March 2010

Porter: National ID Is The Mark of the Beast

A few weeks ago, Alan Colmes had Janet Porter on his radio program to discuss her prayer that God would take control of the media away from the unreighteous and give it to people like her and during the course of the interview Colmes asked her about some of the guests that she had hosted on her radio program, such as Jane Burgermeister who Porter brought on to discuss her claims that the swine vaccine was part of a plot by the Obama White House, along with the FBI, WHO, UN, Federal Reserve, and NATO, to commit mass genocide against the US population via bioterrorism.

Porter's responded that just because she had someone on her radio program, that didn't mean that she agreed with their views. But that was, as we pointed out, complete nonsense because Porter never brings people on to her show in order to debate their views; she brings people on to her program for the sole purpose of sharing their views with her audience.

Case in point: her guest from last Friday's program was Dr. Katherine Albrecht, who Porter brought on to discuss her campaign against the use of RFID chips, which she believes are the Mark of the Beast spoken of in the Book of Revelation.

Back in 2007, Porter was already a supporter of this view, saying that she could not support then GOP presidential candidate Tommy Thompson because of his ties to a company that manufactured such RFID chips:

If this chip is truly a pre-curser to the Mark of the Beast, it may happen soon anyway, but the way I see it, it doesn't have to happen "on our watch." And we don't have to play a role in expediting it. Just another reason why Tommy Thompson's not getting my vote.

On Friday, Albrecht and Porter spent the entire hour of her program discussing how RFID chips and any sort of national ID were, in reality, the Mark of the Beast which will doom anyone who accepts one to an eternity in Hell:


Let's Ask Again, Is The Right Still "Proud To Be a Right-Wing Extremist"?

In light of the arrest of several members of a Michigan militia group that was preparing for battle against the Antichrist and plotting to kill police officers and have now been charged with "seditious conspiracy, attempted use of weapons of mass destruction, teaching the use of explosive materials, and possessing a firearm during a crime of violence," maybe we should revisit the "controversy" the Religious Right ginned up last year over the Department of Homeland Security report "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" [PDF].

As we noted repeatedly, the report warned: 

DHS/I&A assesses that lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States. Information from law enforcement and nongovernmental organizations indicates lone wolves and small terrorist cells have shown intent—and, in some cases, the capability—to commit violent acts.

But the Religious Right seized on a reference in a footnote to the fact that among potentially violent extremists might be "groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration" and launched a full-blown crusade to claim that the report was really an attack on conservatives, thereby intentionally equating themselves with violent extremist groups ... leading, ultimately, to the absurd situation where groups like the Liberty Counsel began selling these:

These are still for sale on the LC's website, by the way.

So now we get to look forward to seeing things like this where the Religious Right tries to claim that the Michigan militia is not really "Christian" and is in no way representative of the conservative movement ... after they have spent the last year claiming that the DHS report on right-wing extremists was really an attack on the conservative movement.

AFA's Fischer Hopes Americans Will Violently Revolt Against the "Tyranny of a Repressive Central Government"

Last week, the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer reacted to the passage of health care reform legislation with utter fury, declaring that it signaled the death of America and warning that unless the individual state's asserted their rights under 10th Amendment and stopped its implementation, it would lead to bloodshed.

In case there by any doubt that Fisher is entirely serious about the prospect of violent armed revolution in response to this legislation, rest assured that he is:

The American people are overwhelmingly opposed to the implementation of MussoliniCare. It is heavy-handed and repressive and is a worse form of oppression than any the Crown imposed on the Colonies in the 1770s.

It is a shocking thing almost beyond comprehension that our president intends to lock up his own citizens for refusing to cooperate with a wholly unconstitutional mandate which forces us at gunpoint to purchase a product as a condition of maintaining what remains of our liberty.

The Intolerable Acts were passed by the British Parliament on virtually the same day in 1774 the Democrats passed MussoliniCare in 2010. The passage of the Intolerable Acts in 1774 led directly to the convening of the Continental Congress which produced the Declaration of Independence and prompted Americans to defend their newly declared liberty with the force of arms.

The question immediately arises as to what remedies the states and the people within them possess to resist the tyranny imposed on us by the Intolerable Act of 2010.

Fischer goes on to quote James Madison at length, highlighting Madison's calls for armed revolution, saying that while he hopes it never comes to that, if it fails he hopes that people will rise up and use all "morally and constitutionally justified means" to resist the "tyranny of a repressive central government":

Let us fervently hope and pray that things do not come to this pass, and that our state officials will exercise their constitutional authority to protect their own citizens by flatly refusing to meekly submit to this gross abuse of power.

But let us also hope that the Father of the Constitution was right, that no free people will in the end submit to the tyranny of a repressive central government, and that they will, as a last resort, use all the morally and constitutionally justified means at their disposal to defend their inalienable rights to life, liberty and property. Otherwise, we are serfs and not citizens.

Allow me to point out, again, that just two weeks ago Fischer was featured on the Family Research Council's anti-health care reform webcast along with Rep. Tom Price, (R-GA), Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN).

Maine's Mike Heath Returns As Head of a New AFA Affiliate

Last year, during the battle over marriage equality in Maine, Mike Heath of the Maine Family Policy Council was busy embarrassing the right-wing effort by claiming that gay marriage leads to things like graffiti, vandalism, and crop failure.

Heath soon found himself cast aside by the movement and, seeing the writing on the wall, resigned his position as the head of the Maine Family Policy Council, announcing that it was time for him to do something else with his life and that he was going to get involved in the manufacture and distribution of solar cookers in Africa.

When, just two months later, Heath showed up on Peter LaBarbera's "Americans for Truth" website to declare that "Homosexuality is a sickness. It’s a sin. We need to stop putting up with it," it was pretty clear that Heath had no real intention of moving on from his professional anti-gay activism ... which is why Jeremy Hooper's discovery that Heath has now launched an American Family Association affiliate in Maine comes as no surprise:

In February of 2010, Mike Heath received approval from the American Family Association in Tupelo, Mississippi to create their affiliate here in Maine. Heath is no stranger to the people of Maine. As Maine's most well-known advocate for family values, Heath unapologetically defends Christianity and Western Civilization. He is deeply concerned with the corrosive effects of the sexual revolution on Maine culture. His signature issue is, and will be for some time, so-called "gay rights." The people of Maine are renowned for choosing common sense over political correctness. They can easily understand why AFA of Maine advocates removing the phrase "sexual orientation" from Maine's laws and regulations. "Sexual orientation" is a term which may have limited value in personal therapy, but the phrase only causes confusion when applied to law and politics. Heath is adamant that sex outside of marriage is immoral and shameful. Society upholds the institution of marriage to protect men, women, and children. Sexual activity is only one small part of marriage; and homosexuality does violence to that institution. AFA of Maine welcomes support from everyone who wants to take a stand for decency, morality, marriage, and the family. Individuals and organizations interested in working with us should email 

Since it is impossible for anyone to ever be too extreme for the AFA, adding Heath to their roster seems like a perfect match.

Right Wing Round-Up

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Will Kentucky really forgo $42 million in federal funds just to save a "Hell Is Real" billboard? 
  • Family Research Council Action and the Oklahoma Family Policy Council are backing a measure that will ban compensation for young women who donate their eggs to fertility clinics.
  • Rob Schenck meets Gov. Tim Pawlenty.
  • Ann Coulter will be headlining WorldNetDaily's "Taking Back America" conference.  Is anyone even remotely surprised.
  • Liberty Counsel says 10,000 people will be attending the Freedom Federation's "Awakening" Summit. I don't buy that for a minute.
  • Tea Partiers are reportedly getting tired of Dick Armey's control over the movement.
  • Rep. Bart Stupak admits that "pro-life groups rallied behind me -- many without my knowledge or consent -- not necessarily because they shared my goals of ensuring protections for life and passing health-care reform but because they viewed me as their best chance to kill health-care legislation."
  • Finally, the quote of the day from Al Mohler, who is outraged over the idea of colleges allowing co-ed roommates: "All of this adds up to a perfect jumble of moral confusion ... First, we have schools collapsing under the logic of gender rebellion ... Second, we have students insisting that there is nothing remotely odd or sexualized about two heterosexual students of opposite genders living in the same small space. That is both unbelievable and deeply sad. Third, we have activists and administrators lecturing parents that they have no right to resist all this ... This is nuts."

A Few Right-Wing Leaders Vow To Be More Civil

Yesterday, Jim Wallis and Sojourners announced the release of something called "A Covenant For Civility: Come Let Us Reason Together,” which seeks to create a more civil discourse on controversial issues of the day and consisted of seven specific vows:

1) We commit that our dialogue with each other will reflect the spirit of the Scriptures, where our posture toward each other is to be “quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry” (James 1:19).

2) We believe that each of us, and our fellow human beings, are created in the image of God. The respect we owe to God should be reflected in the honor and respect we show to each other in our common humanity, particularly in how we speak to each other. “With the tongue we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse those who are made in the likeness of God …. this ought not to be so” (James 3:9, 10).

3) We pledge that when we disagree, we will do so respectfully, without impugning the other’s motives, attacking the other’s character, or questioning the other’s faith, and recognizing in humility that in our limited, human opinions, “we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror” (1 Corinthians 13:12). We will therefore “be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love” (Ephesians 4:2).

4) We will ever be mindful of the language we use in expressing our disagreements, being neither arrogant nor boastful in our beliefs: “Before destruction one’s heart is haughty, but humility goes before honor” (Proverbs 18:12).

5) We recognize that we cannot function together as citizens of the same community, whether local or national, unless we are mindful of how we treat each other in pursuit of the common good in the common life we share together. Each of us must therefore “put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body” (Ephesians 4:25).

6) We commit to pray for our political leaders—those with whom we may agree, as well as those with whom we may disagree. “I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made … for kings and all who are in high positions” (1 Timothy 2:1-2).

7) We believe that it is more difficult to hate others, even our adversaries and our enemies, when we are praying for them. We commit to pray for each other, those with whom we agree and those with whom we may disagree, so that together we may strive to be faithful witnesses to our Lord, who prayed “ that they may be one” (John 17:22).

More than 100 leaders signed on, but only a handful were recognizable Religious Right leader:  Harry Jackson, Samuel Rodriguez, Robert George, and Chuck Colson.

Let's see, Rodriguez recently particiapted in the right-wing anti-health care reform "prayercast" where he declared "the same spirit of Herod who 2000 years ago attempted to exterminate the life of the Messiah today lives even America. The legislation that incorporates death and infanticide all under the capopy of reform."

Jackson has been militantly crusading against marriage equality in Washington DC , declaring that it is an effort by gays to oppress blacks and warning of "bloodletting" if the issue is not put to a vote.

And Colson, who believes that gay marriage causes terrorism, recently teamed up with George to produce The Manhattan Declaration, which they sold as Christians' last hope for preventing America from sliding into totalitarianism and Nazi-like dictatorship.

So you'll have to forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of their pledge to "be mindful of the language" they use and to stop "impugning the other’s motives, attacking the other’s character, or questioning the other’s faith."

"Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death": Liberty Counsel Issues A Call to Revolution (Nonviolently, Of Course)

To say that the Right has completely and totally lost their collective minds over the passage of health care reform would be something of an understatement.

So far this week we've seen it compared to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 while right-wing activists have called those to voted for the legislation traitors who should be shot or killed by God.

And now comes the Liberty Counsel comparing March 23, 2010, the day President Obama signed the legislation into law, to March 23, 1775, the day Patrick Henry delivered his famous "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" speech calling the nation to revolution:

President Obama said he was not concerned about the process but about the end result. In other words, the end justifies the means.

Responding to similar arbitrary abuses of power by the King of Great Britain that threatened life and liberty 235 years to the day, on March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry delivered his fiery speech to the Virginia House of Burgesses at St. John’s Church in Richmond. In part, Henry intoned, “If we wish to be free…, we must fight!” Reaching the crescendo of his speech, he declared, “Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.” Henry then concluded, “The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable – and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.”

Henry’s speech is credited with convincing the Virginia House of Burgesses to commit troops to the Revolutionary War. His “Liberty or Death” slogan was soon emblazoned on the Culpepper Flag, which became the flag of his first regiment of the 100 minutemen.

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, said: “What a difference 235 years makes in American history. The threat to life and liberty has come full circle. Like then, the American people love life and liberty and hate arbitrary abuse of power. Then, like now, powerful leaders stirred up the people to realize they must be vigilant to defend their freedom. There has not been a day in the presidency of Barack Obama in which the people have been free of strife and discord. The Declaration of Independence says that the people are willing to suffer many abuses, but there comes a time when it is their right – it is their duty – to push back. That time is now. The people must channel their anger through nonviolent means to change the leadership and the direction of America.”

I love how Liberty extensively quotes Henry's call to arms and revolt against tyranny and relates it directly to President Obama as a "threat to life and liberty," only to then say activists must find "nonviolent means" to topple our government.

"Average Local Doctor" Concerned Over Health Care Reform

WSFA 12 News in Alabama reports that local doctor Randy Brinson is concerend about what health care reform will do to his practice:

Montgomery Doctor 'Troubled' By New Health Care Law

Brinson says he literally read every page, every word of the monster bill over 3 days.

"That is totally different with the way medical care is delivered today," said Dr. Brinson.

A conclusion critics and supporters of the new law agree on. It's the middle part of the 2,700 page bill that troubles Dr. Brinson ...Troubling because Dr. Brinson says medical professionals in the state have a far better idea how to serve the underserved than someone sitting in Washington.

Of course, Brinson is a bit more than just a concerened Montgomery doctor:

Dr. Brinson is the head of the Christian Coalition of Alabama. He's a Republican but insists his concerns over the health care law have nothing to do with party politics.

Now why would anyone think that Brinson's opposition to health care reform legislation might have anything to do with partisan politics?

This weekend's health care showdown in Congress will test the political clout of evangelical Protestant activists, including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who are rushing to muster mass opposition to the Democratic bill endorsed by President Obama.

Dr. Randy Brinson, founder of Redeem the Vote, said evangelical leaders will target first-time voters, including Catholics, particularly in the Midwest, and voters not normally involved in religious or social activism, with an appeal highlighted by an e-mail from Mr. Huckabee.

Over the next few days, Mr. Huckabee's name, picture and words will appear on what organizers say will be "millions of electronic messages" urging voters to tell lawmakers to stand firm against the health care bill, set for a climactic vote Sunday in the House.

Mr. Huckabee, who ran for the 2008 Republican presidential nod, has teamed up with the Rev. Rick Scarborough of Vision America and Dr. Brinson, a Montgomery, Ala., founder of Optimum Impact LLC, which he describes as the "largest purveyor of e-mail data regarding political messaging."

"President Obama, [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi and [Senate Majority Leader] Harry Reid are doing everything in their power to push through a health care bill that would mandate federally funded abortions, along with a host of other issues that the American people have clearly said they don't want," Mr. Huckabee claims in his e-mail pitch ... The Huckabee e-mails will go to constituents of eight pro-life House Democrats who are considered on the fence or were heavily lobbied by Mr. Obama and Democratic leaders.

Christian Coalition: Bart Stupak Is a Traitor Just Like Benedict Arnold and Julius & Ethel Rosenberg

It seems that the passage of health care reform legislation has awakened the fury in the Christian Coalition. 

Earlier this week, they compared its passage to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 and now they are back labeling Rep. Bart Stupak a traitor on par with Benedict Arnold, Julius & Ethel Rosenberg ... and Jane Fonda:

Nearly all Americans, even students in America's politically-correct schools, know who America's number one traitor is, Benedict Arnold, who escaped to Great Britain avoiding arrest and the noose during the Revolutionary War. Most senior citizens, and other knowledgeable Americans, know who Julius and Ethel Rosenberg are, American communist traitors executed for treason at the height of the Cold War.

And many Americans, and virtually all of us Vietnam War veterans, know the treachery of actress Jane Fonda who actually was in our communist enemy's capital, Hanoi, Vietnam, at the height of the Vietnam War pretending to shoot down American pilots with a North Vietnamese artillery piece, a photo which gave huge aid and comfort to our communist enemies all over the world.

Which brings us to America's newest traitor in this infamous list of traitors: Democrat Congressman Bart Stupak from the First Congressional District of Michigan. Last Sunday, Bart Stupak single-handedly provided the enemies of American culture his vote and less than a handful of votes to install socialism (ObamaCare) for the first time in America.

Indeed, on the very morning of the vote for ObamaCare -- on the Lord's Day of all days -- Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi did not have the votes according to one of the most non-partisan voter-counters on Capitol Hill. That is, until Democrat Congressman Bart Stupak made his treacherous pact with Obama and Pelosi.

Let's get this straight: Arnold aided our British enemies, the Rosenbergs aided our Soviet enemies, Fonda supposedly aided our Vietnamese enemies ... and Stupak aided our enemies Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama?