – and it has never changed. The first commandments are about honoring God and your earthly parents. Next comes God's law against murder. God leaves us no wiggle room when it comes to the shedding of the innocent blood of another human being.

It is no accident that abortion is the most divisive moral issue in America today. God's law may be inconvenient at times, but it is still God's law.

But just in case they are still confused over how to vote, Chastian concludes with a pretty straight-forward argument that God will destory America if Obama is elected:

If you call yourself a Christian and you are still flirting with abortion, or flirting with voting for a candidate who condones the taking of an innocent life, no matter how small, sick or vulnerable, you are only fooling yourself about your Christian commitment – but you will not fool God!

...

If 9/11 wasn't a wake-up call for America, then the financial meltdown of 2008 should be. How many more warnings will God give us before he lifts his hand of protection that has been over this country for more than 200 years? He did not spare the children of Israel. He will not spare the United States of America!

We knew that David Barton was out there doing his part to help elect Republicans, raising money for Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, explaining to Christian audiences the importance of the Supreme Court and how the GOP and God both share the same agenda. 

We also knew that he was supporting John McCain but we had no idea that he was actually out there on the trail on behalf of the McCain-Palin campaign: 

Fred Thompson, former U.S. senator from Tennessee, told a local crowd Wednesday that the chance to talk about guns and God is his kind of event.

But though the title of the rally was "Guns & Religion," the politician/actor spent more time talking about the economy.

...

Thompson, actor Robert Davi, Republican National Committee Deputy Chairman Frank Donatelli and David Barton, president of the religious-based organization WallBuilders, spoke at the Wednesday afternoon rally at McCain/Palin headquarters in Springettsbury Township.

"I love the guns-and-God mantra, because both are God-given rights," Barton said, telling the crowd to encourage others to vote. "Get people of faith back in the polls."

Dawn Balcom of Springettsbury Township said it was nice to hear religion addressed.

"It was good to hear that these politicians are thinking God is important," she said. "When we get away from God . . . the whole country goes down."

Why is the McCain campaign associating itself with a right-wing pseudo-historian who believes that Christians should "start breaking fingers" of those who don't vote Republican and warns them they'll have to answer to God for their failure to vote properly. 

Did they not learn anything from their Hagee/Parsely debacle?

Just yesterday I was writing about Lou Engel and his prayer warriors, noting that in this election cycle he had become far more openly political and had started linking up with DC's Religious Right insiders like Tony Perkins and Mike Huckabee.

And now today comes word that James Dobson himself is set to participate in Engel's rally of prayer and fasting this weekend in opposition to gays getting married in California:

On Saturday, tens of thousands of people will gather at San Diego's Qualcomm Stadium for corporate prayer and fasting for the protection of traditional marriage and the soul of our nation.

Family advocates from across the nation are expected to travel to California to be a part of the day of prayer and worship. Joining them will be Dr. James Dobson, founder and chairman of Focus on the Family.

"It is not a festival, it is a fast," Dr. Dobson said on Wednesday's radio broadcast. "It's a day of concerted prayer from 10 o'clock in the morning till 10 o'clock at night."

Dr. Dobson said he hoped thousands would join him at the free gathering.

Jenny Tyree, marriage analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said Dr. Dobson's presence in California is significant.

"Dr. Dobson is a recognized champion of marriage," she said. "His listeners know his heart for nurturing marriages, as well as his passion for strengthening the definition of marriage in our laws.

"His steadfast stance in support of traditional marriage gives strength to voters in California and across the country who share his esteem for our most pro-child institution."

The San Jose Mercury News has more:

"This vote on whether we stop the gay-marriage juggernaut in California is Armageddon," Charles Colson, the former Nixon administration official turned evangelical leader, said in a video that is being quoted by pastors around the state. On Saturday some of the nation's best-known evangelical leaders are hoping to fill Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego for a rally on behalf of the proposed ban.

Lou Engle — the charismatic founder of TheCall, an evangelical 12-hour gathering of prayer and fasting with a strong following among young people — will be one of the evangelical leaders at the rally, along with James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.

That combination of leaders is "extraordinary. It just tells about the significance of the moment and the real need to pray," Engle, whose ministry is based in Kansas City, said in an interview Wednesday. "I spoke recently with a man from a Muslim country, who said to me, 'Lou, we're praying for you all over the world, for what you're doing, because if same-sex marriage stands in California, it will sweep all over the world.' "

Despite the votes in Arizona and Florida, "California is the focus, because everybody knows that California is the influential one," Engle said.

The global reach of Silicon Valley is another means California has to spread its influence on gay marriage, a senior leader of one prominent Christian group said.

By publicly opposing Proposition 8, companies like Google and Apple have "irritated" people across the country who buy their products, said Carrie Gordon Earll, senior director of public policy for Focus on the Family, a Colorado-based group that has donated more than $350,000 to back Proposition 8. Apple last week said it would contribute $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign, and Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page have made large individual donations.

The issue "has become national in part because those corporations have made it so," Earll said. "People may think twice about buying that iPod."

Ed Whelan takes to the pages of the National Review to discuss the importance of the Supreme Court as it relates to the election and warn that “the survival of the historic American experiment in representative government will be in serious jeopardy if Barack Obama is our next president.”

Whelan helpfully explains that everything you think you know about what might happen to the Court under either an Obama or McCain administration is mistaken:

If you’ve been paying attention to the media’s scant coverage of the impact of the presidential election on the Supreme Court, you’ve been hearing that we currently have either a “conservative” Court or a Court delicately balanced between its “liberal” and “conservative” wings. Electing Obama as president is unlikely to change anything, you’re told, because he’d probably just be replacing liberal justices. The real threat, Obama himself tells us, is that John McCain would appoint justices who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade and thereby (supposedly) make abortion illegal.

Wrong on all counts.

So McCain wouldn’t appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade?  Well, that is a relief.  Oh, wait:

I hope very much that a President McCain appoints justices who will help to overturn Roe v. Wade, and although it won’t be easy to get good nominees confirmed by a heavily Democratic Senate, I think that it’s definitely possible. Overturning Roe, of course, wouldn’t make abortion illegal. Rather, it would restore to the citizens of each state the power to establish abortion policy through their elected representatives — and to revisit that policy over time. That’s the system our Constitution established, and it’s the system that all citizens faithful to our Constitution should welcome. The democratic processes may at times be messy and contentious, but they offer the only real hope of working out a consensus on abortion policy.

Roe v. Wade has corrupted and distorted American politics and Supreme Court decisionmaking for 35 years. All Americans, irrespective of their positions on abortion policy, should welcome its long-overdue demise.

I see.  McCain will appoint justices who will overturn Roe but that is okay because it is a bad decision that has “corrupted and distorted American politics” and “all Americans” will rejoice when Constitutional protections for reproductive choice get eliminated.

And Obama’s claim that McCain would appoint justices who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade is wrong, how?

One of the things I find most entertaining about the Religious Right is their vehement opposition to any effort to broaden the so-called “evangelical agenda” to include anything beyond the Right’s core anti-gay, anti-abortion agenda and their constant attempts to justify their rigidly narrow focus.  

Starting back in 2006 after the GOP got thumped in the mid-term elections and the media stopped talking about “values voters” and began to write about the emergence of a “new evangelical” movement, right-wing leaders were telling anyone who would listen that religious efforts to help the poor or protect the environment were all well and good but were just way less important than opposing gays and abortion:

"It's not a question of the poor not being important or that meeting their needs is not important," said Paul Hetrick, a spokesman for Focus on the Family, Dobson's influential, Colorado-based Christian organization. "But whether or not a baby is killed in the seventh or eighth month of pregnancy, that is less important than help for the poor? We would respectfully disagree with that."

When Rev. Joel Hunter was tapped to take over the Christian Coalition, he ended up leaving his position before he even began because they wanted to have

nothing to do

with his efforts to broaden the Religious Right’s agenda and then, in 2007, when the National Association of Evangelicals’ Richard Cizik stared working on issue of climate change, right-wing leaders including James Dobson, Tony Perkins, Don Wildmon, Gary Bauer, and Rick Scarborough demanded that he be

fired and his efforts shut down

because they were afraid that it would end up undermining their old-school agenda:

More importantly, we have observed that Cizik and others are using the global warming controversy to shift the emphasis away from the great moral issues of our time, notably the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children.

But what angers the Right even more than that is Democratic efforts to reach out to religious communities and voters.  The Religious Right has always hated and attacked such efforts, regularly accusing Democrats of “hijacking” faith to promote an ungodly agenda because, you guessed it, it takes away from their own efforts to use religion to bolster their own narrow agenda:

Tom McClusky, vice president of government affairs for the Family Research Council, an influential conservative lobbying group, said he objects to the Democrats' approach. He said it is morally problematic to equate poverty issues, as serious as they are, with abortion.

"It's not that, as Christians or as people, we shouldn't be helping out those who need it," he said. "But when it comes right down to it, if you're never born, you're not going to be poor. If you're not born, you're not going to be afflicted with illnesses. They're trying to say there's some sort of equivalency when it comes to these issues. I personally think that's wrong."

Can’t argue with that, I guess.  You can’t be poor or sick if you were never born, and so FRC is committed to making sure that you are born so that you can then be poor and get sick, at which point … well, you are on your own because those aren’t thing that they really care about.

Back in 2006, the University of Minnesota released a poll showing that atheists were the most distrusted minority group in America: 

From a telephone sampling of more than 2,000 households, university researchers found that Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in “sharing their vision of American society.” Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry.

Even though atheists are few in number, not formally organized and relatively hard to publicly identify, they are seen as a threat to the American way of life by a large portion of the American public. “Atheists, who account for about 3 percent of the U.S. population, offer a glaring exception to the rule of increasing social tolerance over the last 30 years,” says Penny Edgell, associate sociology professor and the study’s lead researcher.

That finding was backed up by a Gallup poll in 2007 that showed that a majority of Americans were unwilling to elect an atheist whereas a majority said they would be willing to elect someone who was gay.  

Apparently Elizabeth Dole’s re-election campaign was aware of this bias, which is why they have decided to play their “scary atheism” card at the last minute.  Having already gone after her opponent, Kay Hagan, on the issue of gays getting married, the Dole campaign has released a new add linking Hagan to the Godless America PAC and accusing her of taking “Godless money,” whatever that is:

The ad claims that the “leader of the Godless Americans PAC recently held a secret fundraiser in Kay Hagan's honor” which, as the Huffington Post points out, is bogus – it was actually a “fundraiser co-hosted by 40 people, including a representative of the Godless America PAC.”

Hagan, for her part, is understandably upset:

A new television ad by Republican U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole’s re-election campaign that ties her rival, state Sen. Kay Hagan, to an atheist group has provoked a threat of legal action from the Greensboro Democrat.

“I can’t tell you how upset I am that Elizabeth Dole is attacking my strong Christian faith,” Hagan said late Tuesday.

Hagan, who is an elder at First Presbyterian Church, said she is incensed by the ad because at the end it shows her picture with a female voice saying, “There is no God.”

Her campaign will hold a news conference in Greensboro today to push back against the ad, and Hagan said lawyers for the campaign are preparing to send a cease-and-desist order demanding that Dole stop the ad.

But the Dole camp is unapologetic:

“The ad is 100 percent accurate,” Dole spokesman Dan McLagan said. “If the truth hurts, that’s their problem.”

As I noted in my last post on Dole’s campaign tactics, until recently she had never really been the type to engage in this sort of wedge-issue, right-wing scaremongering, which makes her descent into it all the more pathetic. If she keeps this up, I’m going to have to add her to my regular monitoring rotation since she seems to be turning into a regular fountain of wing-nuttery.

Via Dan Treul at The Huffington Post, we see that Mark Hennessy of the Irish Times apparently headed to Colorado Springs to check in on the Right’s predictions that an Obama presidency could spell the end of the world and found a family lounging on the grounds of Focus on the Family headquarters who believe, quite literally, that Barack Obama will be the fulfillment of Revelation’s end times prophecies … and can't decide whether to be excited and fearful:

QUIETLY SPOKEN, religiously and politically conservative, and living in the heartland of evangelical Christianity in the US, Daniel Lopez pondered the end of time that could come if Barack Obama becomes president.

"When I think of it, it brings to mind the prophecies that the Bible tells us about," said Lopez, sitting in the shade outside Focus on the Family's headquarters in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

"On the one hand, it is exciting for us as conservatives because we can actually see what God prophesied coming about; but on the other hand, it is frustrating to see somebody become president who is a blatant liar."

Robb and Robin Wirthlin are fast becoming right-wing celebrities as they turn their horror stories about what happened to their family as a result of gay marriage in Massachusetts into a warning to the rest of the nation.

You see, their son was read the book "King and King" in school and ... well, that's about it.  But that was enough to get them featured in this video about the dangers of gay marriage from the Family Research Council: 

And now they have taken their tale of woe on the road, heading down to Florida to urge its citizens to pass Amendment 2 and prevent such tragedies from befalling their own families:

Massachusetts parents Robb and Robin Wirthlin don't want parents in Florida to have the same experience as they did when their seven-year-old son was taught from a book advocating "gay marriage" in his second grade public school classroom in the wake of that state's legalization of same-sex marriages.

"It's troubling and it's disturbing. We don't want this to happen to any other family," Robb Wirthlin, joined by his wife, said at a Tallahassee news conference Oct. 22.

The Wirthlins, also joined by a Hillsborough County teacher, a First Amendment attorney, and religious leaders urged Floridians to support the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment (also known as Amendment 2 on the November ballot) to protect traditional marriage in order to avoid the negative educational and religious liberty ramifications that have arisen in other states with "gay marriage."

"If we had a million dollars to give the campaign we would because we don't want anyone to go through this-what we've been through," Robb Wirthlin said.

...

The Wirthlins unsuccessfully appealed to their son's teacher and principal to receive prior notice before such subject matter is taught or to opt-out of such lessons. Later, a federal lawsuit also failed to protect the parents' rights, and the Wirthlins have been subjected to ridicule and hostility by other citizens in Lexington.

But just in case that wasn't enough to scare Florida voters straight, Anita Staver, wife of right-wing uber-lawyer Mat Staver, issued some terrifying predictions of her own: 

Anita Staver, president of Liberty Counsel and co-author of the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment, told reporters: "We don't need a crystal ball to tell what's going to happen in Florida if Amendment 2 does not pass. Normalizing same-sex marriage will suppress speech and religion. The ultimate goal for those opposing Amendment 2 is to silence all opposition to same-sex behavior and the homosexual lifestyle."

Noting the "gay marriage" debate is "really a battle over the freedom of speech," Staver listed 10 examples in schools, churches and private businesses in which persons opposing homosexuality have been discriminated against, usually in states and countries where "gay marriage" has been legalized.

"Florida, we've had ample warning. To prevent similar travesties from coming to this state, we need to get ready. We need to vote yes on Amendment 2," Staver said.

It was not too long ago that I wrote a post about how complicated it is to try and make accurate statements about judicial confirmation rates and how Republicans and right-wing judicial activists exploit that fact to make it seem as if President Bush has somehow gotten a raw deal when it comes to seeing his judges confirmed. 

Today comes an op-ed by Federalist Society founder Steven Calabresi in the Wall Street Journal making the same point and issuing a dire warning that if Barack Obama is elected, we're going to see a complete take over of the federal judiciary by liberal activist judges:

One of the great unappreciated stories of the past eight years is how thoroughly Senate Democrats thwarted efforts by President Bush to appoint judges to the lower federal courts.

Consider the most important lower federal court in the country: the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In his two terms as president, Ronald Reagan appointed eight judges, an average of one a year, to this court. They included Robert Bork, Antonin Scalia, Kenneth Starr, Larry Silberman, Stephen Williams, James Buckley, Douglas Ginsburg and David Sentelle. In his two terms, George W. Bush was able to name only four: John Roberts, Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Griffith and Brett Kavanaugh.

Although two seats on this court are vacant, Bush nominee Peter Keisler has been denied even a committee vote for two years. If Barack Obama wins the presidency, he will almost certainly fill those two vacant seats, the seats of two older Clinton appointees who will retire, and most likely the seats of four older Reagan and George H.W. Bush appointees who may retire as well.

The net result is that the legal left will once again have a majority on the nation's most important regulatory court of appeals.

The balance will shift as well on almost all of the 12 other federal appeals courts. Nine of the 13 will probably swing to the left if Mr. Obama is elected (not counting the Ninth Circuit, which the left solidly controls today). Circuit majorities are likely at stake in this presidential election for the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeal. That includes the federal appeals courts for New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia and virtually every other major center of finance in the country.

The interesting thing about Calabresi's handwringing that "majorities are ... at stake ... for the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eleventh Circuit Courts" is his willingness to overlook the basic fact that the Republican majorities on a lot of circuit courts are at stake mainly because Republicans have majorities on nearly every circuit court in the country.

Take a look at this breakdown from the Alliance for Justice of current circuit court justices by appointing president and you'll see that, with the exception of the 9th Circiut and ties on the 2nd and 3rd Circuits,  Republican judges outnumber Democratic judges across the board:

DC Circuit: 7 Republican - 4 Democratic

1st Circuit: 3 Republican - 2 Democratic

2nd Circuit: 6 Republican - 6 Democratic

3rd Circuit: 6 Republican - 6 Democratic

4th Circuit: 7 Republican - 4 Democratic

5th Circuit: 13 Republican - 4 Democratic

6th Circuit: 10 Republican - 6 Democratic

7th Circuit: 8 Republican - 3 Democratic

8th Circuit: 9 Republican - 2 Democratic

9th Circuit: 11 Republican - 16 Democratic

10th Circuit: 8 Republican - 4 Democratic

11th Circuit: 7 Republican - 5 Democratic

Federal Circuit: 8 Republican - 4 Democratic

Overall, Republican circuit court judges outnumber Democratic judges 103-66.  And the reason for that is because for 20 of the last 28 years, Republicans have occupied the White House and have filled the federal bench with judges who share their ideology.  As the AFJ points out:

Judges appointed by Republican presidents dominate the Supreme Court, the courts of appeals, and the district courts. Over 58% of all federal judges were appointed by Republican presidents. George W. Bush has appointed nearly 37% of all sitting federal judges.

After two decades of Republican presidents stacking the federal bench with judges who share Calabresi's right-wing Federalist Society ideology, creating an situation in which that ideology dominates nearly every court in the land, Calabresi is suddenly worried about balance and fairness and breathlessly warning that the "federal courts hang in the balance" because "nothing less than the very idea of liberty and the rule of law are at stake in this election?" 

Give me a break.

Just yesterday I was writing that the GOP's right-wing base was planning on launching an all-out culture war in an effort to rebuild their party in the wake of an Obama victory. 

And today the LA Times reports that social conservatives are already maneuvering to take control of various elements of the party, especially the Republican National Committee:

The social conservatives and moderates who together boosted the Republican Party to dominance have begun a tense battle over the future of the GOP, with social conservatives already moving to seize control of the party's machinery and some vowing to limit John McCain's influence, even if he wins the presidency.

In skirmishes around the country in recent months, evangelicals and others who believe Republicans have been too timid in fighting abortion, gay marriage and illegal immigration have won election to the party's national committee, in preparation for a fight over the direction and leadership of the party.

Apparently, it is going to come down to a decision about whether the RNC will be chaired by a more moderate figure aligned with Florida Governor Charlie Crist, someone like Michael Steele, or someone like South Carolina GOP Chairman Katon Dawson who believes that "moderating our party is what caused us to lose power" in the 2006 elections.

According to the Times, the Right has already won a number of seats on the national committee and is intent on putting someone in power that will make their culture war agenda into the foundation of the party's future:

It was frustration with the Bush-led Republican National Committee that prompted a number of conservatives this year to try to upend the system. Conservatives won seats representing California, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina and Michigan. One new member is a popular black preacher from Detroit, Keith Butler, who presides over a mega-church.

"There is a new blood in the party that is interested in communicating the message of the party -- the conservative message," said Kim Lehman, executive director of the antiabortion group Iowa Right to Life, who in July defeated a state legislator for one of the state's seats on the national committee.

In her latest column, Janet Porter warns all those Christians who intend to vote for Barack Obama that they are willfully disobeying God and will be punished accordingly: 

To all those who name the name of Christ who plan to willfully disobey Him by voting for Obama, take warning. Not only is our nation in grave danger, according to the Word of God, so are you ... [T]his election is not about race. It's not about the economy. It's about obeying God.

...

Be forewarned: If you willfully disobey God on life and marriage because of race or false hope for the economy, you will usher in the kind of change that brought the Soviet Union to collapse.

But the warning goes far beyond that. To those who think that God's grace gives them license to willfully disobey Him without consequences – think again:

Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?" And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!" (Matthew 7:21-23)

That deals with your eternity.

That's right - if you vote for Obama, you are going straight to hell. 

In Porter's view, you have a relatively simple choice: either vote for McCain or stop calling yourself a Christian:

To those who call themselves by the name of Christ who ignore what God says about life and marriage, who and are clinging to a fantasy of economic gain, think again ... Then obey Him in the voting booth and out of it. If not, do us all a favor and quit calling yourself a Christian. 

While checking in to see what David Barton had planned for the last week of the election campaign, I was intrigued to see that he was scheduled to be at Cornerstone Church on the Sunday before the election:

Cornerstone just happens to be the mega-church founded and run by John Hagee, and if you check out their calendar, sure enough you find Barton listed as scheduled to speak at both services that day:

Presumably, Barton will be enlightening Hagee’s audience with speechifying regarding the importance of electing candidates who will ensure that their Supreme Court nominees deliver decisions that are "right on Biblical values” and delivering his standard presentation about the vital role “values voters” play in electing Republicans.

Dan Gilgoff catches the McCain campaign rolling out an “Americans of Faith” section of its website - one week before the election - and he is decidedly unimpressed:

Months after rolling out pages for "American Indians for McCain and "Arab Americans for McCain," the McCain camp has added an "Americans of Faith" page to its web site.

Not much to the page, just short explanations--none more than 105 words--of McCain's stances in four areas: "Judicial Philosophy," "Protecting Marriage," "Human Dignity and Life," "Service, Community and Values."

In fact, the page is so rudimentary that GOM has decided to lower McCain's reading.

It tells you just how amazingly ill-planned and poorly executed McCain’s outreach to the Right has been that he is rolling out a new webpage aimed at them at the last minute – so much so that it led Gilgoff to actually lower McCain’s God-O-Meter rating.

For those hoping that a victory by Barack Obama might somehow restrain or moderate the Religious Right … well, you are going to be disappointed since the Right is already looking ahead and planning on reconstituting itself by rallying around Sarah Palin and launching an all-out culture war: 

"An Obama victory will galvanize social conservatives for 2010 and 2012 and they will look for a standard bearer they can rally around," said Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy arm of America's largest evangelical group.

Land told Reuters the candidate most likely to "rally the troops" under an Obama administration looked to be McCain's running mate Sarah Palin.

The Alaska governor has excited the evangelical base but her strident opposition to abortion rights and other hard-core conservative positions have alienated more moderate voters.

William Donohue, president of the conservative Catholic League which opposes abortion rights, said religious conservatives were bracing for a new phase in the "culture wars."

"I've been on the phone the last couple of days with some of my friends ... and we're getting ready for the biggest culture war battles ever," Donohue said.

"There is nobody in the history of the United States who has run for president who is a more enthusiastic supporter of abortion rights than Obama," he said.

That is what Tony Perkins told the New York Times:

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian lobby based in Washington, said in an interview, “It’s more important than the presidential election.”

“We’ve picked bad presidents before, and we’ve survived as a nation,” said Mr. Perkins, who has made two trips to California in the last six weeks. “But we will not survive if we lose the institution of marriage.”

So dire is the threat that Lou Engle is gathering his prayer warriors in an effort to call forth divine intervention and save America from the forces of evil:

Preachers from other parts of the country have dropped everything and moved to California in recent months. Lou Engle, who leads TheCall, a charismatic prayer ministry in Washington and Kansas City, Mo., with a large following among youth, moved with his seven children to California in September. He is holding large prayer rallies up and down the state, urging people to pray and fast for the 40 days leading up to the election. Some people are giving up solid foods; others are giving up clothes shopping or their favorite television shows.

“We believe there is a spiritual battle in an unseen realm, and that’s why I’ve called for united prayer for divine intervention,” Mr. Engle said. “It’s a defining moment for the definition of marriage in American history.”

For his part, Perkins begins laying the blame should McCain go down in defeat, saying that he’s failed to make marriage an issue in the campaign and is therefore failing to secure the electoral support of the anti-gay movement:

Mr. Perkins of the Family Research Council said the Proposition 8 forces had not benefited from the Republican presidential campaign of Senator John McCain of Arizona or even by his selection of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, an outspoken Christian conservative, as his vice-presidential running mate.

“He’s not helping, and he’s not being helped by the support for the marriage amendment,” Mr. Perkins said, in contrast to the campaigns of President Bush.

I expect that we’ll be seeing a lot more of this finger-pointing from the Right if McCain loses next week.

Rick Warren is often considered one of the most influential leaders of the so-called "New Evangelical" movement that is working to expand the evangelical agenda beyond its anti-gay, anti-abortion traditions to embrace things like poverty, climate change, and human rights.   As we've pointed out before, Warren's reputation of not being part of the old-school Religious Right tends to make people overlook the fact that he does share a great many of their views ... as he says, the only real difference between himself and someone like James Dobson is their tone.

While the media might be fooled by this distinction without a difference, the Religious Right certainly hasn’t been and earlier this week Jan LaRue, formerly of Concerned Women for America, penned a column in which she complained that churches in California were not being active enough in mobilizing support for Prop 8 and called out Rick Warren specifically:

Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, hosted a Presidential Candidates Forum at the church on Aug. 16. He asked John McCain and Barack Obama if the California Supreme Court got it wrong when it overturned the definition of marriage.

Here’s a question for Rick Warren: Do you think the court got it wrong? If you do, where’s your support for Prop 8? There’s no mention of it on Saddleback’s Web site. Your office isn’t returning calls requesting information. You hosted an AIDS summit. Where’s your Prop 8 summit?

It was a good question, considering that back in 2004, Warren declared the question of where presidential candidates stand on the issue of "homosexual marriage" to be one of the "5 issues that are non-negotiable" to Christians. As such, it was odd that he hadn’t taken a public stand at a time when the issue is on the ballot in his home state.

Well, Warren is silent no more:

Pastor Rick Warren is endorsing the effort to protect traditional marriage in California.

The well-known Christian author says people in California need to vote "yes" on Proposition 8 because for "5,000 years, every culture and every religion...not just Christianity...has defined marriage as a contract between men and women."

And Warren says "there is no need to change the universal, historical defintion of marriage to appease 2 percent of our population." As Warren puts it: "This is not a political issue -- it is a moral issue that God has spoken clearly about."

He urges people to vote "yes" on Proposition 8 on November 4 to preserve the biblical definition of marriage.

UPDATE: Via Sarah Posner, here's the video of Warren's endorsement

When Rep. Michele Bachmann basically accused every Democratic member of Congress of being un-American last week, it unleashed a wave of financial support for her opponent and scared off the National Republican Campaign Committee, which pulled its advertising on her behalf ... and the Family Research Council is not happy about it and threatening to shut down their own efforts to raise money for the NRCC: 

The Family Research Council's (FRC) political arm ripped Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) Thursday for withdrawing ad spending on behalf of two endangered Republican candidates.

FRC President Tony Perkins said in a letter to Cole, chairman of the National Republican Campaign Committee (NRCC), that the committee "is abandoning social conservative candidates" by pulling ads from the reelection races of Reps. Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.) and Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.).

...

Perkins, an influential conservative leader, said in his letter that he believes Cole, whose committee has been hemorrhaging money in an uphill battle against Democratic congressional candidates, "made a grave error in judgment" by pulling ads from Musgrave's and Bachmann's districts.

"The left is attacking both of these outstanding women because they are true conservatives," Perkins said. "They vote pro-life and pro-family."

Perkins wrote that both candidates are in "winnable districts," and that "pulling funds from their campaigns sends the wrong message to their supporters and gives their opponents a chance to produce headlines that the NRCC has undermined these campaigns."

"This is no time to cut and run from a fight," Perkins wrote.

He added that he will "urge supporters" of the FRC to stop contributing to the NRCC "until it starts supporting and fighting for conservative candidates in close races."

I am not exactly sure which right-wing groups are behind the new "Values Voters USA" website but I assume that the American Family Association is involved, since I learned about it through one of their emails, perhaps along with Liberty Counsel, Wallbuilders, and the Family Research Council which are all listed on the site's "resources" page.

We'll find out sooner or later who put this all together, but for now I just want to call attention to the video they have produced which is a pretty remarkable piece of right-wing propaganda. 

Basically, everything you need to know about the Religious Right can be found right here in this video: their use of wedge issues; their reliance on fearmongering and victimization; their insistence that America is, has, and always must remain a Judeo-Christian country; their exploitation of religion for political purposes; all summed up in one four-minute video:

It looks like Diane Fedele, the women responsible for the racist "Obama Bucks" newsletter has realized that she wasn't convincing anyone with her "I'm not racist" pleas and decided to step down:

The president of a San Bernardino County Republican club resigned after apologizing for distributing a newsletter with a caricature of Barack Obama on a fake food stamp surrounded by ribs, watermelon and fried chicken.

In a letter sent Wednesday to members of the Chaffey Community Republican Women, Federated, Diane Fedele said she was sorry for showing "poor judgment and lack of insight and sensitivity."

...

Fedele denied racist intent but in her letter defended the message: "The point, that has been lost in the subsequent discussion over images, was that Obama will 'take from the rich and give to the poor' and that we ALL would be buying food with his 'Obama Welfare Dollars.' An ideological statement, not a racial one."

The best part of all of this? The fact that the original image was reportedly made by a Democrat in order to satirize the Right's over-the-top attacks on Obama:

The Riverside Press-Enterprise said the cartoon was created by Tim Kastelein, a 31-year-old Minnesota Democrat who said he made it in a satirical attempt to make fun of right-wing pundits afraid of a Democratic presidential candidate.

First we had Janet Folger writing us a letter from prison in 2010 and delivering newscasts from early 2009 and now, via Good as You, it looks like Focus on the Family has gotten its hands on whatever time-travelling device Folger has invented in orded to send back their own 16-page warning letter [PDF] from the years 2012:

Dear friends,

I can hardly sing “The Star Spangled Banner” any more. When I hear the words,

O say, does that star spangled banner yet wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

I get tears in my eyes and a lump in my throat. Now in October of 2012, after seeing what has happened in the last four years, I don’t think I can still answer, “Yes,” to that question. We are not “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” Many of our freedoms have been taken away by a liberal Supreme Court and a majority of Democrats in both the House and the Senate, and hardly any brave citizen dares to resist the new government policies any more.

The 2008 election was closer than anybody expected, but Barack Obama still won. Many Christians voted for Obama – younger evangelicals actually provided him with the needed margin to defeat John McCain – but they didn’t think he would really follow through on the far left policies that had marked his entire previous career. They were wrong.

Once left-leaning Justices took over the Supreme Court, Focus reports, gay marriage and abortion were mandated, the Boy Scouts were forced to disband, Christian schools were shut down and homeschoolers fled the country, religious speech was drastically curtailed and conservative radio was forced off the air, the Pledge of Allegiance was ruled unconstitutional, guns were taken away, pornography was rampant, taxes had sky-rocketed, Christian publishers had all gone out of business, Bush adminstration officials were targeted and imprisoned, and terrorists were constantly unleashing attacks on American soil.

And it was all the fault of those Christians who had voted for Obama:

When did this all start? Christians share a lot of the blame. In 2008 many evangelicals thought that Senator Obama was an opportunity for a “change,” and they voted for him. They simply did not realize Obama’s far-left agenda would take away many of our freedoms as a nation, perhaps permanently (it is unlikely that the Supreme Court can be changed for perhaps 30 more years). Christians did not realize that by electing Barack Obama, the most liberal member ever to serve in the U.S. Senate, they would allow the law, in the hands of a liberal Congress and Supreme Court, to become a great instrument of oppression.

Many people thought he sounded so thoughtful, so reasonable. And during the campaign, after he had won the Democratic nomination, he seemed to be moving to the center in his speeches, moving away from his earlier far-left record. No one thought he would enact such a far-left, extreme liberal agenda.

But the record was all there for anyone to see. The agenda of the ACLU, the agenda of liberal activist judges in their dissenting opinions, the agenda of the homosexual activists, the agenda of the environmental activists, the agenda of the National Education Association, the agenda of the global warming activists, the agenda of the abortion rights activists, the agenda of the gun control activists, the agenda of the euthanasia supporters, the agenda of the one-world government pacifists, the agenda of far-left groups in Canada and Europe – all of these agendas were there in plain sight, and all of these groups provided huge support for Senator Obama. The liberal agenda was all there. But too many people just didn’t want to see it.

Christians didn’t take time to find out who Barack Obama was when they voted for him. Why did they risk our nation’s future on him? It was a mistake that changed the course of history.

If you thought that Rod Parsley was going to drop out of politics after being humiliated by John McCain, think again.  Earlier this week, Parsley aired a special “election edition” of his program “Breakthrough” with special guests Janet Parshall and Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America.

Parsley opened the broadcast recounting fond memories of how “values voters” saved America during the 2004 election and declared that that was “only the beginning.”  He then turned the discussion over to Wright and Parshall to explain to his viewers why this upcoming election was even more important than the last.

Parshall, after calling Washington, DC “Babylon,” decried the “spiritual warfare” being waged against Sarah Palin, saying that if you “dare to proclaim to a watching world that you follow Christ Jesus, you have opened the gates of Hell” and suggesting that she is actually being attacked by Satan.  When Parsley asked her what the big issues of the election are, Parshall said the question is really “what are the big issues to God?”  As it turns out, the big issues to God just happen to be the same as the big issues to the Religious Right: abortion and gays.  

For her part, Wright urged Parsley’s viewers to elect candidates who will “follow the Biblical principles of how a nation should be governed.”  And, of course, the primary principle was abortion, which Wright compared to the Holocaust, as well as the future of the Supreme Court.

Parsley concluded the program by telling his viewers that it is their votes that will determine if this country will continue to allow the “unconscionable murder of unborn babies, whether it will “stand up for marriage as God intended and his Word declares,”  and whether it will continue to drift toward “silencing the voice of every single Christian.”

In short, it was “values voters” who saved the day in 2004 and it will be “values voters” again in 2008 who will “stop the downward spiral of decadence and immorality in our nation once and for all.”

Focus on the Family has put James Dobson's phone interview with Sarah Palin up on its website.  The mutual admiration between the two was quite palpable as they heaped praise upon one another, with Dobson telling Palin repeatedly that he and many others were praying not only for her but also for a "miracle" regarding the election.

Dobson likewise thanked Palin for her "powerful pro-life testimony" regarding the birth of her youngest son Trig, who was born with Down Syndrome, to which Palin admitted while she was scared after first learning of it during her pregnancy, she was a "hardcore pro-lifer" and it provided not only an "opportunity for me to really be walking the walk and not just talking the talk" but also an opportunity to "help us in our cause here allowing America to be a more welcoming nation for all of our children." 

Palin then thanked Dobson for all he has done for the movement, declaring that "if it were not for you, so many of us would be missing the boat in terms of hearing the message in understanding what we can do to further the cause of life."

Dobson went on to praise the Republican Party platform as the most pro-life, pro-family party platform in history, which Palin seconded, and when Dobson asked her if she thought John McCain would seek to implement it if elected, she said she did "from the bottom of my heart" and reiterated that it was important for Americans to know "that John McCain is solidly there on those solid planks in our platform that build the right agenda for America." 

When Dobson asked if she was discouraged by the current poll numbers showing them trailing, Palin insisted that she was not and that she had always been the underdog but always pulled out a victory when necessary and that she was just "putting this in God’s hands that the right thing for America will be done at the end of the day on November 4th." 

The interview concluded with Dobson telling Palin of a prayer call earlier in the day when those participating asked God for a miracle regarding the election and then invited Palin to visit them in person at Focus on the Family, promising to roll out the red carpet when she does. 

Rough transcript of the interview below.  Audio available: Part I and Part II

Disclaimer: Regarding the "hardcore pro-lifer" quote mentioned earlier, I am not sure if she called herself a "hardcore pro-lifer" or simply "hardcore pro-life." Either way, the point is the same. Also, I didn't transcribe Palin's words exactly as she spoke them because frankly I got sick of my spellchecker asking me if I meant "talking" every time I wrote "talkin'" and "looking" whenever I wrote "lookin'." Furthermore, some sections I didn't transcribe but did provide a short synopsis of what they were saying or the points they were making, especially in cases where Dobson's questions lead to a response from Palin that I did transcribe.

Dobson: I want to tell you that I’m one of those great fans too and I just want you to know that Shirley and I are praying for you, for your safety and for your health and that God’s perfect will will be done on November the fourth. Shirley just had a prayer event here – she’s Chairman of the National Day of Prayer – and we had 430 people here for the weekend. They prayed for the whole weekend. It was not a political event but we were sure asking for God’s intervention.

Palin: Well, it is that intercession that is so needed and so greatly appreciated. And I can feel it too, Dr. Dobson. I can feel the power or prayer and that strength is provided through our prayer warriors across this nation and I so appreciate it.

Dobson: Well, you hear that everywhere you do, don’t you?

Palin: I do, and that is what allows us to continue to be inspired and strengthened. And it’s just a great reminder also when we hear along the rope lines that people are interceding for us and praying for us; it’s our reminder to do the same, to put this all in God’s hands, to seek his perfect will for this nation and to, of course, seek his wisdom and guidance in putting this nation back on the right track.

Dobson: You may not recall it, but in April, before all of this happened, before you were selected by Senator McCain to be his running mate, I wrote to thank you for welcoming little Trig into this world, your little baby with Down Syndrome. And I just wanted to express to you what a powerful testimony that was to the sanctity of human life. And you wrote me a very gracious letter back and there are just so many parents out there who also admire you for your love and care for that precious child.

Palin: Well, I so appreciated your words and yeah, when we found out I was about thirteen weeks along when I found out that Trig would be born with Down Syndrome. To be honest with you, it scared me though and I knew that it would be a challenge and I had to really be on my knees the entire rest of the pregnancy asking that God would prepare my heart. And just the second that he was born it was absolute confirmation that that prayer was answered with all of us just falling so in love with him. And then this whole new world has been opened up to me since then. I’ve always had near and dear to my heart the mission of protecting the sanctity of life and being pro-life, a hardcore pro-lifer, but I think this opportunity for me to really be walking the walk and not just talking the talk. There’s purpose in this also for a greater good to be met. I feel so privileged and blessed to have been, I guess, chosen to have Trig enter our lives because I do want it to help us in our cause here in allowing America to be a more welcoming nation for all of our children.

Dobson: One of the most touching and dramatic moments in the last year for me was when you were speaking at the Republican National Convention and little Trig was sitting on Piper’s lap and she wet her fingers and mashed down his hair that was sticking up in the back. I’m sure that she has seen you do that many times. Boy, that really grabbed my heart, I’ll tell you.

Palin: I know, that was kind of a nice manifestation there of our little mother hen there in Piper, but just of that innocent child-like love that kids certainly have for one another and truly that is that love that our country needs more of. And Dr. Dobson, you have been just on the forefront of all of this, of all of this good for so many years. And your reward is going to be in Heaven because I know that you take a lot of shots also but please know that on our end, kind of outsiders looking in at what you have accomplished all these years, if it were not for you, so many of us would be missing the boat in terms of hearing the message ann understanding what we can do to further the cause of life, and of ethics in our nation, those things that we should be engaged in. We owe so much to you.

Dobson: Well you are very kind in saying that, but we are on the same team in that regard. I’m just trying to serve the Lord like you are and listening to his voice. Wtih egard to the sanctity of human life, it just grieves me greatly how the blood of maybe forty-six, forty-eight million babies who have been aborted cries out to God from the ground. The pro-life and pro-family message is very much a part of who you are, isn’t it?

Palin: It is. It is. And again that’s just been a part of who I’ve been all these years but now with a greater opportunity that I feel blessed to be in this position. A greater opportunity to perhaps help others understand what we can do to usher in more of that respect for life. I’m very, very privileged.

[Dobson asks about media attacks on her and Joe the Plumber – she says that if she can’t handle the attacks, she shouldn’t have offered herself up as VP.]

Dobson: [He had doubts and concerns about McCain and Republicans but] The Republican Platform is the strongest pro-life, pro-family document to come out of a political party, even more so than the platforms during the campaigns of Ronald Reagan. There are principles there that I’ve been fighting for for thirty, forty years and you are tying to articulate those same principles, aren’t you?

Palin: Absolutely, and Dr. Dobson thank you so much for recognizing that. This is a strong platform [built] around the planks in this platform that respect life and respect the entrepreneurial spirit of this great country and those things, back to the social issues that are what Republicans, at least in the past, had articulated and tied to stand on. Now, finally, we have very solid planks in the platform that will allow us to build an even stronger foundation for our country. It’s all good and it’s encouraging. You would maybe have assumed that we would have gotten further away from those strong planks. But no, they're there, they're solid, we stand on them and again I believe that it is the right agenda for the country at this time. Very, very clear and contrasted tickets in this election November 4th. People are going to see the clear contrasts, you just go to the planks in our platforms and that’s where you see them.

Dobson: In your private conversations with Senator McCain, it is your impression that he also strongly supports those views? I know that he did not oppose that platform when it was written. Do you think he will implement it?

Palin: I do, from the bottom of my heart. I am such a strong believer that McCain believes in those strong planks and we do have good conversations about some of the details of the different planks and what they represent. I’m very heartened that John McCain … he doesn’t want a Vice President who will check the opinions … of me at the door and we talk about some of these and they’re very important. It’s most important though, as you’re suggesting, that Americans know that John McCain is solidly there on those solid planks in our platform that build the right agenda for America.

[Dobson asks what lessons she has learned. Palin says she can’t fight with the media, but has faith that their message will get out and faith that God will help them get that message out there. Dobson says millions of people are praying for her and asks if she is discouraged by the polls.]

Palin: I am not discouraged at all, even hearing those poll numbers because, for some reason, I have found myself over and over again in my life being put in these underdog positions and yet still when victory needed to be reached in order to meet this greater good, it’s always worked out just perfectly fine despite the fact that over and over again I’ve been, and I know John McCain has been, in underdog positions. To me, it motivates us, makes us work that much harder and it also strengthens my faith because I’m going to know at the end of the day, putting this in God’s hands, that the right thing for America will be done, the end of the day on November 4th. So I’m not discouraged at all, I’m just fine with the position that we are in today.

Dobson: [Talks about prayer call] “We were just asking for, rather boldly asking, for a miracle with regard to the election this year … let me just say that you that, regardless of the outcome of this election, we would love to have you come by and see us here at Focus on the Family sometime. I know that this is an extremely stressful time for you and we’re not asking you to come now, but when the time permits, we’ll roll out the red carpet for you.”

Palin: I don’t even need any kind of red carpet but I would absolutely love to. Dr. Dobson, Todd is sitting right next to me here in this vehicle before we get on an airplane, so Todd and I too, after I speak with you, I’ll share this conversation with him and we’ll be praying too for your ministry and for those pastors whom you have just mentioned also. Collectively, we can do all that we can within us to strengthen our country and to let Americans know that government has to be on their side, it’s their government and as we seek God’s wisdom and His will in this election, we have to have faith that it’s all going to be good at the end of the day there on November 4th as this country moves forward.

[Dobson and Tom Minnery gush about the interview.]

I generally try to ignore most of what Phyllis Schlafly says or writes because it is so absurdly illogical, biased, and condescending that it defies any attempt to understand what point she is trying to make.  But everyone once in a while she writes something that you just have to stare at in disbelief, such as her latest column innocently wondering if Barack Obama will name William Ayers as his Secretary of Education:

Will William Ayers be secretary of education in a Barack Obama administration? All parents should ponder that possibility before making their choice for president on Nov. 4.

After all, Ayers is a friend of Obama, and professor Ayers's expertise is training teachers and developing public school curriculum. That's been his mission since he gave up planting bombs in government buildings (including the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon) and assaulting police officers.

...

Is an appointment to the U.S. Department of Education his next career advancement? Is Ayers's transformative public school curriculum the kind of "change" Obama will bring us?

Just last week, Schlafly was crowing that she and her anti-ERA allies "invented the pro-family movement" .. and that pretty much tells you all you need to know about the "pro-family movement."

The Roanoke Times has an interesting article on the changes taking place at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University as it seeks to broaden its appeal to potential students:

The college campus that the late Rev. Jerry Falwell founded is not known as a particularly fun-filled place. Falwell himself occasionally referred to Liberty University as a "Bible Boot Camp." But the school's new image includes ski boots -- and a $2 million synthetic slope.

Saying goodbye to some of its straight-laced stereotype, Liberty's fresh face also includes a track for off-road motorcycles, a paintball battlefield, an equestrian center with horse trails and organized student shopping trips to Richmond.

"Our mission was never to be a Bible school just training teachers," said Jerry Falwell Jr., a son of the founder who is Liberty's chancellor and president. He is leading a multimillion-dollar campaign called "Ultimate LU" to enhance the university's appeal to a broader range of prospective students.

I have a sneaking feeling that future classes might contain a fair number of students who were lured by Liberty's shiny new amenities and failed to do some basic research regarding LU's restrictive environment and mission to produce "champions for Christ": 

But Liberty's emphasis on spare-time diversions won't change its strict code of conduct, which includes possible reprimands and fines for such activities as attending dances, entering the bedroom of a member of the opposite sex and viewing R-rated movies.

"We're known as a conservative religious school," Falwell acknowledged. The school's expansion of leisure options "can be done without compromising our Christian beliefs."

"We don't have coed dorms," he added. "We don't have beer bashes."

...

Outsiders did not suggest such nontraditional events for Liberty until recently, and the ideas might underscore a misperception of how much the school's personality is changing, said Chris Misiano, director of campus programming. "We're open" to new concepts, he said. "We're not wide open" ... Liberty officials still filter out HBO at the nearby Ramada Inn that the school leases and manages. Occasionally, Misiano hears someone voice a yearning for campus theaters to show R-rated movies.

The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center has unveiled a new ad highlighting the fact that between 1997 and 2006, anti-affirmative action gadfly Ward Connerly has "lined his own pockets with over $7.6 million from his two tax exempt non-profit organizations; American Civil Rights Institute and the American Civil Rights Coalition."

The BISC points to this recent article on Connerly from The American Conservative that sums up his career by explaining that while "his activism is not entirely cynical" he has somehow managed to acquire "wealth and fame for accomplishing nothing":

But don’t spend too much sympathy on Ward Connerly. The Right’s point man on affirmative action doesn’t need political successes to be a success. While his plans sputter and his former achievements are overturned, Connerly is still being handsomely rewarded. Once he received favored status from the conservative movement, his future was guaranteed. As an activist, Connerly has made millions opposing affirmative action. As a businessman and consultant, he has also made hundreds of thousands in large part because of it.

Between 1999 and 2005, Connerly’s nonprofits, the American Civil Rights Institute and the American Civil Rights Coalition, didn’t challenge a single affirmative-action law. Yet donations climbed to almost $2 million per year. The share that Connerly paid to himself, or to his private for-profit consulting firm, Connerly and Associates, also dramatically increased. In 1998, 22 percent of his nonprofits’ revenue was paid to Connerly in salary or to his firm. By 2001, Connerly’s salary and the fees charged by Connerly and Associates ate up 49 percent of the nonprofits’ combined revenue. Most of the money paid to the firm was listed on tax forms as “speaking fees.” In 2006, when Connerly took up a concrete goal in political activism—ending Michigan’s affirmative-action policies—the cut of nonprofit revenue paid to him and his firm rose to 66 percent of total receipts, nearly $1.6 million.

Connerly’s nonprofits employ him for 30 hours a week and two others full time. The nonprofits then hire him from Connerly and Associates to make speeches. In 2003, ACRI and ACRC paid him $314,079 while he managed two people. By comparison, that year the National Action Network, which receives about $1 million in public funds, only paid Al Sharpton about $4,000. The Claremont Institute, a neoconservative think tank in California, paid its top executive $132,000, and its staff is 9 times the size of Connerly’s. The Heritage Foundation paid its president $292,000 to manage a staff of over 180. The primary financial responsibility that Ward Connerly had at his nonprofits that year was paying his firm over $400,000 for Ward Connerly the consultant, Ward Connerly the speaker, Ward Connerly the political maven—and occasionally a security detail to guard him.

It seems that as the election nears, right-wing groups are trying to work Martin Luther King Jr. into their efforts to convince African American voters to oppose marriage equality and vote for John McCain.  But since MLK would never have supported their political agenda, the Right is reduced to using his niece, Alveda King, to imply that he would. 

Here's is a radio ad from Yes2Marriage, the organization fighting to to pass the anti-equality marriage amendment in Florida, featuring King:

Hi, I'm Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.  A "yes" vote on 2 does only one thing: it defines marriage as a union of one man and one woman. No one loses benefits. Everyone's civil rights are safe. Don't be mislead by dishonest ads about benefits. Protecting marriage between one man and one woman simply protects our children and grandchildren. Please, vote "yes" on 2.

And here she is showing up again, this time alongside Harry Jackson, in an ad from the right-wing group Let Freedom Ring, called "Vote MLK Values" which is aimed at convincing African Americans not to vote for Barack Obama:  

Narrator: Voting is about more than just picking one image over another. For instance, the consequences of not voting your values ...

King: Marting Luther King Jr. had a dream, and I have the same dream; it's in my genes: that people will be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.

Jackson: If we choose a candidate based on race-based affiliation alone, we may choose people who's values are at odd with our deeply-held beliefs.

King: We can never begin to say it was a dream of Martin Luther King that a person would be elected because of his or her color.  No. It was the dream of Martin Luther King Jr. that the character of our civic leaders would line up with the character that is outlined in a book that he held very dear; the Bible.

Jackson: This is the hour in which we need to trust the Bible and vote and vote consistently with what the Bible says. We need to vote to change our culture based on The Word, not based on a party.

Narrator: It's time to think beyond the rhetoric. 

Linda Harvey of Mission America, one of those fringe right-wing groups who are obsessed with things like Witchcraft/Neopaganism and Feminist Theology/Goddess Worship and their threat to Christianity, takes to the pages of WorldNetDaily to demand that Barack Obama sever GLSEN Founder and Executive Director Kevin Jennings’s ties to his campaign.

And after he does that, Harvey has a bunch of questions he needs to answer, including:

• Does Obama believe children are "born gay" and should be able to declare this identity in grade school and join a "gay" club? Kevin Jennings does.
• Does Obama believe kids can decide at age 9 or 10 that they were born in the wrong body, want to switch genders and have schools support this disorder? Jennings does.
• Does Obama believe the Christian moral standard that homosexuality is wrong needs to be suppressed and depicted as "hateful" in the public square, including schools? Jennings does.
• Does Obama believe that if same-sex “marriage” is legalized, this new "law" should be shoved down the throats of all children and their parents via social engineering in public schools? Jennings does.

If we want a totalitarian, pansexual society, with its accompanying disease, dysfunction and abuse, and no room for nobility, goodness and tradition, then we need to make sure we vote for Obama with all his various revolutionary hangers-on, including Jennings.

Even worse, Harvey points to the book “Queering Elementary Education" which she claims has contains not only a “foreword written by Jennings” but also a “blurb on the back from … Bill Ayers.”

I guess that once you realize that, in the Right’s fevered mind, Obama has been surrounding himself with terrorists and pedophilia advocates, you start to understand why they are beginning to freak-out over the prospect that he might actually get elected.

Apparently John Hagee was all set to appear in the Billy Graham biopic “Billy: The Early Years” which chronicles Graham’s calling to the ministry, but the weather didn’t cooperate:

Among the extras in the film, which tells the story of the formative years of famed Christian evangelist Billy Graham, are Eddyville residents Heath and Christi Carlton and A.J. and Julia Littlepage.

Littlepage said she and her husband got the opportunity to be in the film through their support for John Hagee Ministries.

Hagee and his ministerial team were originally supposed to appear in the film, during a tent revival scene where a young Graham accepts Christ and begins his road to greatness.

Hagee Ministries staffers notified the Littlepages in March about the opportunity to be extras in the film.

But rain on the scheduled day of shooting forced its postponement and forced Hagee out of the picture, Littlepage said, expressing disappointment at failing to meet one of today’s widely-followed evangelists.

Just a few weeks ago we were noting that, during the GOP primary, we kept hearing about the emergence of a "new evangelical" movement, led by the likes of Mike Hucakabee, that cared about issues beyond the standard anti-gay, anti-abortion right-wing agenda. We then noted that, when it comes to crunch time, people like Huckabee inevitably revert to form by playing the “God, guns, and gays” card in an effort to bolster the GOP’s electoral chances.

Now, with the election only two weeks away, Huckabee seems to be narrowing the agenda even further and is currently seeking 100,000 signatures for his new “Sanctity of Life” petition:   

I have no doubt that the Democrats' ideas are totally wrong for America and many of their plans would take us the opposite direction from where America needs to go.

Led by Senator Obama, the Majority of the Democrat Party in the House and Senate support the most liberal and indefensible positions on abortion, including a refusal to support a ban on the most vile form of all, partial birth abortion. Led by Senator Obama these Democrats are actively pushing for what the anti-life forces euphemistically call "reproductive rights."

Against them, we must rally every American that seeks to protect and cherish life. I urge you to sign the Petition below and ask your friends and family to do the same.

Frankly, this smacks mainly of an effort by Huckabee to do little more than boost his own mailing list … perhaps as he begins to start thinking about his own 2012 presidential campaign.

Sarah Palin sat down the CBN’s David Brody over the weekend and Brody has now posted various excerpts on his blog.

Among other things, Palin tried to explain her infamous “I read all of them” response to Katie Couric’s question regarding which newspapers she reads by saying she was irritated that Couric wasn’t asking her about real issues and that it’s the sort of thing that only “the Washington elite and the media” care about.

She also defended the recent tone at various McCain and Palin events, saying that if she ever heard people in the audience say anything inappropriate, she “would call 'em out on that,” and likewise defended her efforts to link Barack Obama to William Ayers, saying “I would say it again.”

She then explained to Brody why she wasn’t doing press conferences or appearing on news programs to be interviewed – and it’s because they will just mock her:

Brody: Let me ask you a little bit about media scrutiny because some of the media networks...wonder why you don't go on some of the 24/7 cable networks. What is your response to that?

Palin: Well sometimes it just doesn't do any good. I mean you set yourself up just to continually be mocked, you know so sometimes that doesn't do any good, but what I have done in this campaign is in reaching out to the American voters through our rallies, through the one on ones, through the small meetings that we've had trying to get our message out, our plans for this country out there minus the filter of some of the filter of the mainstream media because, because that filter as, as we see every day when we turn on the news too often there is this, this opaqueness, there is this, this spin, this contortion of a person's words and intentions and that does more harm than good, so it's a greater challenge for me and for John McCain to try to get our message out there without that filter of I think some of the world's media.

And speaking of being mocked, it’s not just Palin that is being ridiculed, it’s also God:

Brody: There have been some shots taken at you…regarding your Christian faith…The Pentecostal stuff, the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Do you want to clear up exactly what you believe in and so that the record can be set straight a little bit? Because there have been some editorials and others taking shots at you regarding --

Palin: Yeah, and I think the saddest part of that is that faith, not just my faith, faith and God in general has been mocked through this campaign, and that breaks my heart and that is unfair for others who share a faith in God and chose to worship our Lord in whatever private manner that they deem fit and my faith has always been pretty personal. I haven't really worn it on my sleeve. I haven't been out there preaching it. I've always been of the mind that you walk the walk. You just don't have to be talking the talk about your beliefs, so just wanting maybe my life to be able to reflect my faith. So it's always been pretty personal and that was kind of a surprise in the last couple of months that people would misconstrue and spin anything that has to do with my faith or anybody else's and turn it into something to be mocked.

Hmmmm … tell that to Barack Obama.

Finally, Palin weighed in on the need for a Federal Marriage Amendment and couched it, as she always does, in her own assertion that she not bigoted or judgmental:

Brody: On Constitutional marriage amendment, are, are you for something like that?

Palin: I am, in my own, state, I have voted along with the vast majority of Alaskans who had the opportunity to vote to amend our Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I wish on a federal level that that's where we would go because I don't support gay marriage. I'm not going to be out there judging individuals, sitting in a seat of judgment telling what they can and can't do, should and should not do, but I certainly can express my own opinion here and take actions that I believe would be best for traditional marriage and that's casting my votes and speaking up for traditional marriage that, that instrument that it's the foundation of our society is that strong family and that's based on that traditional definition of marriage, so I do support that.

So she’s not for telling anyone “what they can and can't do” … unless they are gay, in which case Palin is all for telling them they can’t get married.

Sarah Palin continues her whirlwind media trip, following up hard-hitting interviews with "journalists" like Sean Hannity, Hugh Hewitt, and Rush Limbaugh with an exclusive sit-down with the Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody: 

The Brody File is scheduled to sit down one-on-one with Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin this weekend in Lancaster, Pa. Expect to see clips from the interview first thing Monday morning on The Brody File ... it'll be a great chance for Brody File readers and 700 Club viewers to get a possibly different perspective of her rather than the storyline in the mainstream media.

We've noticed before that John McCain has been openly refusing invitations to sit with Brody, but it looks like Palin is not quite as worried about showing up to talk with a man who works directly for an "agent of intolerance."  

It seems that all of Brody's praying has finally paid off and, as a former journalist herself, maybe Brody can get her thoughts on his belief that journalism is a great way to spread the Gospel and win converts for Christ.

John Hagee may still be recovering from his recent heart surgery, but that doesn’t mean that he can’t also find time to explain that our current financial crisis was predicted thousands of years ago in the Bible.  Via the Dallas Morning News’s Religion Blog:

In response to the growing financial and global economic downturn, Strang Book Group announced the release of Financial Armageddon, written by New York Times best-selling author John Hagee.

Releasing on November 11, 2008, under Strang's current event/political imprint, FrontLine Books, Financial Armageddon was written in less than three weeks in light of the recent banking crash.

Drawing from detailed inside information from sources around the world and combined with his knowledge of Bible prophecy and End Times theology, Hagee gives readers a provocative view of the events taking place today, many of which were spelled out in stunning detail by prophetic writings penned more than two thousand years ago.

Earlier today we noted the American Family Association starting to panic over the possibility of an Obama presidency, declaring that “if the liberals win the upcoming election, America as we have known it will no longer exist.”

And it is starting to look as if abject terror is slowly overtaking the entire Religious Right movement.  For instance, Sarah Posner points us to this post from Stephen Strang proclaiming, in all seriousness, that “life as we know it will end if Obama is elected”:

[P]eople who hate Christianity will be emboldened to attack our freedoms. Christianity is already persona non grata in academia and in the liberal media. People such as Bill Maher and Michael Moore, who hate God and God's people, will think the election verifies that the nation as a whole believes as they do and will jump for glee. Meanwhile, Christians seem almost asleep. There is no outcry!

And here is Rick Scarborough warning of dire consequences for Christians if Obama is elected:

"I think what you'll see is Barack Obama solidifying power in short order, either through the legislative process with hate crimes legislation. And then he'll turn on talk radio with reenactment of the 'Fairness Doctrine.' I'm not so sure he'll wait for an act of Congress. I think he'll do some of this with unconstitutional but never challenged executive orders, but he will silence his critics within days," he explains. "One thing you can always count on is [that] liberals, unlike conservatives, know how to use power -- and they will use it swiftly and decisively. And all I can say is heaven help us if this man becomes president of the United States."

Scarborough contends Obama is a committed socialist who intends to radically transform the United States.

David Corn has a good post up on the MoJo Blog detailing the varying last-minute attacks the Right is throwing at Obama right now, ranging from “Obama is a commie who hates the rich and wants to kill the American Dream” to “Obama will destroy Christianity in the United States and enslave you within an Islamic dictatorship.”

Following up on the racist “Obama Bucks” mailer we wrote about yesterday, the LA Times today has this quote from Chaffey Community Republican Women's Club President Diane Fedele explaining that it was not racist at all because she doesn’t have “racist eyes”:

Fedele said the mailer merely parodied the statements Obama made during a debate last summer and wasn't racist.

"If I was racist, I would have looked at it through racist eyes," she said. "I am not racist, which is why it probably didn't register."

Club member Kristina Sandoval agreed.

"None of us are racists," she said.

The use of watermelon, ribs and fried chicken was innocent, she said.

"Everyone eats those foods, it's not a racial thing."

How does one determine if they have “racist eyes” exactly?  Maybe only if they are looking out through this?

It is now well-known that Sarah Palin won her first bid for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska due in large part to her willingness to turn a non-partisan election into a battle over abortion, gun, and religion:

But in the first major race of her career — the 1996 campaign for mayor of her hometown, Wasilla — Palin was a far more conventional politician. In fact, according to some who were involved in that fight, Palin was a highly polarizing political figure who brought partisan politics and hot-button social issues like abortion and gun control into a mayoral race that had traditionally been contested like a friendly intramural contest among neighbors.

Now, via Ed Brayton we see that the practice is spreading and has been adopted Tim Tinglestad, who is running for the Minnesota Supreme Court:

I am committed to preserving the people's constitutional right to choose their judges through meaningful, contested, non-partisan judicial elections.

Sounds good ... until you read on:

I believe that justice is served when judges fear God and love the people, and as a Minnesota Supreme Court Justice, I will be impartial to the parties, while partial to the original intent of the Constitution.

And it only gets worse from there: 

“Truth is the only solid foundation upon which to build a life, or a nation. God’s Word is the Foundational Truth upon which our constitutional form of government was built. The Truth of God’s Word is the foundation which holds families together. Yet in our pursuit of personal freedoms, we have lost the Foundational Truth upon which those freedoms were built. Where there is Truth, there is hope.”

“God’s Word is the Light of Truth. As God’s Word has been removed from our public lives, the resulting darkness has led to our present social disorder and political divisions. The correction of these problems will only begin when the Light of Truth is returned to our land’s highest hills, the Supreme Courts. Until our highest courts return to an acknowledgment of the existence of God and His Truth, the people will continue to walk in the confusion of darkness.”

“Our State and Nation are in need of the next Great Awakening! Just as we awaken to the light of each new morning, it will be the Light of Truth, from God’s Word, which will again awaken us to a new day in our communities, our State, and our Nation. In the Light of this new day we will return to the path, which God has destined us to travel. The alarm has sounded, and it is time to wake up!

And then it gets even worse than that:

Justice is served when Judges fear God, and love the people. This is the reason that I have chosen to seek to become a Supreme Court Justice, serving the people of Minnesota. To serve the court with impartial justice, judges must possess great knowledge and wisdom. Judges must be God fearing men and women, because God’s Word tells us, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of all knowledge.” (Proverbs 1:7) and “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of all wisdom…” (Psalm 111:10)

To fear God means to love Him with all of your heart, with all of your soul, and with all of your strength. This is the greatest commandment given to man. This fear requires an awesome, reverential acknowledgement of the sovereignty of God over the affairs of man. The second greatest commandment is to love our neighbor as our selves. When we fear God, the necessary result is that we love the people. (Matthew 22:37-39)

If justice is to be served in our courts, then we must use the correct standard in choosing our judges. God’s Word gives us this standard in II Chronicles 19:5-7, which tells us, “Jehoshaphat appointed judges throughout all the fortified cities of Judah, city by city, and said to the judges, Be careful what you do, for you judge not for man but for the Lord, and He is with you in the matter of judgment. So now let the reverence and fear of the Lord be upon you; take heed what you do, for there is no injustice with the Lord our God, or partiality or taking of bribes.”

The hearts of our judges are critical because, “A good man brings forth good out of the good stored in his heart. An evil man brings forth evil out of the evil stored in his heart. For it is out of the overflow of the heart that the tongue speaks.” (Luke 6:45) If we want the decisions of our judges to be good, then we must pray that the hearts of our judges are turned toward God.

Tingelstad is challenging incumbent Supreme Court Justice Paul Anderson and, judging by the primary returns, doesn't seem to stand much of a chance considering that he only pulled in 22 percent of the statewide vote back in September.  So provided that John McCain doesn't suddenly pick him as his next running mate, this will hopefully be the last time we ever write about him. 

Somehow we missed this story a few months back about Central Alabama Pride suing Birmingham Mayor Larry Langford for discriminating against the group when he refused to allow city workers to hang Gay Pride Week banners.

For his part, Langford had a rather novel church-state defense:

Langford on Wednesday reiterated his position against signing a proclamation for the event because he said it is inappropriate for a government to endorse a lifestyle that God opposes.

"The bottom line is I don't condone the lifestyle and what they were asking me to do in my official capacity as mayor was to issue a proclamation which in essence endorsed the gay lifestyle," Langford said. "If I had issued such a proclamation, I would in essence be saying that God's position is wrong and I wouldn't dare take a position against God. So as opposed to suing me, they need to be suing God, and the last time I checked, he can defend himself. End of story."

Apparently, in Langford's view, the role of government is to please God and the determination of what is pleasing to God is made entirely by whether Langford personally approves of the the issue at hand. 

Presumably, Langford realized that that sort of defense wasn't going to stand up well in federal court, which is why he's now getting legal representation from Jerry Falwell's Liberty Counsel:

Stephen M. Crampton, a lawyer with Liberty Counsel, has filed notice that he will appear as an attorney of record for Langford. The Liberty Council is a nonprofit legal organization with ties to a fundamentalist Baptist University in Virginia.

What happens when a local gay organization in Florida can't get any of the people working to pass the anti-gay marriage amendment to come and debate them? Well, if you are the Stonewall Legal Alliance at FIU College of Law, you go out and find some other anti-gay activists who will - in this case, members of the Westboro Baptist Church:

A church known for spewing anti-gay rhetoric and picketing military funerals is slated to debate a state marriage amendment at a forum next week at Florida International University.

The Topeka, Kan.-based Westboro Baptist Church accepted an invitation from the Stonewall Legal Alliance, a gay group at the FIU College of Law. The debate will focus on Amendment 2, the initiative on the Nov. 4 ballot that would add Florida's existing ban on same-sex marriage to the state constitution.

...

Jose Gabilondo, an associate law professor at FIU, plans to argue against the amendment, while two daughters of Westboro Pastor Fred Phelps will speak for it.

Westboro has gained national notoriety by picketing at gay pride events as well as funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq; it equates modern America with Sodom and Gomorrah.

Westboro members agreed to pay their own expenses to Florida.

"The message of Westboro is the message of Amendment 2," Gabilondo said.

Debate organizers said they invited members of a state coalition supporting the amendment, as well as several other groups, but they declined.

"That's the most heinous thing I've ever heard. They go to the most radical group," said Janet Folger, an Amendment 2 supporter who heads a more mainstream Fort Lauderdale-based group called Faith2Action. "It's a deliberate attempt to make the pro-marriage people appear to be something they're not."

Of course, if Folger is so concerned that her movement is being represented by a bunch of vicious bigots, perhaps she should attend the debate herself and explain exactly how her belief that gay marriage = end times actually differs from those espoused by the Phelps clan.

It looks like the Right finally got what it wanted when the issue of abortion worked its way into last night's debate and was tied to the issue of the future of the Supreme Court, to boot. 

Of course, John McCain stepped all over what should have been his golden opportunity to appease the Religious Right by immediately bringing up his role in the "Gang of 14," which is something for which they still have not forgiven him. 

But when he finally got back on track, he reverted to the standard Republican line that he would never have a "litmus test" for his Supreme Court nominees regarding Roe v. Wade but would instead find nominees with a "history of strict adherence to the Constitution and not legislating from the bench."

Since McCain refused to apply a "litmus test" to potential nominees, moderator Bob Schieffer logically took that to mean that he might be willing to consider someone who "had a history of being for abortion rights," to which McCain replied that he would do no such thing:

MCCAIN: I would consider anyone in their qualifications. I do not believe that someone who has supported Roe v. Wade that would be part of those qualifications. But I certainly would not impose any litmus test.

So McCain could not appoint an abortion rights supporter because that would conflict with his commitment to naming judges with a "history of strict adherence to the Constitution."  Of course, the whole question of reproductive rights is whether or not such rights are protected by the Constitution.  McCain clearly doesn't believe that they are ... but by hiding behind the phrase "strict adherence to the Constitution" he gets to absurdly pretend that he's not applying a dreaded "litmus test" when, in fact, that is exactly what he is doing.  

McCain should at least be honest about it and tell the nation what he told Gary Bauer back in 2000 that led Bauer to endorse him over George Bush:

Somewhat surprisingly, McCain had the support of Gary Bauer, the social conservative, who had dropped out of the race by that time. “I wanted a commitment from either George Bush or John McCain that if elected he would appoint pro-life judges to the Supreme Court,” Bauer told me. “Bush said he had no litmus test, and his judges would be strict constructionists. But McCain, in private, assured me he would appoint pro-life judges.”

Of course, Bauer denies this now, saying that McCain merely promised him judges who would not be activist; a claim which is just as bogus as McCain's "no litmus test" dodge.

Considering that Republicans are up in arms over allegations of “voter fraud” or, more accurately “voter registration fraud,” we assume that they’ll soon be turning the attention to Virginia where, as we last month, Jerry Falwell Jr. set out to register the entire student body at Liberty University, in hopes of being the “college that elected a president."

It turns out that Liberty registered some 4,000+ new voters, but that a lot of the new registrations were illegible, incomplete, or otherwise ineligible:

Disappointment, however, could await an estimated 200 to 300 people whose handwriting on their voter applications was so illegible or incomplete that registrar’s office personnel couldn’t find them to fix their information … Board member John Falcone said workers who processed the flood of applications told him many of the illegible forms came from Liberty University students, however [Patricia Bower, Lynchburg’s registrar] said there’s no way to tell whether those forms came from Liberty, because they show addresses in California or several other states.

Of course it’s impossible to tell if they came from Liberty since all the addresses are from other states.That’s exactly the problem. But unless there was another organization conducting a massive voter registration drive in Lynchburg to get out-of-state students to register in Virginia, it’s probably safe to assume that these forms came from Liberty.

Recently, CBN’s David Brody delivered the keynote address as the Baptist Press Collegiate Journalism Conference where he explained to his audience that journalism is a great way to spread the Gospel and win converts for Christ:

“If we can go ahead and say intelligent things on the air in a mainstream media network, then maybe they’ll listen to our Jesus talk as well,” Brody said. “And you never know how that’s subconsciously going through, but I can tell you that you definitely get witnessing opportunities to shine your light in the mainstream media world.”

…

“The blog that I write is viewed by the mainstream networks, and it’s an opportunity at that point to really talk to people about what it means to be saved and grace and redemption of Jesus Christ,” he said. “I do that quite a bit on my blog. You don’t hammer them over the head with it, but at the same time you don’t want to miss opportunities either.”

Brody declared that he prays before his on-air appearances because “no journalism can be successful without divine enabling” and that that it was because of prayer that he has managed to secure interviews with newsmakers like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (though he has still been unable to win over John McCain):

In addition to articulating a Christian worldview in their work, Christian journalists also must rely on God to sustain them and guide them, Brody said. He told how God has worked through prayer many times to land interviews and work out challenging details.

During the 2008 primary season, Brody worked for an entire year to get an interview with Hillary Clinton. The night before the scheduled interview, it was still uncertain whether Clinton would come, he said. But his producer spent an hour and a half in prayer, and Clinton showed up at the appointed time.

According to the article, Brody believes that “Christian journalists have an opportunity to change the world” and so it only makes sense that he plies his trade on behalf of Pat Robertson.  As for what CNN thinks he brings to the table, that remains to be answered.

For the last week or so, as the economy continues to dominate the news cycle and presidential election, the Right has been lamenting that their anti-abortion, anti-gay agenda has been relegated to the back burner and wishing that they could choose right-wing moderators to run the debates.  

But since they can’t do that, they’ve decided to do the next best thing and petition Bob Schieffer, the moderator of the final debate, to make sure their issues play prominent in tonight’s debate.  Earlier this week, Ken Blackwell, a senior fellow at the Family Research Council, wrote an "open letter" to Schieffer decrying Tom Brokaw's failure to work their agenda into the last debate:

Mr. Brokaw’s choice of topics for the second debate robbed the American people of what was intended to be a look into the more personal and controversial aspects of the candidates. In that debate focusing on domestic policy, there was not a single question about the Supreme Court, gun control, abortion, gay marriage or immigration. It strains credulity to assert that of the more than 1,000 questions offered to Mr. Brokaw, he could not find any that spoke to these issues.

And now the FRC has followed suit. Declaring that “no issue our nation faces is more important than the protection of innocent unborn life,” the FRC has launched a petition to try and pressure Schieffer into asking questions designed to rally so-called “values voters” behind John McCain:

The American people face many crucial issues in this year's elections, including the state of the economy, immigration, health care, the environment, and foreign policy.  The first two presidential debates this year, however, have failed to include the most pressing social issues on the minds of values voters.  We the undersigned urge you to ask questions along the lines of those listed below, which discuss the future of marriage and the sanctity of human life.  These are questions that matter to all Americans, and you have the last remaining opportunity for the American people to compare the candidates' answers as they appear together for the final presidential debate of 2008.

* Do you believe that the U.S. Constitution contains a right for homosexuals to marry?
* Would you change the traditional definition of marriage contained in the federal Defense of Marriage Act?
* Do you support the Defense of Marriage Act's provision allowing states not to recognize same-sex marriages from other states?
* Have you ever opposed any ballot initiative seeking to define marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman?
* Do you agree or disagree with the Supreme Court's decision allowing the government to ban abortions that kill a partially born baby?
* Have you ever supported or opposed any law designed to protect the lives of babies that have survived an attempted abortion?

Moderating a debate is a great responsibility that rests on your shoulders.  We ask that you exercise that responsibility with great care to ensure that the American people have the chance to know where the candidates stand on every pressing issue. 

And just in case this effort doesn’t work out, FRC Action is doing its own part to support McCain by running anti-Obama ads in several battleground states:

Today, FRC Action PAC announced an initial $100,000 TV and radio ad campaign in key battleground states aimed at educating voters on Senator Barack Obama's promise to make the radical "Freedom of Choice Act" his top priority as President. The "Freedom of Choice Act" will overturn virtually all federal and state limitations on abortion. The ad campaign is a response to the Matthew 25 initiative, which sought to mislead voters and downplay Obama's extreme pro-abortion views. The initial TV and radio ad buy will run this week in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, and Michigan, with additional television commercials airing in the Washington, D.C. market. The radio ads will target Christian radio stations that earlier this year carried the Matthew 25 campaign.

Club for Growth, the radically anti-tax and anti-government organization, has often targeted Republican incumbents it deems insufficiently devoted to its free-market fundamentalism. But Politico points out that its endorsement may not be such a great thing for candidates these days.

It couldn't have been a nicer Saturday for Democrat Frank Kratovil, up on stage playing blues guitar for an oyster-slurping, beer-drinking crowd on the water in Queen Anne's County, Md.

 When he's done with his set, reporters from CQ, Politico and the New Republic are waiting to talk with the man who may be the next member of Congress from Maryland's 1st District.

This isn't what the Club for Growth had in mind.

Back in February, the conservative PAC helped knock off moderate Republican Rep. Wayne Gilchrest in the GOP primary here, in the hopes of installing a more conservative Republican in his place.

But it may not work out that way. With less than a month to go before Election Day, Kratovil is running neck and neck with the Club for Growth-backed GOP nominee, Maryland state Sen. Andy Harris, in a district that's about as red as they come.

And with voters worried about their retirement accounts and suddenly suspicious of the free-market economics espoused by the Club for Growth, Kratovil is using the Club for Growth's support of Harris as a way to bludgeon him.

 "We need to stop listening to those people, like my opponent and his million-dollar backers, the Club for Growth, who believe in no regulation," Kratovil says.

For Club for Growth-backed candidates across the country, this is sounding like a familiar story.

Politico reports that Rep. Tim Walberg, elected in 2006 after defeating moderate GOPer Joe Schwarz in a Club for Growth backed primary challenge, is now seeing the Club's backing used as a major line of attack from his opponent. And it's forcing the GOP to spend money to defend what were once considered safe seats:

Still, the club's investment in GOP efforts may end up costing the party more than it saves it, forcing the National Republican Congressional Committee to spend money in what might have been forget-about-'em races if more moderate Republicans were on the ballot.

It seems likely that Grover Norquist's expressed desire to shrink government to the size that he could "drown it in the bathtub" doesn't resonate too well with voters who see the financial meltdown draining their retirement plans as the result of a little too much "magic of the marketplace" and not enough oversight or regulation.

In addition . the group played a key role in funding conservative Rep. Steve Pearce in his New Mexico Senate primary victory against Rep. Heather Wilson. Wilson was viewed as the more electable Republican against Democrat Tom Udall; with Pearce as the nominee, the GOP has written off the seat.

The Religious Right conservatives and the Big Money conservatives usually stick closely to their own turf. Even within the right wing fraternity, good fences make good neighbors. But lately in Alabama, all bets are off (so to speak).

The state chapter of the Christian Coalition, which has split from the national group and calls itself Christian Action Alabama, has been sparring with Freedom’s Watch, a right-wing group funded by casino magnate Sheldon Adelson which has been spending big in the state. The reason is simple: gambling.

Political observers wondered how long the dispute could simmer before bursting into plain view of voters. The DCCC just answered that question with its new ad in the race for Alabama’s 2nd congressional district:

For the last few weeks, I've been mocking the Right's claim that somehow our current economic crisis is actually due to abortion, homosexuals, and an overall breakdown in the family whenever it comes up.

And, for some reason, it keeps coming up and getting odder every time … to the point where we now have Religious Right activists calling for a nationwide prayer vigil as our only hope of reversing the economic slide:

Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, states, "America is facing its worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.  In times of great crisis and challenge Americans have always turned to God for comfort, support and guidance.  We call upon President Bush, to follow the example of Abraham Lincoln, and issue a proclamation for a National Day of Prayer just as Lincoln did in April of 1863 during the Civil War.

"It is important that Americans humble themselves and turn to God to address this grave crisis which political leaders seem to have no power to solve.

 "As President Lincoln stated, '...it is the duty of nations as well as of men, to owe their dependence upon the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and transgressions, in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon; and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord:'"

Rev. Rob Schenck, President of Faith and Action, adds, "Americans are living in fear and confusion in the wake of this tragic economic crisis.  Many are seeing their investments and retirement funds vanish before their eyes.  In response to this massive uncertainty, we call upon President Bush to proclaim a National Day of Prayer.

Regardless of whether or not President Bush actually follows through on their demands, I predict that, at some point down the road when the chaos subsides and the economy begins to recover, the Christian Defense Coalition will subsequently release a statement taking credit for it - just as they did back in 2007 when they attempted to take sole credit a decline in the murder rate in Washington DC.

It seems that the big scoop Jerome Corsi uncovered before he was deported from Kenya is that Barack Obama “backed ruthless, foreign thug” in Kenya.  WorldNetDaily explains:

Sen. Barack Obama designated a personal aide as his direct contact for the 2007 Kenyan presidential campaign of Raila Odinga, who later was appointed prime minister after his election loss was followed by widespread, deadly violence that destroyed or damaged 800 Christian churches, according to e-mails obtained by WND senior staff writer Jerry Corsi during a trip to Kenya.

WND even provides concrete visual proof:

The e-mails, apparently sent by Obama himself, referenced the senator's aide, Mark Lippert. The e-mails were provided to WND by an insider in Kenya who fled Odinga's Orange Democratic political party and requested anonymity because of the danger of retaliation.

The e-mails, identified as coming from Obama's Senate office, are addressed to "railaaodinga" at a yahoo.com address.

A WND e-mail to the same Obama address generated an automated response and a list of contacts for Obama's offices. A WND e-mail sent to the Odinga e-mail address didn't generate a response.

One e-mail purportedly from Obama, dated Dec. 22, 2006, read, "I will kindly wish that all our correspondence [be] handled by Mr Mark Lippert. I have already instructed him. This will be for my own security both for now and in future."

It is reproduced here with the e-mail address of the person who forwarded it to WND redacted:

Well, color me convinced.  Since it is glaringly obvious that nobody could ever fake something as intricate as an email, I contacted Corsi’s media rep, Tim Bueler, as instructed to do at the bottom of the WND article, to pass on my congratulations regarding this amazing scoop.  I was shocked by Bueler’s totally authentic and in no way completely made up and forged by me response:

It is just me or is the bogus "War on Christmas" starting earlier every year? 

Here it is, not even Halloween yet, and the American Family Association is already trotting out its "help us save Christmas" merchandise:

It's hard to believe that there are companies and individuals who want to ban "Merry Christmas" and replace it with "Holiday Greetings" because, they say, they don't want to offend anyone.

Christians can take a stand and proclaim to our communities that Christmas is not just a winter holiday focused on materialism, but a "holy day" when we celebrate the birth of our Savior. We can do it in a gentle and effective way by wearing the “It’s OK to say Merry Christmas” button.

You can help preserve our tradition of greeting others with a “Merry Christmas” by taking a vital leadership role in AFA’s "Project Merry Christmas."

Here's how. AFA is making available an attractive button and Glossy Sticker that carry on our tradition of saying “It's OK to say Merry Christmas."

Purchase enough buttons for each member of your church and enough Glossy Stickers for each family to have one to go on their automobile. Urge your fellow members to wear their buttons and display the Glossy Stickers during the entire Christmas season.

Some things just defy efforts to try and explain them:

Pastor [Raymond S. Porter] will be put into a casket for three days and three nights, from October 12th at 2:00 pm through October 15th at 9:00 am. Then he will come out and give a message to Mr. Obama from God, that the whole world may hear.

...

This is about murdering innocent babies. Our society calls it abortion, but I call it what it is murder.

The reason why I am doing this is out of obedience to God. Many Americans think our economy is failing because of the Bush Administration, but they are wrong, it is because of sin.

We are a very sinful nation, therefore God is against us. The only quote I have is from God's word. 2 Chronicles 7:14 say's 'If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land'. We are suppose to be a civilized nation but we are practicing Barbaric behavior called human sacrifice. It is sad that we live in a county were it is perfectly legal to murder an unborn child for convenience, maybe the mother to be says, 'It's not the right time, I must further my career', or a mother may tell her teenage daughter, 'You must get rid of the baby because you are to young. You must finish school'. It is human sacrifice for one's own convenience. Senator Barack Obama said if he becomes president that he would intervene in the African countries where genocide is taking place. He will not however, intervene in Roe vs. Wade which is genocide that is taking place here in America everyday disguised as planned parenthood.

The American Family Association announces an end to its boycott of McDonald's, proclaiming itself victorious: 

McDonald's has told AFA they will remain neutral in the culture war regarding homosexual marriage. AFA is ending the boycott of McDonald's. As you know, AFA called for the boycott in May after McDonald's joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC).

McDonald's said McDonald's Vice President Richard Ellis has resigned his position on the board of NGLCC and that his seat on the board will not be replaced. McDonald's also said that the company has no plans to renew their membership in NGLCC when it expires in December.

In an e-mail to McDonald's franchised owners the company said, "It is our policy to not be involved in political and social issues. McDonald's remains neutral on same sex marriage or any 'homosexual agenda' as defined by the American Family Association."

We appreciate the decision by McDonald's to no longer support political activity by homosexual activist organizations. You might want to thank your local McDonald's manager.

They can start by thanking the manager of the local McDonald's in Louisville, KY.

It seems that while I’ve been busy not paying attention to the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, they’ve released parts 2 and 3 of their “Why Obama Is Not A Christian” video series. I was inclined to ignore these new videos until I saw that the CADC was relying on us to help them get the word out:

The controversy continues to swirl around our campaign. RightWingWatch.com, a radical liberal organization, has taken note of CADC and our campaign. They have even posted our video on their site. Many of their supporters have weighed in with a barrage of heated e-mails. We are rejoicing that so many unbelievers are watching the videos. Pray that the life changing truth of Christ's gospel will touch their hearts.

Unfortunately for them, angry emails generally don’t contain donations, which they obviously need:

In order to keep Barack Obama from defaming and redefining the Christian faith we need to raise $10,000.00 this week. Help us keep this vital campaign alive so that millions of Christians will not be deceived by Obama's phony claim that he is a "devout Christian." Your gift will make it possible to get us these videos out!

I sure hope that they raise the money they need because, if they go out of business, I’ll have one less D-list fringe group to mock.

Kristian Kanya, writing on the Committee for Justice blog, weighs in on the inevitably confusing issue of judicial confirmation numbers, which I am generally reluctant to tackle because they are notoriously hard to calculate accurately.  After all, how does one account for things like withdrawn nominees or, worse yet, nominees who were not confirmed in one Congress and then renominated, often more than once, in subsequent Congresses? Are they counted as just one nominee or are they counted as multiple nominations?  What about someone like William H. Steele, who was nominated by President Bush to the Eleventh Circuit in 2001, not confirmed, and then renominated by Bush to a District Court seat in 2003 and then confirmed?  And what about nominees to the International Court of Trade, are they counted? 

You see, it’s complicated. 

But what is not particularly complicated, provided that we can all agree on basic numbers, is drawing comparisons across presidencies, which is what CFJ tries to do by citing this section from a Washington Post article:

“Democrats expressed surprise that Bush would revive such allegations, arguing that the Senate has confirmed more of Bush's nominees in the past two years than were approved under the previous six years of GOP control.

The White House says 324 of 376 federal court nominees have been confirmed during Bush's tenure, with 34 current vacancies. By comparison, Democrats say, there were 84 judicial openings at the end of Bill Clinton's presidency.”

CFJ then compares the varying confirmation figures during recent Congresses and declares that the Democrats' claim is “simply misleading.”   Of course, I could just point out that, in the four years they have controlled the Senate under President Bush, Democrats have confirmed more of his judicial nominees than the Republicans did during their four years of control – 168 confirmed by the Democrats compared to 156 confirmed by the Republicans.  But that is exactly the problem with this game; it all depends on what dates and calculations you choose to use.

But there is one thing on which everyone ought to be able to agree – it is not so much the total number of nominees confirmed as it is the overall percentage of confirmed.  If a president, for some reason, only put forth 100 nominees and yet saw every one of them confirmed, nobody could complain that he only had 100 judges confirmed compared to some other president who had, say, 150 confirmed out of a pool of 300.  Which brings me to this point from CFJ:  

Some aggregate figures deserve attention also. During Reagan a total of 383 federal judges were confirmed. Under Clinton, that dropped slightly to 377. However, during the Bush administration, only 326 federal judges have been put on the bench. Judicial openings or not, the numbers do not lie.

Indeed, numbers do not lie. So, for the sake of simplicity, let’s just use the figures found on Table 4(b) of this Congressional Research Service report “Judicial Nomination Statistics: U.S. District and Circuit Courts, 1977-2003” [PDF].  

According to CRS, President Reagan put forth a total of 423 District and Circuit Court nominees and saw 375 of them confirmed, a confirmation rate of 88%. President Clinton, by contrast, put forth more nominees and had fewer confirmed:  372 of 488, for a confirmation rate of 76%.  

In comparison, according to the White House’s own figures cited in the Washington Post article above, “324 of 376 federal court nominees have been confirmed during Bush's tenure.”  That gives him a confirmation rate of 86%, well above President Clinton’s confirmation rate.  In fact, for Bush to lower his confirmation rate to match that of Clinton, he'd have to nominate another 50 or so judges before he leaves office in a few months, which is essentially impossible given that there are only 34 vacancies. 

The topic of judicial confirmation rates is complex enough as it is without organizations like CFJ throwing around figures totally devoid of context and confusing people even further. 

In short, despite all of the Right's complaining, President Bush has had a pretty good record of getting his judges confirmed.  Of course, you'd never know that by listening to them. 

Several weeks back, we noted that some of Sarah Palin’s more ardent right-wing supporters were comparing her to Queen Esther and declaring that she was “destined to be the matriarch of her people.”

Now, Sarah Posner in her latest FundamentaList points to this post by Stephen Strang in which Strange shares an email from Pastor Mark Arnold in Lebanon, Ohio who explains how God worked miracles so that he could meet Palin personally and “deliver a message confirming to Sarah and Todd to realize they are truly chosen vessels of God”: 

On Sept. 9, the McCain/Palin bus came through a little town called Lebanon, Ohio. The Lord allowed me to go to the rally [to give McCain and Palin] a message that He wanted me to personally deliver.

Sunday Night: A burden hit me that would only shake me to my knees--I prayed and wept for our nation. Never has my heart been so broken before God. I literally interceded for these wonderful people who do not deserve all the hate against them. The God-haters are going to try everything to stop them, but they will not succeed!

God is not pleased with the “bashing” in the news of this “anointed” person [Sarah Palin]. He has called her for this time! I promised God that I would pray and hold them up in prayer. I would “listen” out and be mindful of where they were. The following day is important in this time line ... because I didn't even know until God spoke to me.

Monday and into Monday night: The burden of prayer was so heavy that I was literally shaking and could not stop weeping. I didn't know that they were coming to Ohio. I prayed and walked and wept and walked. I prayed and prayed and wept and prayed.

Tuesday at 2:00 a.m.: God spoke these words to me: “Go turn the radio on!” Immediately the reporter's words were, “McCain & Palin bus to be in Lebanon later this morning for a 10:00 a.m. rally!”

Immediately on hearing that news, I heard God again. God said, “You are to go. You will meet them and give them a message for Me!”

I prayed as an intercessor and went to a place in prayer that I don't think I've ever been … because the Lord had just visited me … and I knew I was on a “mission.” I had now been up since Sunday night … and now it's Tuesday and I've got to go on the “Word of the Lord.” He sure became my strength as this unfolds.

I didn't stop praying until I drove over to the town and parked the car. The news would later report they were expecting 5,000 people, [but] the actual head-count of those who had been scanned was more than 10,000 people.

I simply obeyed … and God actually told me where to stand, who to talk to … and when to be on the move. I had sure learned on the mission field, when God wants to open a door, He will do it at the appropriate time. He always has someone to assist … and even those standing beside you may just be an angel.

…

When McCain came to hug her … he immediately shook my hand and following his moment with her, I shook his hand as he grabbed my hand, now for the second time, and I said, “God wants you to know that I'm praying for you, Sir!” He thanked me and kept smiling. I repeated that phrase to him five times. He grabbed my hands and looked right into my eyes and said, “I won't make it without prayer. Sir, thank you for praying for me, and don't let one day go by that you don't pray for me. I need all the prayers that I can get. Thank you, thank you, thank you!”

As he moved to my right, Sarah Palin came over to my left side … standing over the crowd and then looking at the little lady who had lost the son. It took a moment for her to shake some hands and people were pushing in all around. Sarah came and got on her hands and knees on that side of the stage and hugged that little mom, telling her, “It was not in vain.” She promised her support.

It was at this moment Sarah Palin reached out for me to help her up, and as I was assisting her to stand, I was now face-to-face with her, and God said, “Open up your mouth and I will fill it.”

Here is what came out:

“God wants you to know that you are a present-day Esther!”

[She immediately began to cry!]

“God wants to tell you that you are chosen for such a time as this!”

“You are called, and chosen to be a leader.”

“Don't lose heart and don't fear man.”

“The news and naysayers and criticizers are going to be very hateful toward you … and in the days ahead they are going to turn up the heat … but do not fear.”

“You are a present-day Esther.” You are an Esther. You are an Esther!

“Keep your eyes on God and know that He has chosen you to reign!”

“Stay strong ... be strong ... don't tire. Don't be weary in well-doing. Be strong.”

Her husband, Todd, came over, and I told him what I told her. He began to cry.

I emphasized the fact that he was to guard her at this time … and know that “she is God-called and God-anointed.”

“This is a God-thing and your wife is a present-day Esther ... she is for God to use at this time ... she is an Esther ... she is an Esther ... she is an Esther.”

“You will be hated … but stand strong … God has called both of you to stand!”

“We are praying and I am praying for you!”

At this moment, McCain came right to where I was finishing talking to Todd, and I told Mr. McCain exactly what I told to Sarah and Todd Palin.

“Mr. McCain … they are called of God and she is an Esther.”

“Don't lose hope and don't lose heart.”

“We are praying for all of you!”

He shook my hand and with a deep look of understanding what I had just said, he said, “Thank you for your prayers and support ... I really do mean that!”

And he turned and shook more hands … and I watched them as they went through the crowd.

When I got to my car I sat there for quite a long time … knowing the God of the universe had just used me to deliver a message confirming to Sarah and Todd to realize they are truly chosen vessels of God.

I wept. I have not stopped praying and crying. My heart is full knowing they had to have all the staging and all the hype and all the crowd … but the God of heaven and earth … wanted to give them a divine God-appointment!