January 2010

Cindy McCain's Support for Marriage Equality Is Why She's Not First Lady

Tony Perkins responds to the news that Cindy McCain posed for the NOH8 Campaign by suggesting that her husband lost his race for the White House because people did like her views

[C]onservatives shrug at the suggestion that Cindy McCain is influencing the public.

“The people of California have been very clear on this issue,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, one of the groups that supported the Proposition 8 campaign in California. “They’ve voted twice to preserve the definition of marriage.”

...

“There’s probably a reason she’s not first lady,” Perkins said. “People were worried about the influence she would have on social issues such as this.”

Oddly, when just about every Religious Right group in existence was ardently backing McCain during the election, nobody was raising concerns about his wife's views.  But since that he lost, it's because people were worried that she might support for marriage equality?

The Scariest Thing You'll See All Day

Obviously, polls taken two-plus years before the next presidential election don't mean a whole lot, but that probably won't stop Mike Huckabee's supporters from trumpeting this:

For the first time in one of our monthly polls looking ahead to the 2012 Presidential election Barack Obama trails one of his hypothetical opponents, albeit by the smallest of margins.

Mike Huckabee has a 45-44 advantage over Obama, aided largely by a 44-38 lead with independents. There continues to be no evidence of any negative fallout for Huckabee after murders of police officers committed by an ex-Arkansas inmate whose sentence he had commuted. His 35/29 favorability breakdown is actually slightly better than it was in November before that incident.

Of course, just yesterday Huckabee warned the GOP to not "get too giddy" because President Obama will probably be re-elected.

Don't Get Too Comfortable, Scott Brown

It seems that while the pundits and prognosticators are mulling over just what Scott Brown's victory means for President Obama, the Democratic agenda in Congress, and the future of the Republican Party, a theme is starting to emerge among the Religious Right that as exciting as Brown's win may have been, he's really just another RINO.

Randall Terry was first out of the box, saying that Brown's win was better than a Coakley win, but "we must not deceive ourselves or our supporters about Scott Brown, and his true position on child killing. We need to replace Scott Brown as soon as we can with a true defender of babies' lives, not a phony who supports their murder." 

Alan Keyes has made a similar point:

Conservatives working to restore constitution freedom can cheer for Obama's defeat, but take no cheer from Brown's victory because he is a typical RINO (Republican-in-name-only) who:

* has no differences in principle with the socialist-minded Democrats;

* embraces the substance of Obama's socialist agenda, but "opposes" Obama by criticizing his implementation of socialism, especially when it comes to fiscal matters;

* agrees in principle with the Democrats on the fundamental issues of justice and morality but employs the deceptive rhetoric of personal opinion to evade the questions of public law and policy they involve. Such issues include child-murder and other abrogations of the unalienable right to life, as well as the rejection of the God-endowed rights of the natural family.

Matt Barber is likewise of the view that Brown is little more than a "tourniquet"

Many social conservatives (of which I’m one) have complained that the senator-elect is woefully flawed on social issues – particularly abortion. This is true.

Still, to my pro-life, pro-family compatriots, I offer this: While bleeding to death, one may be left no choice but to apply a tourniquet. A tourniquet is less than ideal. It may even cost a limb; however, it’s also likely to save one’s life. Obama has sliced open America’s wrists with his cutting political agenda. Time is of the essence. By providing Senate Republicans the crucial 41st vote needed to filibuster, Scott Brown supplies the tourniquet.

...

Of course, none of this justifies Brown’s indefensible position on abortion, “civil unions” and other social issues. I and others will not rest until he, and all who have been so deceived by the euphemistic language of “choice” and “reproductive freedom,” likewise recognize that all persons – whether born or pre-born – share an “inalienable right to life” that in every instance trumps another’s phantom “right to choose” premeditated murder.

Most importantly, even the Family Research Council admits that they are not happy with many of Brown's views but withheld criticism in pursuit of short term goals: 

Social conservatives held back criticism of Brown's social views--and, in some cases, openly supported him--because they believe a Brown win fulfills a short term goal of blocking President Obama's abominable health bill. Of course, the Republican Establishment would like us to believe that Scott Brown's moderate platform on life and marriage is a recipe for conservative success in 2010.

So it remains to be seen just how long the current infatuation with Brown lasts and if, when he comes up for re-election down the road, right-wing groups who are happy with his election now will be change their tune and end up backing a "true conservative" primary challenger later.

Obviously, that is a long way away ... but given that the Right doesn't really support Brown now, it is entirely possible that he might eventually find himself the next Dede Scozzafava or Charlie Crist.

Engle and Company Protest Genocide in Houston

Earlier this week, we posted a video from Lou Engle's "The Call - Houston" four-hour prayer rally against abortion.  But that was just part one of the festivities, as the following day Engle and the participants gathered with a crowd esitmated at 10,000 outside a new Planned Parenthood facility to protest and accuse the organization of engaging in genocide against minority groups:

Samuel Rodriguez said the "spirit of Herod" is alive and well, referencing the desperate king's attempts to kill the baby Christ. Rodriguez said the building's location specifically targets minorities and begs the question, "Why is the devil so afraid of black babies and brown babies? It's time to turn the tide. Abortion is anti-Latino, anti-black and anti-life," he declared to the cheers of estimated 8,000-9,000 people gathered for a worship and prayer rally at the Catholic Charismatic Center, a few blocks from the 78,000-square-foot Planned Parenthood facility.

...

Pastor Stephen Broden of Fair Park Bible Fellowship in Dallas said the acceptance of Darwinism escalated racist ideals as blacks were seen as below par on the evolutionary scale. As blacks were dehumanized -- as Jews were in Germany -- there was little to no moral outcry within the circles of the intellectual elite who supported and promoted the practice of eugenics, the theory of improving humanity through selective breeding and discouraging breeding among those considered less fit.

Broden said Sanger supported the practice by promoting the use of birth control among the black populations in America.

"To the community of death," Broden declared, "no more eugenics. We will push back."

Harry Jackson, who led opposition to the push for same-sex "marriage" in Washington, D.C. said, "We are in danger of the civil rights movement selling us out. This is about the rights of the unborn."

Jackson said he understood intimately the struggles of blacks in America. He told of how his father's life was threatened when he tried to vote and of seeing lynchings and the burned body of a black man dragged through town.

Referencing that brutal history, Jackson said, "I'm here to tell you, right now is the same kind of lynching, the same kind of burning. But you are seeing us come together. I believe Dr. King would say, 'Save the unborn.' The ultimate civil right is the right of life."

Citizens United: A Win For The "Regular Guy"

Yesterday's Citizens United ruling [PDF] by the Supreme Court has has now made it possible for corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to support or oppose candidates ... and to hear the Religious Right tell it, it's a victory for the little guy:

Kelly Shackelford, president of the Free Market Foundation, tells OneNewsNow the decision is a great victory for freedom for every citizen.

"The government has no right to control the speech of citizens speaking out as a group during elections -- and these types of campaign finance laws are pure evil and destructive to any free society," he comments.

Shackelford notes that wealthy individuals such as George Soros are having a huge impact on elections, and he adds, "The idea that a group of citizens can't come together in some sort of corporate entity and speak their mind is really discrimination against the regular guy in this country" and against smaller businesses that want to take part in the election process.

The Family Research Council hails it as a victory for all of those oppressed "corporate citizens":

"Under the principles established by the First Amendment, nothing is more foundational than free speech. This is a win for free political speech and the right of corporate citizens to join the political process.

"The court's decision is a step toward restoring open political discourse in this country. Speech should not be truncated by government regulation; rather, transparency should be pursued. The standard of accountability must be full and prompt disclosure, not unconstitutional prohibitions on financial contributions.

While Focus on the Family rejoices, because apparently up until now, they too were having their voices silenced:

Tim Goeglein, vice president of external relations for Focus on the Family Action, said the pro-family movement will benefit.

"Organizations like Focus on the Family Action, the family policy councils, all of our allies," he said, "this will give us an incredible voice in the great issues of our time."

And Concerned Women for America declares that "Americans are the real winners today" and says the decision is the first step toward reclaiming "the ideals our Founders believed in when they fought and died to establish a country where we can be truly free to speak and worship our God without government interference":

Penny Young Nance, Concerned Women for America's (CWA) Chief Executive Officer, said, "The Court correctly concluded that judges should stop playing semantics with our Constitution and read the text as it is written. The government should not be limiting political speech because someone is rich or poor, or because they disagree with a particular point of view. Americans are the real winners today. Further, I recall upon the passage of the legislation that Members of Congress openly admitted voting in favor of the McCain-Feingold knowing it was unconstitutional. Those days have to end."

CWA President Wendy Wright said, "CWA joined an Amicus brief asking the Court to overrule these laws that serve only to chill political speech and open the door for those in power to choose favorites. We applaud the Court for listening to the voices of millions of Americans who believe in those foundational principles embodied by the First Amendment.

"We hope this is just the first in a series of steps to reclaim the ideals our Founders believed in when they fought and died to establish a country where we can be truly free to speak and worship our God without government interference."

You know, I wonder what these groups will be saying if the makers of Plan B were to now start pumping their $11 Billion into taking out conservative candidates who oppose their product.

Right-Wing Avatars Descend On DC

What are you to do if you can't make it to Washington DC today for the National March for Life?  Well, you could always join Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, James Dobson and others for the "Virtual March for Life":

Hundreds of thousands of Americans are expected to attend tomorrow's National March for Life, which takes place annually on the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision. Americans United for Life Action, in an effort to bolster the real March for Life, launched the first-ever Virtual March for Life www.virtualmarchforlife.com earlier this week. This innovative online campaign allows people to create an avatar of themselves and "march" online. The Virtual March for Life currently boasts 45,000 Americans and is growing by the minute. As part of this effort, the Virtual March for Life is featuring prominent leaders who are lending their support to the cause.

So get your avatar ready:

Starting at top left: Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Michael Steele, John McCain, Tony Perkins, Joe the Plumber, Jim DeMint, and John Boehner.

Right Wing Round-Up

  • Statement: People For the American Way Calls for Constitutional Amendment to Undo Supreme Court Decision.
  • Yes, we should all be focusing on slavery's good old days.
  • Here's something you don't hear everyday:  a Senator boldly declaring "I believe in racial and ethnic profiling."
  • Did Prop 8 supporters drop two witnesses because said witnessed feared the repercussion of testifying, as they claimed?  Doesn't look like it.
  • Finally, did newly minted Senator Scott Brown endorse a Birther candidate for Congress or did said candidate go rogue?

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Concerned Women for America declares the Citizen's United decision the "first in a series of steps to reclaim the ideals our Founders believed in when they fought and died to establish a country where we can be truly free to speak and worship our God without government interference."
  • John McCain's wife and daughter may support marriage equality, but he most certainly does not.
  • Maggie Gallagher will be debating Jonathan Rauch on marriage on Jan. 25 at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
  • Apparently, the election of Scott Brown "put a stake in the heart of Camelot."
  • Wow, the Traditional Values Coalition really, really hates transgender people.
  • Bonus TVC lunacy: "The American people must quarantine Obama by electing conservatives to the Senate and House in November. His Al Capone management style must be brought under control. Our nation’s future depends on what each of us does this year to fight every aspect of the Obamunist agenda."
  • Finally, if you can't make it to the National March for Life, you can always Sarah Palin, Governor Mike Huckabee, James Dobson, Tony Perkins and other for the Virtual March for Life.

Prop 8 Is Putting Christianity On Trial

Apparently, the right-wing talking point of the day is that the lawsuit challenging Proposition 8 is really an attempt to put Christianity on trial.

So says Maggie Gallagher:

What do Olson and Boies think they are doing? Watching accounts of this trial unfold this week I had a big “aha” moment. It’s now clear: Ted and David think they are conducting the Scopes trial!

When this trial began I told you: gay marriage activists were putting 7 million Californians on trial. (Ed Whelan over at National Review has a brilliant series “Judge Walker’s Witch Hunt“ . . . explaining how intellectually absurd it is to conduct a “trial” into the subjective motivations of 7 million voters, constitutionally speaking.). But this week it got worse: They are clearly putting Christianity itself on trial. Why else have an expert read statements of Catholic and Southern Baptist doctrines into the record?

And why put a Stanford Prof. named Gary Segura on the stand to testify “”religion is the chief obstacle for gays’ and lesbians’ political progress.”

Could the zero-sum nature of the game be any clear? Rights for gays and lesbians, in their minds, depends on invalidating the voting rights of religious people when it comes to gay marriage, because their votes are influenced by their religion–i.e. bigotry.

Here’s their brilliant legal strategy: Ted and David want the Supreme Court to rule that Catholicism and Southern Baptism and related Christian denominations are bigotry.

So does Bill Donohue:

Yesterday, the judge allowed Boies and Olsen to submit e-mails they obtained between the director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the bishops. Allowing such communication in a trial is unusual enough, but the purpose was even more invidious: to show that Catholics played a major role in passing Proposition 8. The lawyers did the same thing to Mormons, offering more e-mail “proof” of their involvement.

...

Their goal is not to contest the First Amendment rights of Catholics and others—their goal is to put religion on trial. What they are saying is that religious-based reasons for rejecting gay marriage are irrational, and thus do not meet the test of promoting a legitimate state interest. That is why they have trotted out professors like Gary Segura of Stanford and George Chauncey of Yale to testify to the irrationality of the pro-Proposition 8 side. Chauncey was even given the opportunity to read from a Vatican document that rejects homosexual marriage.

Society cannot exist without families; families cannot exist without reproduction; reproduction cannot exist without a sexual union between a man and a woman; and every society in the history of the world has created an institution called marriage to provide for this end. In short, it is nothing but irrational to challenge such a timeless verity. No matter, what is going on in the courtroom smacks of an animus against religion.

A Matter of Bigoted Priorities

State Rep. Paul Scott, (R-Grand Blanc) recently announced his candidacy for the GOP nomination for Michigan's Secretary of State and released a list of his top four priorities. 

This was among them

I will make it a priority to ensure transgender individuals will not be allowed to change the sex on their driver’s license in any circumstance

Of all the things a Secretary of State hopeful could focus on, instituting bigotry is what Scott decided ranked among his most important priorities?  Amazingly, yes: 

In an interview with Michigan Messenger, Scott said the issue was about “values.”

“It’s a social values issue. If you are born a male, you should be known as a male. Same as with a female, she should be known as a female,” he said.

When asked to explain how such a mandate from the Secretary of State would benefit Michigan, he said it was about “preventing people who are males genetically from dressing as a woman and going into female bathrooms.”

While Scott is aware that federal courts have ruled that gender dysphoria, the medical diagnosis for transgender persons, was a disability, he said he did not think he would run afoul of discrimination laws. For the 27-year-old state representative, the issue is about biological gender.

He said his mandate would be in place even for those who had completely undergone sex reassignment surgeries.

“That’s who you are. You can have cosmetic surgery or reassignment surgery but you are still that gender,” he said.