December 2009

• For some reason, Focus on the Family thought it appropriate to ask Matt Barber and Robert Knight what they think about domestic partnership benefits.  Guess what, they don't like it.
• Stay classy, Pete Hoekstra.
• Has the Right completely forgotten about "shoe-bomber" Richard Reid?  Apparently.
• It seems that just about every day, everything related to Orly Taitz just keeps getting more bizarre.
• Finally, Newt Gingrich has a great suggestion: we should be profiling dangerous people instead of harassing innocent people.  Why didn't somebody think of that before? Maybe next Gingrich could come up with some way of actually telling them apart, since that is kind of the problem.

I've tried to ignore the latest nonsense from Senate candidate Andy Martin and his allegations that Rep. Mark Kirk is gay because, frankly, Martin is a certified nut. 

If I posted on every crazy thing Martin said, this blog would consist of nothing else ... like his claims that Max Baucus is a "habitual sex offender" or that Wikipedia "is a tax-exempt protosocialist scam that seeks to harass Republicans, conservatives and Obama opponents."

But Peter LaBabera doesn't think that Martin is a loon, which is why Martin participated in the Americans for Truth fundraising banquet earlier this year:

David Smith, Executive Director of the Illinois Family Institute, accepted an award on behalf of Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman of the American Family Association (AFA) and American Family Radio. [Wildmon, who is recovering from encephalitis, was the recipient of AFTAH's first annual American Truth Teller Award; his son, AFA President Tim Wildmon, thanked Americans For Truth with a video message played at the banquet.]

Though the AFTAH banquet was not a political event, two candidates seeking statewide office were present. Dan Proft, who is running for Governor in the GOP primary and Andy Martin, who is seeking the Republican Party nomination in the U.S. Senate race, joined pro-family supporters at the AFTAH fundraiser.

So that is why it comes as no surprise that LaBarbera seems to think Martin's claims and antics are perfectly acceptable, even though he doesn't mention him by name:

Do voters have a right to know that their Congressman — especially one that bills himself as “pro-family” — is having adulterous affairs with women? Yes. Do the same voters have a right to know if their Congressman is himself a homosexual — especially since he will likely be voting on “gay”-related legislation predicated on the (false) assumption that homosexuality is a “civil rights” criterion? You bet they do.

In this post-Will & Grace age in which vulgar sodomy jokes are aired uncensored on primetime TV, it is unfair, hypocritical and simply odd to enable homosexual candidates to hide their pet sexual sin behind the “gay” “closet” — or to demand that any questions on the topic are inappropriate. I write this as one who hoped for the defeat of Republican “pro-family” politicians who were exposed as philanderers.

So our question to any candidate around which “gay” rumors are swirling is this:

Are you a homosexual — i.e., or have you practiced homosexual behavior or been in “gay” relationships?

There is no easy way to ask this awkward question, but it is as relevant as asking a candidate rumored to be a cad if he has been faithful to his wife. From a Christian perspective, sexual sin is sexual sin, and the politics of homosexuality and “outing” should not be dictated by the needs and wants of pro-homosexuality advocates or the GLBT Lobby.

The problems and ethical implications of secretly “gay” politicians are also exacerbated by the policy of homosexual activist “outers” who specialize in exposing the homosexuality on only the candidates they regard as hypocritical (read: anti-homosexual-agenda) on homosexual issues. This creates an incentive for covertly homosexual pols to vote pro-”gay” on GLBT legislation because that will lessen the likelihood of an embarrasing [sic] “outing” episode.

This is another reason why voters deserve to know if their representative or potential representative has a conflict of interest on homosexuality issues.

If you are a Republican and you think it’s unfair for homsoexual politicans [sic] to have their homosexuality revealed, here’s three words for you: Mark Foley scandal. As one who monitors the “gay” press, I knew about Foley’s homosexuality years before the page scandal happened — and had GOP leaders not swept that under the rug, perhaps the whole sordid Foley episode could have been avoided, and all its bad consequences for the Republican Party in the 2006 elections.

Any candidate hit with the “gay” question can simply answer my question above. We hope they wouldn’t lie about it, but that seems to have happened with one Republican candidate in Illinois who I sought answers from on the homosexual issue.

I guessing we'll soon see a Dixie Chicks-style backlash against Ted Nugent for his statements, right?

Rocker TED NUGENT isn't a fan of U.S. leader BARACK OBAMA - he thinks the president should be jailed.

The Cat Scratch Fever hitmaker, a fervent Republican, insists America should be ashamed about voting in the Democrat, who took office in January (09).

He tells Royal Flush magazine, "I think that Barack Hussein Obama should be put in jail. It is clear that Barack Hussein Obama is a communist.

"(Former Chinese leader) Mao Tse Tung lives and his name is Barack Hussein Obama. This country should be ashamed. I wanna throw up."

Janet Porter says it is "time to fight for your lives!" and lays out five ways to do so, with numbers 4 and 5 being prayer and fasting, which are necessary because America "made the choice of death last November" and is therefore cursed for electing Barack Obama:

4. Fast. That's right. High octane prayer – a weapon they don't have. Have one more Christmas cookie, and then let God know we're serious about our desperate need for Him to intervene and rescue us from the consequences of our actions. America made the choice of death last November, and as Deuteronomy 30:19 tells us, there are some consequences for such action. They're called curses. The good news is there is a way to break a curse. It's called repentance, which leads me to my next point.

5. Reserve your calendar for May 1, 2010. We're going to meet at the Lincoln Memorial at sunrise for "May Day – A cry to God for a nation in distress." We're not gathering to do cartwheels for the media in hopes that they'll give us a 20-second sound bite. Our goal isn't to impress the Washington elite. We are gathering at our nation's capitol to ask for an audience with the Creator of the universe. As we step out in obedience, following the checklist God gave us in 2 Chronicles 7:14 to humble ourselves, repent and pray, to seek God's face and turn from our wicked ways, it is our hope that God will look down and see enough of a remnant to hear us from heaven, forgive our sins and heal our land.

As we noted a few weeks ago, several Republican members of Congress and other Religious Right activists have already signed on to her "May Day For America" effort to be held at the Lincoln Memorial next year.

• Alan Colmes: The Republican National Committee’s War On Christmas.
• Steve Benen: Mary Matalin's Alternate Universe.
• Box Turtle Bulletin: Focus On the Family Denounces Uganda’s Anti-Gay Bill.
• Media Matters: O Tannen-Mao? The right-wing's White House Christmas tree freak-out.
• Ezra Klein: Republicans try and fail to justify voting for Medicare Part D.
• Think Progress: DeMint Uses Failed Terrorist Bombing To Attack Unions.
• Finally, just when you think the Orly Taitz saga can't get any stranger, it does.

Earlier this year, I wrote a series of posts based upon a widespread right-wing lie alleging that the economic stimulus legislation signed into law by President Obama contained an "anti-Christian" provision that would "usher in a new era of religious censorship" and target Christians for discrimination.  We eventually produced our very first Right Wing Watch In Focus examining the Right's use of this lie in order to generate opposition to President Obama and his agenda.

In short, for weeks, the Right relentlessly claimed that the provision was unconstitutional and discriminatory until finally Sen. Jim DeMint took it up on the Senate floor and forced a vote on an amendment stripping the provision from the legislation - a vote which he lost. And then the Right used that vote to try and generate more outrage while pleading for donations. 

The group that got this whole thing started was the American Center for Law and Justice, which proclaimed at the time that "unless this provision is removed from the final stimulus package, we'll be in federal court challenging this discriminatory measure."

Well, the provision was not removed and the legislation passed and was signed more than ten months ago ... and yet the ACLJ never filed suit, nor has any other Religious Right group so much as mentioned it since its passage.

In essence, this entire charade perfectly encapsulates the method of operation for the Religious Right in 2009 and presumably for years to come:  generate a phony controversy, raise money off that phony controversy, scream and yell about the fact that nobody is taking this phony controversy seriously, make bold threats and declarations regarding this phony controversy, and then move on to generating new phony controversies and starting the entire process all over again.

It looks like singer José Feliciano, who composed and sang the song "Feliz Navidad," was not pleased with the fact that "The Fox and Rice Experience" had turned it turned into the offensively racist "Illegals In My Yard" earlier this month on Human Events, and now the song has been removed and Human Events has apologized:

Grammy-winner Jose Feliciano has gotten an apology after accusing a pair of radio producers of trashing the spirit of Christmas by using his popular holiday song, "Feliz Navidad," for a racist musical spoof about undocumented immigrants.

Feliciano released a statement Wednesday saying that he was "revolted beyond words" and that the song was never meant to be "a vehicle for a political platform of racism and hate."

"When I wrote and composed 'Feliz Navidad,' I chose to sing in both English and Spanish in order to create a bridge between two wonderful cultures during the time of year in which we hope for goodwill toward all," the Puerto Rico-born singer said.

The parody, titled "The Illegal Alien Christmas Song," was created by radio producers and writers Matt Fox and A.J. Rice and was posted in mid-December on the Web site for Human Events, a Washington-based conservative weekly publication founded in 1944.

Web site editor Jed Babbin apologized Wednesday and said the song would be removed from the site. The link to the song's page was no longer available by Thursday.

"We regret any offense that Mr. Feliciano may have taken from this parody," Babbin said in an e-mail sent to The Associated Press.

Interestingly, while the page on Human Events website has been removed, the embeddable audio clip has not:

Back in 1990, Pat Robertson created the American Center for Law and Justice as a right-wing alternative to the American Civil Liberties Union here in the United States.  But over the last two decades, and especially in recent years, the organization has begun focusing on work overseas and opening offices in different countries, creating that European Center for Law and Justice, based in Strasbourg, France, and the Slavic Center for Law and Justice, based in Moscow, Russia.

And now it looks like they are branching out into Africa as well, where the organization intends to play a role in helping draft constitutions in both Zimbabwe and Kenya:

The ACLJ does not take international expansion lightly. In fact, we do not expand unless we are called to. Each of our international offices - France, Russia, Israel, and Pakistan - was formed because the ACLJ was asked to come and help form organizations modeled on the ACLJ-USA. While each country expansion is unique, I wanted to tell you about why we're expanding into Africa, specifically Kenya and Zimbabwe.

Earlier this year, we were asked to accompany a women's ministry to Zimbabwe because the leaders of the ministry felt that our sophisticated legal assistance was needed. If you don't know much about Zimbabwe, know it is sanctioned by the United States, battling AIDS, and in the midst of an economic crisis. When we arrived in Zimbabwe in March, we were greeted warmly by citizens and government leaders. Now, just months after our first trip, we're opening a full-time office in the country's capital.

While our work in Zimbabwe focuses primarily on the country's constitution drafting process, we'll also be providing legal training and legal research facilities to attorneys throughout the country. Of course, one can never forget the hardships faced by the good people of Zimbabwe. We have taken proactive steps to assist orphanages and single mother's centers. In Zimbabwe, our mission is threefold: (1) help train attorneys while working on the draft constitution, (2) promote economic empowerment, and (3) provide humanitarian assistance when we are able. Part of the African Center for Law & Justice's launch in Harare is a neighborhood cleanup project in partnership with the City of Harare.

Our work in Kenya began a very different way. A good friend and pastor from a church in Iowa, who I met during the Iowa caucuses, introduced me to a well-known Bishop from Kenya who was interested in opening an operation similar to ACLJ-USA. Kenya, like Zimbabwe, is also going through a constitution drafting process and this Bishop wanted to make sure that he and the thousands of pastors that are part of his denomination knew how to properly comment on the draft constitution when speaking to their parishioners and the media. Because of Kenya's sizable Muslim population, estimated at about 10 million (roughly 1/4 of Kenya's population), this predominately Christian country is prepared to constitutionalize Kadhis' Courts (Kadhi is Arabic for judge) to handle matters such as family law, inheritance, marriage, and divorce. These would be official, binding courts in Kenya's judiciary.

The Bishop and his fellow pastors have decided to speak out against the constitutionalization of the Sharia Courts and have called on the ACLJ to travel to Kenya to setup a full-time legal and government affairs operation in Nairobi where we'll work with church leaders on this crucial issue.

David Keene, head of the American Conservative Union, which puts on the Conservative Political Action Conference every year, has responded to the complaints from anti-gay activists who are demanded that the gay conservative group GOProud be removed from the list of CPAC co-sponsors, by refusing to do so but assuring them that GOProud will not be allowed to speak at the event and that the CPAC's overwhelmingly anti-gay bias would not be undermined by GOProud's presence: 

Keene admitted GOProud "has signed on as a CPAC co-sponsor, but will have no speakers and we told them that, in fact, since opposition to gay marriage, etc are consensus positions (if not unanimous) among conservatives, these topics are not open to debate." 

...

"I know that there are those who are as opposed to the sinner as the sin, but our view is that CPAC is inclusive and welcomes all of those who agree with us on most issues. I don't know the GOProud people personally, but we find it difficult to exclude groups because of disagreements on one or two issues no matter how important many of us believe those issues to be … other examples: we have pro-life and pro-abortion co-sponsors, advocates of restrictive and more open immigration, supporters and opponents of the war in Afghanistan and supporters and opponents of some of the restrictions adopted in the war on terror since 9/11," he continued.

"Some of these issues draw significant support on both sides of the question from the broad movement and these we often debate at CPAC … trade policy, immigration are example … while others like abortion are consensus positions and while we accept those who differ from the consensus, we see no reason for further debate. Gay issues fall within this category," he said.

Of course, anti-gay activists aren't buying it and instead see it as proof that the conservative movement is being infiltrated by socialists:

"I would have thought the American Conservative Union would have had a higher standard for groups that cosponsor their pivotal annual event," [radio host Adam] McManus told WND. "If there's one time when conservatives need to be getting their message right and need to be clear about what they believe, it's right now amidst the Obama socialist push."

• Box Turtle Bulletin: Ugandan Pastors Demand Apology from Rick Warren.
• Steve Benen: Steele's Sweet Racket.
• Alex Koppelman: NRCC scrubs ads attacking party switcher.
• Timothy Kincaid: Your Humble Grinch.
• Think Progress: World Net Daily poll on what to get Obama for Christmas: an ‘arrest warrant’ and a ‘ticket back to Kenya.’
• Americans United: Falwell Lawyer Serves Up Heaping Helping Of Holiday Humbug.

Writing in The Weekly Standard, Gary Bauer complains that the lack of a "backlash" against Muslims in America is leading to more terrorist attacks:

It has been more than a month since U.S. Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly murdered 14 people and wounded 30 others at Fort Hood military base in Texas. And while we were led to believe that the rampage by Hasan, who is Muslim, would provoke a strong and violent reaction against Arab and Muslim Americans, a backlash has been conspicuous only by its absence.

In fact, in the immediate aftermath of each of the dozen attacks by Muslim Americans since 9-11, the conversation has been dominated by predictions of inevitable violence toward Muslims by bigoted Americans unable to control their rage. And each time a backlash has been virtually nonexistent. Our journalistic and political elites have become terrorism's unwitting domestic enablers, perceiving religion-based violence where there is none, while ignoring it where it is widespread and intensifying.

...

A Rasmussen poll immediately after the Fort Hood massacre found that a majority of Americans were at least somewhat concerned that the shooting would prompt a backlash against Muslims in the military. They needn't have been concerned. Since 9-11, every Muslim terrorist attack on American soil has been followed not by a violent backlash, but by outreach and conciliation toward Muslim Americans. And then by more attacks--by radical Islamists. Instead of fretting about a nonexistent backlash against Muslims, perhaps we should be examining more closely what is happening on radical Islamic websites and in some U.S. prisons, mosques, and Islamic schools that is causing increasing numbers of young American Muslims to embrace jihad against their neighbors.

Apparently, Bauer thinks that America needs a backlash against Muslims if we want to stop terrorism, since the lack of any such backlash is what is leading to more attacks.

Back in June, a new right-wing supergroup was formed.  Known as The Freedom Federation, the coalition paired several established Religious Right groups with various several lesser known organizations in an effort to unify the movement for greater political gain.

In August, the coalition announced its opposition to health care reform, but that was the last we had heard of them, until today when it announced, again, that it still opposes health care reform (note also the inclusion of Lou Engle in the press release.  It seems as if Engle is now a bona fide Religious Right political leader): 

Mathew Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, remarked: "Abortion is not healthcare. The Senate bill forces the American people to conspire with the federal government in murdering innocent children. This is morally unacceptable."

Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, Hispanic National Association of Evangelicals, said: "We vehemently and unequivocally oppose any and all healthcare legislation that funds abortion directly or indirectly, explicitly or implicitly without exception. Abortion is not health care. We oppose any and all legislation, language or compromise that surrenders this core value on the altar of political expediency. Any and all statements, endorsements or commentaries outside the canopy of the aforementioned commitment hereby stand rectified. As an organization serving 25,434 congregations, we seek to facilitate a multi-ethnic firewall against the Spirit of Herod and the Culture of Death. Once again, we say to Senator Reid and the leadership in the Senate -- Life cannot be compromised."

Deacon Keith Fournier, Editor in Chief, Catholic Online, said: "Abortion is the taking of innocent human life. Killing is not - and will never be - health care. It is always and everywhere wrong to kill our innocent neighbors. To use federal funds to do so is an egregious violation of fundamental human rights and must never be considered healthcare."

Tony Perkins, President of Family Research Council, commented: "A federal government run health care system will create a nationwide abortion network funded by government dollars resulting in the greatest abortion expansion since Roe v. Wade. Senators Ben Nelson and Robert Casey gave mere lip service to protecting the most innocent among us by placing their stamp of approval on government funding for abortion coverage in direct conflict with longstanding policy. I ask them to reverse course."

Lou Engle, Founder and President of The Call to Conscience, said: "The shedding of the blood of our most innocent citizens, the unborn, can never be a solution to the great social problems of our day. We reject and renounce Sen. Reid's bill being pushed through the Senate, including Sen. Casey's and Sen. Nelson's compromised amendments."

To follow-up on our post from yesterday about the revelation that Lou Engle and Sam Brownback were roommates for seven months, Bruce Wilson has now posted the video of Engle explaining how it came about - we've edited Wilson's video down just to highlight Engle's Brownback connection:

Watch Wilson's entire video here:

As we head into the last days of 2009, we are doing some end-of-the-year fundraising so we can keep going strong as we prepare to keep tracking, exposing, and fighting the Right in 2010. 

So, in honor of that effort, here is a look back at the ten most popular Right Wing Watch posts of 2009:

1. God Commands You To Kill Gays

2. Sally Kern's Proclamation for Morality

3. Terry Declares That Tiller "Reaped What He Sowed," Then Asks If Someone Will Buy Him Lunch

4. Rep. Trent Franks Declares President Obama an "Enemy of Humanity"

5. Putting "Christ" In Your Christmas Tree. Literally.

6. Virginia GOP Chair goes all Cro-Magnon on Darwin, on his birthday

7. Robertson: Will Hate Crimes Protect Someone Who "Likes to Have Sex With Ducks"?

8. Wiley Drake Prays For Obama's Death

9. The Religious Right's New Demand: Stop Calling Us the Religious Right

10. Halloween is Satan's Holy Day and Candy Is How Demons Steal Your Soul!

It is your support that makes it possible for us to do this work and help turn stories such as these into national news. Please considering making a donation today, so that we can go into 2010 prepared for the battles that lay ahead.

• Not surprisingly, right-wing groups are not happy with Sen. Ben Nelson or the Senate's health care bill.
• On a related note, Mike Huckabee headlined a hastily organized anti-health care reform rally in Nebraska where he compared Sen. Nelson to Judas.
• Ralph Reed has big plans for his Faith and Freedom Coalition as he launches its Georgia chapter.
• Dick Cheney has been named Human Events' "Conservative of the Year." What an honor.
• On a similar note, I can't wait to find out who will win Peter LaBarbera's "Gay Grinch of the Year Award."
• Finally, anti-choice groups are outraged that activist Lila Rose was supposedly "attacked" by a Planned Parenthood, though said "attack" seems to have consisted of having anti-choice literature knocked out of her hand.

While researching the Religious Right's newest start Lou Engle and his ties to the International House of Prayer which, as we noted last week, had recently canceled classes due to an outpouring of the Holy Spirit, I discovered something I had not known: namely, that Engle has a prayer house located right in Washington, DC known as the Justice House of Prayer, which is also the headquarters of Bound for Life:

In the Fall of 2004, the Lord led Lou Engle and a group of young people to fast and pray in our nation’s capitol with a focus on the upcoming elections and for righteousness and justice to be established in America’s government. The prayer mobilized before the elections soon became ongoing prayer for the ending of abortion and the reformation of our society. Since that time people of all ages continue the unending cry for justice and mercy in JHOP DC.

Our hope is for Jesus Christ to become the “desired of the nation.” We have faith for the reformation of society through revival and spiritual awakening. In the meantime, we contend in fasting and prayer in the cultural gate of America against false ideologies that are destructive to our nation and families.

Strategically located only a couple blocks away from the Supreme Court and the Capitol Building, JHOP DC facilitates training and corporate prayer and fasting through young adult internships and a network of local intercessors. While other interns in DC are learning the trade of government, our interns are learning the trade of governing through prayer. Luke 18 gives us a mandate to never give up in night and day prayer for justice. This draws us near the heart of God in His great desire to release justice in the earth and ultimately the return of Jesus–the Just One.

In addition, JHOP DC is the birthplace and headquarters for Bound4LIFE, a wide-spread grass roots prayer movement aimed at the ending of abortion, the increase of adoptions and the reformation of government and society through spiritual awakening.

I also discovered this Nightline segment from 2005 on Engle's DC-based prayer network that profiles the young men and women who have taken up the call to pray non-stop for the Supreme Court and our nation's government to end abortion:

Be sure to also check out this "mini-documentary" on JHOP uploaded to YouTube earler this year:

Keep in the mind that the man responsible for this has, in recent months, become one of the most influential Religious Right leaders in America, regularly rubbing shoulders with (and occasionally placing hands upon) current and former Republican members of Congress.

A few months ago we wrote a post about Wallbuilders' David Barton seemingly suggesting that he was a "professor" despite the fact that his academic credentials consist entirely of a "B.A. from Oral Roberts University and an Honorary Doctorate of Letters from Pensacola Christian College."

Now Bob Vander Plaats, the Republican candidate for governor in Iowa, is touting the fact that he received Barton's endorsement with an announcement containing a link to a radio interview with "Dr. Barton":

Nationally known author and political activist David Barton has endorsed Sioux City Republican Bob Vander Plaats in the 2010 Iowa gubernatorial race.

"I’m incredibly excited to have David’s backing because he has such a deep base of supporters across our state. I know several candidates and potential candidates have sought his support because he commands tremendous respect and attention. Having him in our corner will be another crucial tool to motivate and mobilize grassroots Iowans next year," Vander Plaats said.

Barton was recognized by Time magazine in 2005 as "One of the 25 Most Influential Evangelicals" in the United States. He is the founder and president of the Aledo, Texas-based group WallBuilders, an organization which presents "America's forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on the moral, religious, and constitutional foundation on which America was built."

"Bob Vander Plaats epitomizes the leadership our Founding Fathers envisioned when they stood up for our individual liberties," Barton said in a prepared statement. "He knows that it’s the hard work and unfettered creative spirit of individuals made this country and states like Iowa great. He knows that more bureaucracies, more government employees, higher taxes and increased government spending will crush Iowa. And, he’ll articulate that message in winning fashion."

A former vice chairman of the Texas Republican Party and a consultant to the Republican National Committee on outreach to evangelical voters, Barton has been praised by U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback for providing "the philosophical underpinning for a lot of the Republican effort in the country today."

Barton, who speaks to well over 400 groups each year across the country, is the author of numerous best-selling books. His subjects are drawn largely from his massive library of tens of thousands of original writings from the Founding Era. His exhaustive research has led to recognition as an expert in historical and constitutional issues. As a result, he serves as a consultant to state and federal legislators, has participated in several U.S. Supreme Court cases, was involved in the development of the history and social studies standards for states such as Texas and California, and has helped produce history textbooks now used in schools across the nation.

Click here to listen to Dr. Barton’s interview on WHO Radio.

As you may have noticed by the pop-up donation page that has begun showing up, we're doing a bit of end-of-the-year fundraising to support the work we do here at Right Wing Watch.

The Right is both consolidating and branching out at a remarkable pace heading into the 2010 elections, so we are going to have our work cut out for us in monitoring and analyzing just where they are heading, what they are doing, and what it all means in the year ahead.

Your donations are vital to that effort, so if you like and appreciate the work we are doing here and want to do your part in helping us fight the Right, please consider making a donation.

• Fresh out of prison, James Traficant is eyeing another run for office.
• Peggy Noonan laments "the Adam Lambert problem," whatever that is.
• Rand Paul's spokesman has resigned over racist images he posted on his MySpace page.
• Mike Huckabee says "Who cares what Chris Matthews thinks?"
• Finally, recall how earlier this week we predicted that the story about a young boy being suspended from school for drawing a picture of Jesus on the cross was going to become a standard horror story for the Right, even though it was true?  Well, case in point.

When Lou Engle is not overseeing right-wing "prayercasts" and rubbing elbows with Republican members of Congress, he is affiliated with the International House of Prayer in Kansas City, which is essentially a 24/7/365 version of one of his The Call prayer rallies.

A few weeks ago, we wrote about the fact that IHOP had canceled classes for several days because the Holy Spirit had descended on the campus and thousands of people were experiencing miraculous healings and spiritual re-awakenings.

Now CBN has produced this segment on the Holy Spirit outpouring in question:

As we reported a few weeks back, anti-gay activists in Texas had mobilized in an effort to defeat gay Houston mayoral candidate Annise Parker but failed.

Via Alan Colmes, we get this story from ABC 13 in Houston of what happened on election night when Eric Story, a supporter of one of Parker's opponents, lead the gathering in prayer and said they could not stand idly by and allow Parker's lifestyle to become accepted and warned that Houston was going to come under God's judgment: 

Last night, Colmes had Story, who is himself running for Congress, on his radio program to defend his position.  Story insisted that Parker had "flaunted" her lifestyle, a lifestyle that is "contrary to God's word."  He went on to insist America is a "Christian nation" and declared that he would "never be accepting of this lifestyle" and that nobody who is gay could ever be a good role model because, again, "it is contrary to God's word."

He likewise defended his statement that when any society becomes supportive of the gay lifestyle, God renders judgment upon it and warned that God would do so to Houston.  Then, for some reason, Story blamed Fox News for the fact that voters in Houston didn't know that Parker was gay.

The interview then got even more bizarre when Colmes quoted Story as saying that "when a city or a state or a nation accepts the homosexual lifestyle, history tells us that destruction follows, that judgment follows" to which Story strenuously objected because Colmes mistakenly quoted him as saying "holy judgment follows."  Apparently the fact that Colmes added "holy" to the quote was greatly offensive to Story, even though Story readily admitted that that is exactly what he meant and exactly what he believes will happen to Houston, which he likened to Sodom and Gomorrah:

Gary Bauer writes that Jews are under attack here in America and seems to think that the best way to stem anti-Semitism is for more people to become Christians:

It is true that the citizens of the U.S. are more pious than those of many European countries, where the decline of faith has been much reported. Still, in the U.S., legal attacks on Christmas have become as much of the tradition as the holiday itself, and church attendance among American youths has reached all time lows. Those are only a few of the signs of declining faith ... America’s secular momentum coincides with an increase in persecution of American Jews. The Federal Bureau of Investigation recently released 2008 hate crimes statistics showing that 65.7 percent of religion-motivated hate crimes were anti-Jewish. There were 1,013 cases of hate crimes motivated by anti-Semitism last year, the most since 2001.

...

Theologically, Christians believe God came into this world through the Jewish people and that the Jewish faith is the foundation of all that was to come. That God has directed Christians to love His people is a great counter weight to increasing anti-Semitism in the U.S ... Christians and Jews have also reached an important time in their relationships with one another. In an increasingly hostile world, Christians and Jews must stand together to defend against attacks on Judeo-Christian values. It is a friendship as old as Abraham, as new as a baby in a manger.

And since when did members of the Religious Right start caring about hate crimes?  I thought all crimes were hate crimes and it didn't matter what the race or religion or sexual orientation was of the victim.

Apparently Bauer only believes that hate crimes laws "are neither necessary nor constitutionally authorized" when it comes to sexual orientation.

Rachel Maddow expertly summarizes the recent anti-health care reform "prayercast":

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

• FRC's Peter Sprigg stands by his organizations attacks on Kevin Jennings.
• The Rutherford Institute stands by its claims regarding a student in Taunton, MA who was supposedly suspended for drawing a picture of Jesus.
• The Alliance Defense Fund announces that it will appeal a court ruling against a business that refused to photograph the commitment ceremony of a same-sex couple in New Mexico.
• Fox News appears to be getting a bit sensitive about its hosts close ties to gold retailers.
• Rep. Michele Bachmann has been dropped by her fundraising firm.
• Finally, Franklin Graham stands by his views that Islam is "a very evil and wicked religion."

In yesterday's post on Rod Parsley's desperate plea for financial support, we mentioned that part of his financial crisis stemmed from the fact that he recently had to pay a $3.1 million settlement to the family of a young boy who was injured by a substitute teacher while attending day care at Parsley's World Harvest Church (WHC).

Parsley's claim that the settlement was part of a "demonically inspired financial attack" being carried out against him by the Devil becomes even more outrageous if you read the court decision in question.

As Richard Bartholomew pointed out, the court decision [PDF] makes for grim reading.

WHC had employed a man named Richard Vaughan to perform various tasks at the school and "although Vaughan was not a licensed teacher and never had a job that required him to work with young children, WHC assigned Vaughan the task of supervising young children, usually placing him in the 'Extended Care' program for children in Kindergarten through sixth grade."

In late October 2005, when Vaughan was alone and in charge of the "Cuddle Care" classroom, a three year-old boy suffered a skull fracture:

According to Z.C.'s mother, when she picked up Z.C. from the Cuddle Care classroom at approximately 6:00 p.m. on October 13, 2005, he was waiting anxiously for her at the classroom door with his left eye swollen shut, his nose draining, and his face red and puffy. Vaughan, the only adult in the room, was not consoling Z.C. and did not offer Z.C.'s mother any explanation regarding Z.C.'s condition. When Z.C.'s mother asked Vaughan what had happened to Z.C., Vaughan hesitantly told her another boy, E.Y., had pushed Z.C. She asked Vaughan if anyone had paperwork or documentation regarding the incident, but he replied "no." When she told Vaughan that she needed to take Z.C. to Children's Hospital, Vaughan told her repeatedly that Z.C. was "fine." Over Vaughan's protestations, she took Z.C. to Children's Hospital, where he was diagnosed with a fractured skull and concussion and was held overnight for observation.

The ruling stated that "Vaughan's trial testimony regarding the incident was inconsistent both with previous accounts he gave and with the testimony of other witnesses" and that nobody from WHC even inquired about any injuries supposedly suffered by the other child (E.Y.) and that "E.Y.'s father insisted his son had not collided with Z.C. and had not been injured in any incident with Z.C."

Importantly, that is not the incident that cost Parsley $3 million, but was rather cited in the case as proof of WHC's negligence and liability for the subsequent injuries to another child at Vaughan's hands a few months later:

WHC conducted no investigation of the incident, did not make further inquiries of Vaughan concerning the matter, did not provide him with further training to prevent serious injury from occurring to another child, and, most importantly, did not change how it supervised Vaughan after the incident. Approximately three months later, the very next time WHC permitted Vaughan to be alone with the young children in the Cuddle Care classroom, Vaughan physically abused A.F.

The situation involving A.F. is even more disturbing: 

Shortly before 6:00 p.m., Michael Faieta picked up his daughter and then picked up A.F. in their respective classrooms. A.F. was in the Cuddle Care classroom alone with Vaughan, who had taken over for the afternoon teacher sometime after 4:00 p.m. According to Mr. Faieta, A.F. was anxious and upset, his eyes were red, and he clung to his father's side as his belongings were gathered. Vaughan did not give Mr. Faieta any paperwork or say that A.F. had experienced any problems that day, and he did not indicate he had seen any sort of rash or other marks on A.F.'s body.

Upon their using the restroom on the way out of the building, Mr. Faieta observed the numerous fresh cuts, welts, and red marks on A.F.'s back, buttocks and thighs. The marks were linear and consistent with being hit with a ruler. In the car on the way home approximately an hour later, A.F. told his father that Vaughan had "spanked" him with a "knife." At home, upon being shown pictures of various objects, A.F. pointed to a ruler as the object used to "spank" him. After A.F.'s mother, Lacey Faieta, arrived home and looked at the marks on A.F., she spoke with their pediatrician and the police, who advised her to take A.F. to Children's Hospital. The emergency physicians at Children's Hospital found A.F.'s injuries to be consistent with physical abuse, and the matter was forwarded to Franklin County Children Services ("FCCS") and the Columbus Police Department ("CPD") for investigation.

When A.F's parents tried to find out what happened to their son, WHC threatened to have them arrested for tresspassing if they stepped foot on campus again: 

When, however, Lacey Faieta returned to WHC two days later and attempted to meet and discuss the matter with Jack Johnson, WHC's headmaster, he refused, telling her he had been advised not to speak with the Faietas. The next week WHC sent the Faietas a letter ordering them not to come on the property and threatening them with criminal prosecution for trespass if they returned to the school. The letter contained no exceptions and provided the Faietas with no means to schedule any further meetings with WHC personnel. The Faietas received no further communication from WHC.

This year, Parsley had to cut a check to the Faieta's for the injuries their child suffered at his World Harvest Church ... and Parsley cites it as proof that the Devil has released a "demonically inspired assault against us."

Pastor Jim Garlow explains how health care reform legislation violates just about every one of the Ten Commandments: 

Rep. Randy Forbes, Tony Perkins, and Lou Engle discuss the importance of prayer in shaping public policy, after which Engle leads the gathering in prayer:

• Guess who is co-sponsoring the next CPAC? The John Birch Society.
• Alan Colmes: FCC Chief Diversity Officer Blames “Right-Wing Smear Campaign” For Death Threats.
• David Weigel: Nervous About Health Care, Tea Partiers Look to 2010.
• Andy Birkey: Is candidate Quist still the religious right candidate?
• Steve Benen: Die-In Struggles to Come to Life.
• Media Matters: Jawa Report calls for "ass kicking" of Jennings defenders.
• Hanna Rosin: One of the great ironies of Oral Roberts' life was that he could not heal his own broken hip.
• Finally, Stephen Colbert and the "The Blitzkrieg on Grinchitude":

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Blitzkrieg on Grinchitude - Treesus & CHRIST-mas Tree
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor U.S. Speedskating

You know, I must be stupid because I have absolutely no idea what is going on in this Catholic League press release:

Catholic League president Bill Donohue speaks to the Omnibus Spending Bill just passed by the Senate:

The Congress is now officially on record approving a bill that tells mothers in Washington, D.C. that if they decide to take their baby to term, and elect to send their child to a private school—just like the one that President Obama and his wife have chosen for their own children—they can do it on their own dime: the successful voucher scholarship program that 1,700 poor kids were enrolled in is now dead. But if these same mothers decide to abort their babies, the same government will rush to pay their bills.

Most of those affected are black. The bill will soon be signed into law by America’s first black president. Is there anyone so stupid not to understand what is going on?

President Obama hates school vouchers? Or black babies? Or mothers of black babies who might one day use school vouchers?

I'm utterly confused.

Earlier this week, we noted that tonight The Family Research Council would be holding a special anti-healthcare reform "prayercast" this evening featuring several Republican members of Congress, including Rep. Michele Bachmann and Sen. Jim DeMint, as well as Religious Right activists like Lou Engle and Harry Jackson.

Today, FRC announced that the event had picked up several new Focus on the Family participants, including James and Shirley Dobson, as well as FOF President Jim Daly:

Tonight, Wednesday, December 16, 2009 at 8:30 pm ET, Family Research Council Action, The Call to Conscience and Focus on the Family Action will host a special one hour webcast that will mobilize thousands of Christians and churches to join in corporate prayer over the health care overhaul bill. Family Research Council Action President Tony Perkins will be joined by Congressional leaders, prominent pastors, and policy experts to discuss and pray over significant concerns within the bill that will have far reaching consequences for the Christian community and our society.

FRC Action President Tony Perkins made the following comments:

"Life and death hinges on the Senate health care bill. We face significant threats to the God-given right to human life through government funding of abortions, our health from rationing, our family finances from higher taxes, and our general freedoms posed by the government plan to take over health care.

"There have been a number of critical hours in American history. Our nation has struggled mightily and, under God, always risen to the challenges before us. Tonight, we will face this moral crisis by taking action and obeying the Biblical mandate to pray for our nation and its leaders."

Who:
Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council Action
Lou Engle, Founder and President, The Call to Conscience
Jim Daly, President, Focus on the Family Action
Dr. James Dobson, Founder, Focus on the Family Action
Shirley Dobson, National Day of Prayer Task Force Chairman
Hon. Sam Brownback, United States Senator, Kansas
Hon. Jim DeMint, United States Senator, South Carolina
Hon. Randy Forbes, United States House of Representatives, Virginia
Hon. Michele Bachmann, United States House of Representatives, Minnesota
Bishop Harry Jackson, President, High Impact Leadership Coalition
Pastor Jim Garlow, Skyline Church, San Diego, Calif.
Reverend Samuel Rodriguez, President, National Hispanic Leadership Conference

Earlier this year, GOProud, a new gay conservative group, appeared on the scene intent on finding ways to sell the conservative agenda to gays. 

Their approach has been to eschew the "traditional" gay issues like hate crimes protections or the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in favor arguing that healthcare reform would be bad for gays, that "the inheritance tax is really a gay tax," or claiming that the best way to stop hate crimes is to expand gun ownership.

But GOProud does also support things like marriage equality and the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell ... and for that reason the Religious Right's professional anti-gay activists at Americans for Truth and the Liberty Counsel are now threatening to boycott the annual CPAC conference if GOProud is allowed to serve as an official co-sponsor:

Folks, for years religious conservatives have been complaining about getting the shaft from CPAC, the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. There is usually only a token panel or two dealing with “Culture War” social issues like abortion and homosexuality (and rarely one explicitly on fighting the “gay” agenda) – as organizers seek to appease the CPAC libertarians, some of whom support goals like homosexual “marriage” that are anathema to socially conservatives.

Now CPAC’s tenuous ”Big Tent” could collapse altogether as social conservatives led by Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber threaten to launch a boycott of the conference (scheduled for Feb. 18-20, 2010) unless CPAC drops a homosexual activist group, GOProud, as a co-sponsor. Barber, my good friend, an AFTAH Board Member, and the Director of Cultural Affairs at Liberty Counsel, is leading the charge to keep the CPAC sponsorship list … conservative.

...

It boils down to this: there is nothing “conservative” about — as Barber inimitably puts it — “one man violently cramming his penis into another man’s lower intestine and calling it ‘love.’” Or two women awkwardly mimicking natural procreative relations or raising a child together in an intentionally fatherless home. This does not mean that people practicing those and other immoral (and changeable) behaviors cannot think and act conservatively on other issues like lowering taxes, cutting government spending, ending abortion, etc. But let’s be honest: the “proud” in GOProud is not about pride in opposing the death tax, or defending the right to bear arms; it’s about proudly embracing sinful homosexual behavior – and that is hardly a conservative value.

I challenge every thinking conservative to explain why we should jettison our nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage (which clearly rejects homosexual acts as immoral) for some new, secularized brand of “conservatism” that fails to conserve natural, normal, and noble sex within God-ordained marriage. Where does the expansion of “conservatism” stop? Would CPAC welcome “Republicans for Abortion” as a co-sponsor? How about “Conservatives For Higher Taxes”? We doubt it. So let’s stop the double-standard on one issue — homosexuality — that happens to be politically incorrect in this decadent age.

The American Family Association is also voicing its opposition:

Bryan Fischer is director of issues analysis for the American Family Association and host of the radio program Focal Point with Bryan Fischer. He says CPAC chairman David Keene and CPAC organizers have a serious problem on their hands.

"The bottom line is that homosexuality is not a conservative value," Fischer states emphatically. "There are any number of co-sponsoring organizations that I believe are going to have a real problem with the fact that they are giving such a prominent place to an organization which is such an active proponent of gay rights."

"And it's GOProud, they're identifying themselves with the Republican Party...and yet their legislative agenda is directly contrary to the platform of the Republican Party."

As I wrote last year, though there is significant overlap, those who attend the CPAC conference have distinctly different priorities from those who attend the strictly Religious Right conferences like the Values Voter Summit.

It'll be interesting to see how CPAC organizers managed to handle this controversy.  I'm guessing that GOProud will eventually "voluntarily" withdraw their sponsorship.

• The National Organization For Marriage declares war after the DC Council passes marriage equality legislation while Bishop Harry Jackson says they have an "airtight legal case" for getting the issue put to a vote.
• The Tulsa Word remembers Oral Roberts, who passed away today at the age of 91.
• Janet Porter is trying to get a movie made about herself.  Seriously.
• Mat Staver says that the custody fight between Janet Jenkins and Lisa Miller is nothing more than an effort to claim a "political trophy [for] the homosexual agenda."
• Ralph Reed's Faith and Freedom Coalition announces that it is launching a "campaign to defeat [the] health care bill in U.S. Senate."
• Finally, the Christian Defense Coalition held a "pray-in" at Senator Robert Casey's office this afternoon to let him know that he "cannot make the claim that [he is] pro-life" if he votes for cloture on the healthcare reform legislation.

Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council has some "serious questions" about Nevada's decision to allow males to work in brothels - namely, shouldn't they be required to have sex with men?

This does not mean that there has never been homosexual prostitution in Nevada. The female prostitutes have long been free to accept either male or female clients, according to the report, and male prostitutes will have the same right.

This raises serious questions about gender equity, however. If a Christian psychologist or a fertility doctor is not free to turn away a homosexual client for fear of “discrimination” charges, how can a homosexual male prostitute be allowed to turn away a female client? Isn’t that discrimination, too? On the other hand, if you require them to take all clients, then maybe that would effectively mean that only bisexuals can work as prostitutes in Nevada. Wouldn’t that be discrimination, too?

Such are thickets in which the sexual revolution and political correctness entrap us. In the meantime, if you want to know how to get to Las Vegas—just climb in a handbasket and travel toward the heat as far as you can go.

If you were worrying that the Right might be running out of subjects from which it could gin up phony controversies, rest assured that they are always hard at work coming up with new, innovative, and ridiculous scandals ... like the idea that in accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, President Obama violated the Constitution:

Last Thursday, Barack Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize Oslo, Norway. He is the third sitting president, after Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt, to win the award. While controversy swirled around the award being granted to a wartime president, Matthew Spalding with The Heritage Foundation is concerned about the constitutionality of Obama's acceptance of the Nobel Prize. 

A clause in Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states: "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office or Trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state." That raises a question: Is the Nobel Peace Prize an "Emolument" -- a gift arising from one's office which includes some sort of monetary award with it?

Spalding, director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at The Heritage Foundation, says since the award is technically the property of the United States, Obama has under 60 days to turn the award over to the appropriate authorities for proper disposal.

"The Commission, the group that gives out the Nobel Prize, is actually appointed by the Parliament of Norway, which is [to] say that it's connected with a foreign state. This makes it very interesting," the Heritage scholar notes. "In 1993, President Clinton's own Office of Legal Counsel said that it didn't have to be a foreign state acting in a formal way, but could be, rather, indirect. [This] seems to be a perfect example of what the Nobel Prize is -- and the Founders put this clause in the Constitution precisely to make sure that foreign states didn't unwarrantedly influence American domestic politics."

Spalding believes the Nobel Prize Commission intended to give the award to a president who had not yet accomplished anything, in hopes of encouraging him to do certain things in the future.

And for the record, "emolument" means "salary, wages and benefits paid for employment or an office held," not "gift".  

Even though Janet Porter believes that President Obama's government is planning on rounding up conservatives and send them off to internment camps as part of a plot to commit mass genocide against Americans through the swine flu vaccine, she still manages to get Republican and conservative leaders to appear at her gatherings and on her radio program.

Yesterday it was Mike Huckabee, who appeared on the program to hawk his latest book. Despite her radical views, it's not really all that surprising that Huckabee would join Porter on her program considering that he was a keynote speaker at her How To Take Back America conference earlier this year and that he had tapped her to serve as the co-chair of his presidential campaign's Faith and Family Values Coalition.

Porter opened the program with a lengthy defense of Huckabee's handling of the Maurice Clemmons clemency case that was based almost entirely on Huckabee's own defense, which seemed rather odd until you remember that Porter believes Huckabee to be the "David among Jesse's sons" that they have been longing to place in the White House.

In fact, Porter told Huckabee that they ought to have another Values Voter Debate to highlight his standing as the chosen one and keep voters from supporting "candidates of compromise" like they did during the last election.  

Porter and Huckabee then took some calls from listeners.  The first questioned Huckabee's past statements about the Rifqa Bary case, to which replied that he is now much better informed thanks to people like Mat Staver and John Stemberger and is now "very sympathetic" to her case. 

The second caller questioned Huckabee's membership in the Council on Foreign Relations, which has always figured heavily in right-wing conspiracy theories, and Huckabee assured the caller that he has "never been affiliated in any way" with CFR , to which Porter replied "that's encouraging to know":

• Pam's House Blend: Video of Annise Parker's speech after winning her bid to become Houston's first out mayor.
• AMERICAblog: Reporter fired for unprofessional anti-gay outburst now the latest cause celebre for the religious right.
• Box Turtle Bulletin: Manhattan Declaration Authors Criticize Aspects of Uganda’s “Kill Gays” Bill.
• News Hounds: Hannity's Studio Audience Wants Obama Charged With Treason.
• RH Reality Check: "Crushing Student Loan Debt" Doubles as Birth Control, Says Conservative.
• Finally, David Weigel on the GOP's creeping Birtherism.

Last week we mentioned the situation in North Carolina where conservatives are threatening to sue in an effort to keep an atheist out of office, citing the state Constitution:

When Mr. [Cecil] Bothwell was sworn into office on Monday, he used an alternate oath that does not require officials to swear on a Bible or refer to “Almighty God.”

That has riled conservative advocates, who cite a little-noticed quirk in North Carolina’s Constitution that disqualifies officeholders “who shall deny the being of Almighty God.” The provision was included when the document was drafted in 1868 and was not revised when North Carolina amended its Constitution in 1971.

One opponent, H. K. Edgerton, is threatening to file suit against the city to challenge Mr. Bothwell’s swearing in. “My father was a Baptist minister,” Mr. Edgerton said. “I’m a Christian man. I have problems with people who don’t believe in God.” Mr. Edgerton is a local civil rights leader and founder of Southern Heritage 411, an organization that promotes the interests of black Southerners.

David Morgan, the head of a conservative weekly newspaper, The Asheville Tribune, said city officials had shirked their duty to uphold the state’s laws by swearing in Mr. Bothwell.

The Supreme Court already ruled unanimously against such religious test provisions back in 1961 in a case out of Maryland:

We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person "to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs ... This Maryland religious test for public office unconstitutionally invades the appellant's freedom of belief and religion and therefore cannot be enforced against him.

But Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association, while not mentioning the Bothwell case specifically, doesn't seem to a) care or b) be aware of the Court's ruling and says that such restrictions are perfectly constitutional:

Our secular fundamentalist friends are fond of citing Article VI of our Constitution as proof that this foundational document is non-religious in nature. It reads, ""but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

It's worthy of note that this applies only to federal offices, for the prior clause makes it clear that the Founders were distinguishing between the federal government - "the United States" - and the legislatures of the individual states, which are referred to as "the several State Legislatures." Both are included in the previous phrase, "all executive Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution." (emphasis mine)

This makes it clear that while officers at both the state and federal level were required to support the Constitution, the restriction on the application of a "religious Test" was reserved for officials in the federal government. States were left to apply explicitly religious tests if they chose, and most did.

Almost all states required holders of public office to declare a belief in God, and many went beyond that to require a belief in the inspiration of both the Old and New Testaments, which in effect limited public service to self-professing Christians. This was just fine with the Founders, who wanted the states to have complete liberty in such matters.

But they were also clear that no religious test was to be applied as a condition of public service at the federal level. What the Founders meant by this, however, was this and this alone: an individual did not need to belong to a particular Christian denomination to be eligible for federal office. That's it.

Of course, we already knew that Fisher had some rather unique views regarding the First Amendment and the separation of church and state and doesn't think that Muslims should be allowed to serve in the military.

Last week, Media Matters ran this piece exposing the views of Lord Christopher Monckton:

Media Matters Action Network, our partner organization, has unearthed a 1987 American Spectator article in which Lord Christopher Monckton -- one of the right's favorite global warming deniers -- advocates requiring the entire population to undergo monthly HIV tests and forcibly quarantining "for life" those who test positive.

You would think that such views would have made Monckton a marginal figure. But apparently there are no views too extreme for the right-wing media.

On October 23, for instance, Glenn Beck said on his Fox News show that Monckton is "one of the world's foremost authorities on what the global warming hoax is really all about and what they are about to sign over in Copenhagen."

Monckton appeared as a guest throughout Beck's October 30 Fox show. Beck introduced Monckton by saying: "With me now, Lord Christopher Monckton, former adviser to British prime minister, Margaret Thatcher and climate change expert."

On October 19, Rush Limbaugh described Monckton as "a voice of sanity," saying, "The hysteria on the left on virtually everything is all over the place. So you got to hear a voice of sanity in this. Last Wednesday, St. Paul, Minnesota, during a presentation at Bethel University, a portion of remarks made by Lord Christopher Monckton regarding the United Nations' climate change treaty."

Allow me to just remind everyone that Mike Huckabee said more or less the same thing ... in 1992, which was five years after Monckton wrote his piece and four years after the federal government had distributed a pamphlet penned by then Surgeon General C. Everett Koop entitled “Understanding AIDS” which explained that the disease could not be contracted through everyday contact:

"It is the first time in the history of civilization in which the carriers of a genuine plague have not been isolated from the general population," he said. "This deadly disease, for which there is no cure, is being treated as a civil rights issue instead of the true health crisis it represents.

"If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague."

Huckabee is currently a leading contender for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, a highly sought-after speaker, and host of a television program on Fox News.

Considering that such views didn't turn Huckabee into a marginal figure, it shouldn't come as much of a shock to see someone like Monckton hailed as a "voice of sanity" because, as Media Matters notes, there simply are "no views too extreme for the right-wing media."

UPDATE: Over at Open Left, Nick Berning points out that Monckton is not actully a "lord," nor is he a "Nobel Laureate."

• Media Matters: Anti-gay "hate group" MassResistance is source for right-wing media attacks on Jennings.
• Alan Colmes: GOP CA Councilman Wears Sign Equating Pelosi With Stalin.
• Good As You: Manhattan Declaration's most eye-opening signature yet.
• Minnesota Independent: Bachmann tied for voice GOP insiders most want to ‘mute’.
• Towleroad: Annise Parker Takes Distinct Lead in Houston Mayoral Race.
• Steve Benen: Don't Feed The Crazies.
• Think Progress: Right-wing activists demand that Rep. Periello move office to make protesting him easier.

12/14/09 UPDATE: We did it! Following our report on Friday, bloggers and activists spread the word about products on Zazzle.com that threatened President Obama and his supporters. Zazzle heard from many of us and got the message. As of today, the products are no longer available. Chalk one up for the good guys!

Let’s say that you’re a run-of-the-mill teabagger looking to set yourself apart from the mob. Nazi/Hitler signs tend to go over well, but that’s so not original. You could strap an assault rifle to your back – like this guy did outside an Obama speech – but that’s so not subtle.

Do not fret. Thanks to Zazzle.com, you can find just the right product to push you over the edge from workaday winger to racist extremist.

Want to encourage, or joke about, President Obama’s death? Check out this line of “Bullet holes anti Obama Bumper Stickers:”

Don’t forget to pick up a t-shirt for that special woman in your life:

Maybe you’re a little paranoid about the Secret Service and would rather joke about killing the president’s supporters rather than Obama himself, no problem:

Or maybe you’d prefer to have your dog joke about killing the president instead. What’s the Secret Service gonna do, arrest Fido?

If you’d prefer to be a little more oblique about threatening Obama, while no less offensive, these are for you:

The above designs are all the handiwork of a single user of Zazzle named NOBAMAMAN (thanks go to the Active Art blog for discovering them). Bad taste isn’t against the law, but many of these designs are clearly beyond the pale – especially in an environment of heightened threats against the president.

Last month Zazzle banned a line of products which called on people to pray for Obama’s death. The company said the so-called Psalm 109 products “may be interpreted in such a way as to suggest physical harm to the President of the United States.” In light of this, we should be sure to call Zazzle’s attention to some of the above products.

Where can you find Sarah Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann rubbing elbows with the likes of Roy Moore and Rick Scarborough?

At the National Tea Party Convention next February in Tennessee:

Tea Party Nation is pleased to announce the First National Tea Party Convention. The convention is aimed at bringing Tea Party representatives together from around the nation for the purpose of networking and supporting the movements' principle goals.

Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska (2006-2009) and the 2008 Republican Vice Presidential Nominee will be the guest of honor and keynote speaker.

Rep. Michele Bachmann will be a breakfast speaker at the convention. Also speaking at the convention are Rep. Marsha Blackburn and former Alabama Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore.

Other participants include: Phil Valentine (Nationally Syndicated Conservative Talk Radio Host), Bruce Donnelly (President, SurgeUSA), Ana Puig, Dr. B. Leland Baker (author of Tea Party Revival), Mark Skoda (The Memphis Tea Party), Keli Carender (aka Liberty Belle), Dr. Rick Scarborough (author of "Enough is Enough"), Lori Christenson (The Evergreen Conifer Tea Party), David DeGerolamo (NC Freedom Tea Party), Walter Fitzgerald (Tea Party Nation - Emergency Preparedness), The Leadership Institute, Judicial Watch, SurgeUSA, FAIR, National Taxpayers Union, American Majority, Smart Girl Politics.

Back in September, Bachmann and Scarborough both appeared at the How To Take Back America Conference, and this is what we got:

We are expecting more of the same the next time around.

• Matthew Yglesias: War on Christmas Just Got More Fierce.
• Pam's House Blend: GOProud calls for President to speak out against Uganda's execute gays bill (You know, maybe GOProud should be calling on some of its CPAC allies to speak out as well.)
• Sarah Posner: Rick Warren condemns the punishment but not inflammatory rhetoric.
• Think Progress: Tea Party activists to ‘storm Senate offices’ and ‘stay there until they force us to leave.’
• Tapped: CAIR Tipped Off The FBI.
• Media Matters: AIM blog post smearing Jennings as a "pedophile" removed from site.
• Finally, it's amazing that ABC let an insightful media professional like John Stossel get away.

The other day we noted how Houston mayoral candidate Annise Parker was coming under attack from right wing anti-gay activists, among them Steve Hotze, who was a backer of Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign.

Now it looks like other Huckabee supporters are getting in on the act as well. As Towleroad reports, Rick Scarbrough of Vision America has sent out this email to Texas activists warning that Parker and others want "to recruit children to their lifestyle"::

Houston is facing the most critical city elections in its history. As a minister of the Gospel and a concerned former citizen of Houston, whose children and grandchildren live there, I am writing this letter to warn you of the devastating consequences which may occur if you overlook the threat which the December 12th runoff elections pose for the city of Houston. You will have two choices when you vote.

The Houston Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgendered (GLBT) Political Caucus has fielded a slate of endorsed candidates in the City of Houston Runoff Elections. They are searching the city for votes for their candidates and if successful, Houston will become increasingly like the city of San Francisco.

The Houston Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgendered (GLBT) Political Caucus Slate

Mayor – Annise Parker
City Controller – Ron Green

City Council Races:
District A – Lane Lewis
District F – Mike Laster
At Large Position 1 – Karen Derr
At Large Position 2 – Sue Lovell
At Large Position 5 – Jolanda Jones
HISD School Board Position 1 – Alma Lara
HISD School Board Position 9 – Adrian Collins

Money is pouring in from homosexual groups around the country who want Houston to become the San Francisco of the South.

The Homosexual Agenda

1. Legalize same sex marriage.

2. Mandate public acceptance of the homosexual activities.

3. Teach homosexuality to school children, starting in kindergarten, as an acceptable, alternative lifestyle. This is known as multisexualism. This enables homosexuals to recruit children to their lifestyle.

4. Lower or remove age of consent laws leading to relaxation of laws prohibiting pedophilia. See www.nambla.org /

5. Elevate homosexuals to a minority class, leading to affirmative action for homosexuals in the workplace. Cross dressers could force employers to accept their actions at work.

6. Prohibit any speech which opposes homosexual activity. This would be considered “hate speech” and have criminal sanctions. This would destroy 1st Amendment free speech rights for those who oppose homosexual conduct and the homosexual political movement.

7. Require employee benefits to be provided to same sex partners.

8. Elect candidates to office who will work to implement the homosexual agenda.

If you DO NOT support the homosexual agenda and do not want Houston to become another San Francisco, then please consider voting for the following candidates:

Recommended Slate of Candidates

Mayor – Gene Locke
City Controller – M.J. Khan

City Council Races:
District A – Brenda Stardig
District F – Al Hoang
At Large Position 1 – Stephen C. Costello
At Large Position 2 – Andrew C. Burks, Jr.
At Large Position 5 – Jack Christie
HISD School Board Position 1 – Anna Eastman
HISD School Board Position 9 – Lawrence Marshall

If people who hold to traditional values neglect to vote in this election, the results will be far reaching. The above list of candidates is not perfect by any measure, but I strongly recommend them over the alternative. This election illustrates like few others why good men and women must stay engaged as concerned citizens.

“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke

Please forward this to your family and friends on your e-mail distribution lists.

Respectfully,

Dr. Rick Scarborough
President of Vision America Action

For nearly two weeks, Rick Warren has been getting relentlessly criticized for refusing to speak out against the proposed legislation in Uganda that would have carried the death penalty for gays after declaring that "it is not my personal calling as a pastor in America to comment or interfere in the political process of other nations."

Well, Warren has apparently changed his mind and has now spoken out ... though of course he is still playing the victim, complaining that he had to speak out in order to "correct lies, errors and false reports when others associate my name with a law that I had nothing to do with, completely oppose and vigorously condemn."

Of course, had he just said that when he was asked about the legislation in the first place, instead of saying it wasn't any of his business, he wouldn't have had to make this video at all:

Alvin McEwen has been doing heroic work combating the relentless stream of lies about Kevin Jennings, especially the allegations that Jennings' taught "fisting" to a group of children, as Rush Limbaugh claimed yesterday, and that GLSEN was distributing copies of "The Little Black Book," a directory of gay bars.  

McEwen has repeatedly debunked these claims, in all their forms, pointing out time and again that the incidents underlying the claims involved are being completely misrepresented and that Jennings was never personally involved in any of them.

For instance, the "fisting" allegation stems from a dental dam kit distributed by Planned Parenthood at a GLSEN conference, while the "Black Book" allegation stems from a community health group which accidentally left a few copies on its table at a GLSEN conference, and which no students ever received.

And, from that, the Right has declared Jennings "a raging pervert who taught fisting ... to grade school and junior high school students."

Now let's try an experiment:

Remember last year when a vendor was selling Obama Waffles at the Values Voter Summit?

The Family Research Council quickly issued a statement saying it "strongly condemned the tone and content of the materials" and Focus on the Family pledged to "do everything in its power to prevent another such unacceptable situation in the future."

Now imagine if we wrote about this incident by claiming "Family Research Council president Tony Perkins peddles racist paraphernalia" or "Focus on the Family's James Dobson traffics in crude racial stereotypes. " How do you think FRC, FOF, and others on the Religious Right would react?  

Do you think they'd accuse us of flagrant misrepresentation and baseless character assassination?  If so, they'd be right ... and that is exactly what they are doing to Kevin Jennings.   

• Watch Rachel Maddow demolish "ex-gay" therapist Richard Cohen.
• On a related note, it looks like Ugana is backing off a bit on its "kill the gays" bill.
• Mother Jones: The Religious Right's Potty Paranoia.
• Think Progress: How The Right-Wing Noise Machine Manufactured ‘Climategate.’
• Just so you know, the House GOP approves of Christmas.
• Bruce Springsteen supports marriage equality in New Jersey.
• Michael Steele cannot be bothered with your petty questions.
• Rep. Steve King discovers the vast ACORN conspiracy!
• Finally, a good quote from Kevin Drum: There are times when I feel that I'm pretty inured to political opportunism and duplicitousness. But railing against any kind of government interference in the health industry as death panels and socialism, and then turning around and suggesting we take advantage of the benefits of an actual socialist healthcare system really takes the cake.

Earlier today I had a post pulling together right-wing reaction to the defeat of Sen. Ben Nelson's anti-choice amendment to the healthcare reform legislation and it seems as if they are not about to take the defeat lying down, and so they are mobilizing to get Senators to filibuster the bill: 

"[T]his is a long way from over," the National Right to Life Committee said in a statement, noting that the bill again must pass the House, where there are a bloc of pro-life Democrats.

Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said he found Tuesday's Senate vote both "discouraging and encouraging."

"It's discouraging that the Senate as a whole could not comprehend the need to respect the will of 70 percent of the American people that public funds should not pay for or subsidize the killing of our nation's unborn citizens," Land told Baptist Press. "It was encouraging in that the motion to table got 54 votes, well short of the 60 needed to stop a filibuster. As long as there are sufficient pro-life senators such as Sen. Nelson who are willing to filibuster any health legislation that does not contain these restrictions on abortion, it will be difficult to break the filibuster and pass the entire bill.

"In that case," Land added, "then pro-choice supporters will have to decide between their pro-choice convictions and their desire for a vastly increased government role in health care."

Other groups, including the Family Research Council, Democrats for Life, Concerned Women for America and Americans United for Life, also said they would support a filibuster.

"We now have no choice but to work vigorously to defeat this bill," Americans United for Life said.

...

Pro-life groups are trying to pressure those and other Democratic senators to support a filibuster if pro-life language isn't added. The Family Research Council says it is calling every household in Arkansas, South Dakota and Louisiana -- all conservative states with Democratic senators -- to conduct a survey on such topics as abortion funding, rationing, higher taxes and the public option. It is also calling pro-life households in Pennsylvania and Virginia. Participants who answer a particular way will be given information on contacting their senators, an FRC release stated. Democratic Sens. Blanche Lincoln (Ark.), Tim Johnson (S.D.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Jim Webb (Va.) and Mark Warner (Va.) all sided with pro-choicers in voting to table the Nelson amendment.

"We're doing everything in our power to make sure that the constituents of those senators know that those senators are voting to expand abortion in this country," Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said.

Yesterday, the Senate rejected the restrictive anti-choice amendment Sen. Ben Nelson sought to add to health care reform legislation.

Not surprisingly, the Religious Right is not pleased.

Concerned Women for America:

"Nelson-Hatch was a reasonable amendment that does one thing: ensures federal funds are not spent on elective abortions. What the government funds, we get more of. Without this amendment, the health care bill will violate two of Pres. Obama's promises: that the bill will not fund abortion and that he will work to reduce abortions.

"Since abortion costs less than delivery of a baby, it is not unlikely that bureaucrats, facing pressure to reduce costs, will sign off on paying for abortion but not for the health care that pregnant women and their babies need. This could lead to women being coerced into abortion by their own government.

"The Senate bill is now at odds with the House version, which prohibits funding of elective abortions.

"Federal funding of abortion will increase the number of abortions and lead to higher health care costs for women who suffer complications, such as hemorrhaging, infection, subsequent premature births, and psychological issues.

"If more children are aborted, who will pay for this massive government entitlement when it balloons in 20 years?"

Susan B. Anthony List:

"Tonight Senator Reid invoked Henry Clay, posing as a great compromiser even as he denied the consciences of the majority of Americans. Yet Clay himself would have never blanched at Nelson's amendment, a commonsense proposal backed by 61% of America. You can't find greater common ground than the decision to restrict government funding for abortion on-demand. With his actions tonight, Harry Reid has effectively tabled the common ground.

"Senator Reid's tabling of the pro-life Nelson Amendment is just the latest reason why incumbents like Harry Reid are becoming top political targets: the disconnect between their words and actions inspire a rising populist opposition. Senator Reid calls himself pro-life, yet he continues to advance the largest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade at taxpayers' expense.

"As it stands today, there should be no question about opposing the Senate health care bill. If you call yourself pro-life and genuinely care about preserving true common ground, you cannot possibly vote for this bill. Pro-Life senators - the sponsors of Nelson's amendment included - must oppose this legislation.

"As the debate continues, on behalf of the 280,000 pro-life Susan B. Anthony List members and activists nationwide, I call on Senator Casey to follow the unyielding leadership of his father, former Governor Bob Casey. Senator Casey and his Democratic colleagues now have the opportunity to honor the consistent pro-life ethic of his father."

Focus on the Family:

“Today, the U.S. Senate failed to protect the preborn and ignored the will of the people they represent.

“Although 67 percent of Americans oppose the use of federal money to pay for abortion in any government-run healthcare, Senators nevertheless rejected the Hatch-Nelson amendment. Their vote would compel Americans who have moral and religious objects to abortion – and who now make up the majority of the country – to fund it. This is what Thomas Jefferson described as ‘tyrannical.’

“Focus on the Family continues to oppose the health care bill because it fails to protect the most vulnerable among us – the preborn. We will keep working diligently to ensure that this faulty legislation does not pass by giving a voice to the millions of Americans who oppose the use of federal funds to pay for abortion.”

Priests for Life:

Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, commented on the Senate's vote on the Nelson Amendment to the health care bill. "Those in the Senate who rejected this Amendment have voted to let their attachment to the abortion industry interfere with health care reform in this country. These Senators could have listened to their constituents and opposed abortion funding. Instead, they are allowing this effort at reform to be hijacked by abortion extremists."

American Center for Law and Justice:

“The vote reflects a callous disregard for the protection of innocent human life,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. “It is clear most Americans do not want abortion classified as a mandatory health care benefit. The House understood this in passing the Stupak-Pitts Amendment. Sadly, the Senate chose to ignore the concerns of the American people and refused to approve an Amendment that would have put into place much-needed pro-life protections in the Senate's version of health care reform. Rejecting this Amendment is disappointing, but not surprising.”

“With this vote, we now call on pro-life Democrats - including Sen. Nelson, co-sponsor of the Amendment, to follow through with the promise to reject the Senate's health care measure because it fails to exclude abortion funding,” added Sekulow.

“The battle over health care reform is far from over. We will continue to oppose the Senate's health care bill and continue to work to ensure that a final version of health care to be considered at some point by Congress includes the pro-life protections so many Americans demand.”

Recently we released a report entitled "Rise of the New McCarthyism: How Right Wing Extremists Try to Paralyze Government Through Ideological Smears and Baseless Attacks" that examined how "Joseph McCarthy’s ideological heirs in the Republican Party and right-wing media are using the language and tactics of McCarthy to stir fears that the nation is being destroyed by enemies from within."

Among the features of this new McCarthyism is "an obsessive hunt for homosexuals" and one of their primary targets has been Kevin Jennings, the Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools.

And, as if to prove our point, just yesterday the Washington Times ran this editorial entitled "Obama's buggery czar" that was based largely on this recent Breitbart.tv "exposé" of GLSEN 's recommended reading list, which the times says proves Jennings is unfit for his position:

The readings try to make sex between children and adults seem normal and acceptable. Being exploited by homosexual pedophiles is portrayed as something that can make children happy and fulfilled. Perhaps Mr. Jennings will claim he was too busy to check what his organization was recommending children read. Either way, this is not a man who should have been appointed by the White House to make schools safe.

Media Matters already debunked the editorial's claims, so I just want to highlight this post from Peter LaBarbera, who loved the Times' editorial:

Folks, as one who has worked for more than 15 years with other pro-family groups to expose the insidious and child-corrupting agenda of Kevin Jennings and GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network), I’m overjoyed that conservatives and right-leaning media are finally helping to expose this organization’s truly radical and evil agenda to millions of outraged Americans.

LaBarbera also wants it known that, contrary to the claims from the various other conservatives who are attacking Jennings while claiming that this is not about homosexuality, the attacks are entirely about homosexuality:

One more point: it is now common for conservatives — especially non-religiously-affiliated media leaders like Sean Hannity (who should be applauded for his yeoman’s work exposing Jennings) — to make the odd disclaimer that the GLSEN/Jennings controversy (or whatever “gay”-related culture-war story they are discussing) “is not about homosexuality.” Baloney. This is all about homosexuality and the “gay” activist agenda whose singular goal is to normalize homosexuality as a “civil right.”

Jennings’ role in the wider GLBT movement is to promote homosexuality and gender confusion (transgenderism: cross-dressing, etc.) to impressionable youth through the schools (public and private). It is absurd and intellectually dishonest to claim that this highly organized and well-funded campaign is somehow not about … homosexuality! (Which is not to deny that some or even many homosexuals agree with us that Jennings’ “gay-youth” agenda is reckless.)

Only a Homosexual Movement unified by a morality- and normality-rejecting ideology that aims to mainstream sinful, deviant, and once-taboo behaviors could produce such perverse ‘Recommended Readings’ for students as GLSEN — complete with fictional, “non-judgmental” accounts of man-boy sex. Only a movement that defiantly calls itself “queer” could produce “Fistgate” — a GLSEN-sponsored youth conference at Tufts University in 2000, at which underage children were verbally guided by homosexual adults on how to engage in the vile, sadomasochistic act of ‘fisting’ — hand-anal penetration (yes, truth is stranger than fiction).

The politically correct “not-about-gays” caveat is about illogical as claiming that the effort to expose systematic human rights abuses in China and North Korea “has nothing to with Communism.” Anyone who calls himself “conservative” should know better. Besides, true conservatives should not be ashamed of enthusiastically conserving the age-old Judeo-Christian sexual/marriage ethic — which has served mankind well and which rejects all efforts to approve of unnatural and destructive sexual behaviors condemned by God.

• From the Ashville Citizen-Times: "North Carolina's constitution is clear: politicians who deny the existence of God are barred from holding office. Opponents of Cecil Bothwell are seizing on that law to argue he should not be seated as a City Council member today, even though federal courts have ruled religious tests for public office are unlawful under the U.S. Constitution."
• Mike Huckabee continues to defend his handling of the Maurice Clemmons case.
• Help the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission decide the "Top 10 Anti-Christian Acts of 2009."
• Operation Rescue claims that the "handwriting [is] on the wall" for the abortion industry.
• The movie "2012" is just "like Satan in the Garden" because it "redefines what God has told us and is being used to promote lies and anti-God thinking."
• Carrie Prejean reportedly pulled out of an appearance because it was scheduled for midnight and such late hours would do damage to "her reputation as a Christian [which] is more important than any public appearance attention or monetary compensation."
• Finally, as an avid fan of Xbox, allow me to say that I have absolutely no desire for this.

I'm guessing that we've probably seen that last of Mike Huckabee's "Mr. Nice Guy" routine regarding Sarah Palin: 

Sarah Palin says former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee made a “horrible decision” nine years ago in granting clemency to a man suspected of killing four police officers two weeks ago in Washington state.

...

“It’s absolutely tragic and just unfathomable what has happened there, and I do feel bad for Huckabee,” Palin said. “But it was a horrible decision that he made.”

As governor of Alaska, she said she had never been in the position of having to grant a prisoner clemency, adding that “most Alaskans know me well enough to know that I don’t have a whole lot of mercy for the bad guys.”

“I’m on the good guys’s side,” she said. “I’m all about redemption and recovery and reform and all that. But I will always error on the side of punishing even stricter, even harder on the bad guys.”

Ever since Palin burst on the scene, Huckabee has been exceedingly diplomatic and careful never to say anything that might come across as critical of her, even though it was pretty obvious that he's been irked by the fact that overnight she became the darling of the conservative movement despite having accomplished next to nothing and having no real public record on key conservative issues, at least in comparison to him.

Presumably, Huckabee won't be quite so diplomatic regarding Palin down the line after this ... though whether he'll really be willing to run the risk alienating Palin's supporters remains to be seen. 

Just try taking the "Christ" out of Christmas now:

Be sure to get this season's ultimate "War on Christmas" accessory:

Boss Creations, a new holiday decor company, has introduced the new "CHRIST-mas" Tree, featuring the unique trait of a trunk in the shape of a wooden cross. Company owner Marsha Boggs says the tree was specifically designed to counter the "war on Christmas."

"When I became a Christian a few years ago," says Boggs, "I was appalled by the secularization of the Christmas holiday. When retail stores started substituting 'Happy Holidays' for 'Merry Christmas,' and schools began calling their Christmas programs 'Winter Plays,' it all seemed ridiculous to me. That's why we have created products that remind people what the Christmas season is really all about - the birth of Christ."

The "CHRIST-mas" Tree is size adjustable up to 7.5 foot tall to accommodate various ceiling sizes. Additionally, the company offers ornaments, wreaths and gift items all with Christian-based themes.

Legal fights over Christmas symbolism continue to create headlines such as a recent ban on religious songs in a New Jersey school district where the federal appeal judges noted "such songs were once common in public schools, but times have changed." Lawsuits regarding Christmas trees being taken down from public buildings have sparked anger across the country. Boggs says Boss Creations' mission is to uphold the traditional meaning of the Christmas season, and from their sales, the company will be supporting two non-profits that work as advocates for religious freedom. A portion of the proceeds of all "CHRIST-mas" Tree sales will go to support the American Center of Law & Justice, an organization recently hailed by BusinessWeek as "the leading advocacy group for religious freedom," as well as to the Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit litigation, education and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family.

• TPM: ACORN Report Finds No Illegal Conduct.
• Did you hear about the terrorist "dry run" on Flight 297?  It's bogus, but the man responsible for the story is standing behind his claims.
• Pam gets a message from Larry Sinclair.  Lucky her.
• Mother Jones: The Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial.
• Finally, why does Fox News hate Christmas?

It looks like the Family Research Council, buoyed by the success of their annual Values Voter Summit, will be hosting another such gathering early next spring called the "Faith & Family Summit":

This is a joyful season, as we celebrate Christ's birth and the peace we have with God. In the midst of all the festivities, we pray you and your family are richly blessed this Christmas.

2010 is just around the corner! You should have already received a Save-the-Date postcard for the Faith & Family Summit to be held April 29 - May 1, 2010. This year, we will meet at a new location: Hyatt Regency Washington on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.

Be on the lookout for your formal invitation which should arrive in the mail within a week. In the meantime, I encourage you to make travel plans now to come to Washington, D.C. in April. Please contact Sara Kontz at 800-225-4008 or sek@frc.org to reserve your place at the Faith & Family Summit.

In recognition of your steadfast support, FRC is pleased to provide complimentary meals and accommodations on April 29 and 30; you only need to cover transportation costs to and from Washington, D.C.

Please prayerfully consider attending the Faith & Family Summit at this critical time in our nation's history.

FRC hasn't yet made known just what this new summit will entail, but we'll be keeping an eye on developments and posting them as they become available.

I never tire of reading right-wing attempts to explain what they see as the Left's irrational dislike of Sarah Palin, because inevitably it comes down to pseudo-intellectual nonsense about how it is all rooted in "post-abortion pain": 

Many women chose the birth control route, delaying marriage and childbirth well into their thirties and even forties. Their biological clocks ticked away and they sacrificed the most fertile time in their lives for career advancement and what they thought would be true happiness.

Some, when faced with an unplanned pregnancy they believed would interfere with their careers, chose the abortion route. They sacrificed the life of their unborn child for their own personal career advancement.

Now enter Sarah Palin, a woman with a husband, children and a high-profile career. Yes, this hockey Mom went from school board, to mayor, to governor to a vice presidential candidate! And her own unplanned pregnancy ended not in the hands of an abortionist, but in the loving embrace of the Palin family.

Now when the women who sacrificed motherhood either by abortion or birth control look at Sarah, they can't stand her, even if they can't explain why. Because she was able to have a family and a career, they see her as having the best of both worlds. They see, in this confident, self-possessed, accomplished woman, surrounded by a loving family, everything they gave up.

In an new email from Wallbuilders, David Barton declares that the "pocket veto" clause of the Constitution means that Sunday sessions in Congress are unconstitutional and declares that any member of Congress who supports working on the Sabbath needs to be tossed out of office: 

On Sunday, December 6, 2009, President Obama traveled to Capitol Hill to speak to the Senate Democrat Caucus to rally their support for the federal government health care seizure and takeover plan. Following that lobbying meeting with the President, Senate leader Harry Reid took the Senate into an extremely rare Sunday session where they continued debating the many problems with the health care bill, including required abortion coverage and the public option issue.

Sunday sessions have been extremely rare because of the U. S. Constitution's Article I "Sundays Excepted" Clause, which excludes Sunday from the federal lawmaking process. The Framers of the Constitution held great respect for the Christian Sabbath and therefore removed it from the federal lawmaking calendar.

...

The actions of the current congressional leadership certainly call into question whether they have ever read the Constitution. If they have, they have certainly shown little respect for its clauses – clauses they swore to uphold when they took their oath of office last January 6th.

There have already been numerous instances demonstrating Congress's insistence on passing the federal health care seizure and takeover bill in blatant disregard for specific clauses of the Constitution (including the Tenth Amendment). This disregard for yet another part of the Constitution further heightens concern over the current reckless congressional agenda.

Contact your elected U. S. Representatives and Senators and find out where they stand on the issue of the Sundays Excepted Clause. If they support or make excuses for this recent congressional Sunday session, then they have affirmed their disregard for the Constitution and for their own congressional oath. If such is the case, make sure and replace them in the next election, November 2, 2010!

For the record, the "Sundays excepted" clause reads thusly: 

If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Bishop Harry Jackson appeared on the Family Research Council's "Washington Watch Weekly" with Tony Perkins to discuss the state of the right-wing effort to stop marriage equality in Washington, DC.

Perkins complained that nobody in the press was paying attention to the DC fight and Jackson agreed (did he forget about this?) saying there was a conspiracy afoot on the part of the media not to talk about it even though it is a national issue. And it is a national issue, Jackson explains, because just "imagine two men coming out of the National Cathedral, rice coming down, them embracing and kissing, on the front page of USA Today. That will lift the spirits of pro-same-sex marriage advocates around the country." Perkins then likens the fight over marriage equality to the Civil War and other wars, because in war that is always "a real effort to take the capital city."

• In a video released by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, Sarah Palin says the United States should rededicate itself to seeking God's will. You can see the video here.
• Sadly, Tom Tancredo is not going to run for Governor.
• It looks like Gov. Tim Pawlenty is ramping up his plans for a 2012 presidential run.
• When did CWA's Wendy Wright become an "official international election observer"?
• Elaine Donnelly is, not surprisingly, against anything and everything that might lead to the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
• Finally, the Family Research Council announced that it is launching "an eight week campaign to call all household phones in Louisiana" to generate opposition to healthcare reform.

During the debate about expanding hate crimes legislation to cover sexual orientation, one of the standard scare tactics employed by the Religious Right was to point to pastors in other nations who had been arrested for speaking out about homosexuality and warning that, if this legislation passed, the same thing would start happening here.

One of the incidents they regularly pointed to involved Canadian pastor Stephen Boissoin ... in fact, Sen. Jim DeMint explicitly mentioned Boissoin in his speech on the Senate floor opposing the legislation:

Today in the United States, only actions are crimes. If we pass this conference report, opinions will become crimes. What is to stop us from following the lead of European countries and American college campuses, where certain speech is criminalized?

Can priests, pastors, and rabbis be sure their preaching will not be prosecuted if they say certain things are right and wrong? Again, in Canada, for instance, Pastor Stephen Boissoin was so prosecuted by Alberta’s Human Rights Commission for publishing letters critical of homosexuality.

Or will this provision serve as a warning to people not to speak out too loudly about their religious views, lest federal agents come knocking on their doors?

What about the unintended consequences, such as a pedophiles and sex-offenders claiming protected status under this provision as being “disabled”?

There is no such thing as a criminal thought, only criminal acts. Once we endorse the concept of thought-crime, where will we draw the line? And more importantly, who will draw that line?

...

I urge my colleagues to consider the implications of what we’re doing, just the raw cynicism of attaching this type of controversial legislation to the bill that funds the defense of our country. What type of legislative extortion will they consider of next? I have a choice to vote for hate crimes legislation that I feel would undermine the very justice system in our country or against the defense of my country. I don’t think we could be more cynical.
 

Well, guess what happened yesterday?

A Court of Queen's Bench judge has ruled an anti-gay letter written by a former Alberta pastor in 2002 was not a hate crime and is allowed under freedom of speech.

Justice E.C. Wilson overturned a 2008 ruling by the Alberta Human Rights Commission that the letter by Stephen Boissoin that was published in the Red Deer Advocate broke provincial law.

At the time, the commission said it may even have played a role in the beating of a gay teenager two weeks after it was published.

The commission had ordered Boissoin to refrain from making disparaging remarks about homosexuals and to pay the complainant, former Red Deer high school teacher Darren Lund, $5,000 in damages.

Neither order can now be enforced, as Wilson declared them "unlawful or unconstitutional."

The letter carried the headline "Homosexual agenda wicked" and suggested gays were as immoral as pedophiles, drug dealers and pimps.

Boissoin had argued he was simply commenting on government policy by criticizing homosexuality being portrayed positively in the public school curriculum.

On Thursday, Boissoin said he was thrilled with the judge's ruling, calling it a victory for "freedom of speech and religious expression in Canada."

Of course, this won't stop the Religious Right from continuing to cite this case as proof of their claims, just as they continue to cite the case involving two grandmothers arrested a few years back in Philadeplhia, as we explained in our Right Wing Watch In Focus on the issue:

One story Religious Right leaders like to tell revolves around the arrest of some Repent America protestors at a Philadelphia gay pride rally. This incident has become the stuff of mythology on the right, in part due to ads produced by Repent America in 2007 featuring a couple of grandmothers who were supposedly arrested for sharing the Gospel. The way they tell it, it’s understandable that it would concern people. So it’s worth finding out what really happened.

The kernel of truth under the pile of propaganda is that a group of Repent America activists were in fact arrested while protesting Philadelphia’s OutFest, and a local prosecutor did charge them with violations of several laws, including the state’s hate crimes law. But none of those charges were for “sharing the gospel.” Repent America – and the religious and political leaders who tell the same story – don’t mention that the police in fact were careful to protect their right to protest. The court found that among other things the protesters “blocked access to vendors, and disobeyed direct orders from the police, who were trying to preserve order and keep the peace.”

The First Amendment allows equality advocates to rally, and allows those with a different point of view to protest. But it doesn’t mean that the protesters have the right to disrupt the rally or drown out its speakers. It is universally recognized that public safety officials can place reasonable “time, place, or manner” restrictions on people exercising their First Amendment rights in order to preserve public order and prevent one group from trampling another’s rights. The court, which noted that Repent America did not get a permit for its protest, found that the police applied the law reasonably when the bullhorn-wielding Repent America protesters refused a request to move to another location and instead sat down in the street.

It’s also important to note that the court ruled that the prosecutor’s decision to file charges under the hate crimes law was a misapplication of the law – and charges against the protesters were dismissed. The court affirmed that the hate crimes law did not apply to the protesters’ speech or even to their disruptive behavior and refusal to obey police requests. That’s not exactly the impression you’ll get from listening to Religious Right leaders. It’s also important to note that federal courts rejected Repent America’s claims that the city and Outfest organizers had violated their First Amendment rights.