Miranda Blue's blog

CWA Goes After 'Ruth Traitor Ginsburg' For Officiating Gay Couple's Wedding

We can now count Concerned Women for America among the groups that wants Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to recuse herself from the marriage cases at the Supreme Court because she has officiated weddings for gay couples.

CWA's president, Penny Nance, sent out a fundraising email this morning with the subject line “Ruth Traitor Ginsburg,” the treason in question apparently being Ginsburg’s officiating at a gay couple’s wedding this weekend.

Huckabee: Better To Have A Gun You Don't Know How To Use Than No Gun At All

At a campaign stop at an Iowa gun range yesterday, Mike Huckabee dismissed concerns about lax state requirements for gun permits, saying he wasn’t very worried about a permit-holder “not being as trained as they could be” because “a good guy armed is still better than a good guy unarmed.”

A reporter attending the event at Crossroads Shooting Sports in Johnston, Iowa, asked Huckabee to comment on laws in Iowa that make it “relatively easy to get your permit to carry” without “actual hands-on training.”

“You know, I leave that to the states,” Huckabee said. “[I have] less worry about someone not being as trained as they could be, because I think ultimately a citizen who is going to arm themselves is going to want to avail themselves of significant training to become proficient. I mean, that just makes sense, for their own sake. But if they don’t, a good guy armed is still better than a good guy unarmed.”

He told the audience that he would hope permit holders would pursue extensive firearms training, “but that’s an individual responsibility, so I wouldn’t try to get in the way of what the state thinks is the right way to go about that.”

At the same event, Huckabee told another questioner that the government shouldn't restrict the ability of people to acquire military-grade weaponsThe comments were caught on video by the conservative blog Caffeinated Thoughts.  

 

 

Gohmert: Bush Wouldn't Have Invaded Iraq Had He Known Obama Would Succeed Him And Fight For 'The Wrong Side'

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, said yesterday that President Bush would have thought twice about invading Iraq if he had known that his successor would be “such a total incompetent leader” who is on “the wrong side” in the fight against terrorism.

In an interview with Virginia talk radio host John Fredericks, Gohmert said he opposed an effort led by Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia to pass a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) in the fight against ISIS, saying that “the president has all the authority he could possibly need” in the broad AUMF passed in 2001 and that the proposed new AUMF would “help tie his hands in ways a good president would not need.”

He added that the new AUMF, in addition to giving the president too little authority, would give the president too much authority. “I don’t trust this administration, I don’t want to give them any additional authority that Bush didn’t have,” he said.

“So, thank you very much, Mr. Kaine, but you need to tell your buddy in the Democratic Party to actually start fighting our enemies and quit helping our enemies and help our friends instead and quit worrying about a new AUMF,” Gohmert added. “He would be able to defeat ISIS if he just starts helping our friends and stops helping the enemies.”

“That AUMF, it’s a red herring, it’s a crock,” he continued. “The problem is the president’s on the wrong side. That’s the real problem.”

As Fredericks repeatedly tried to break in with a question, Gohmert continued his train of thought.

“I mean, seriously, John, you think a new AUMF is all of a sudden going to give us a president that will fight with the right people over there and win over there, really?

“Everybody else wants to ask that question of, ‘Gee, would you have gone into Iraq if you’d known what you know now?’ And I think if President Bush had known that he would have a total incompetent follow him that would not even be able to negotiate a status of forces agreement with Iraq and start helping our enemies and just totally put the Middle East in chaos, then he would have to think twice about doing anything if he had known he would have such a total incompetent leader take over after him. That should be the question.”

Scott Walker To Anti-Choice Leaders: I Didn't Mean What I Said About Abortion Being Between 'A Woman And Her Doctor'

Last night, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker met with a few dozen social conservative leaders in Washington, including representatives of the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America and the National Organization for Marriage, attempting to win them to his side if he decides to run for president.

According to people who attended the meeting, one subject that came up was a TV ad Walker ran last year in which he promoted his efforts to chip away at abortion access in his state, which, he said, would still leave “the final decision to a woman and her doctor.”

Marjorie Dannenfelser, head of the Susan B. Anthony List, told the Weekly Standard that Walker explained to her that in the ad he was “using the language of the other side to support our own position” and that people who said he was trying to paint himself as more pro-choice than he was were quoting him “out of context”:

Walker's pro-life credentials have been questioned by one Republican rival because of a 2014 Walker TV ad in which the governor defended laws regulating abortion as “legislation to increase safety and to provide more information for a woman considering her options. The bill leaves the final decision to a woman and her doctor.”

According to Dannenfelser, Walker brought up the ad during Tuesday's meeting and "explained his perspective on that — that using the language of the other side to support our own position is a good thing, but you can only do it if people aren't trying to call you out and quoting you out of context. And I actually liked the way he formulated this in general."

In an interview with the Daily Beast, Dannenfelser said that it’s just this sort of evasiveness on abortion rights that she’d like to see from other anti-choice GOP candidates:

Dannenfelser said Walker brought up his 2014 abortion ad before being asked.

“He felt very quoted out of context, very misunderstood,” she said. “He said there was a snippet of the ad used that did not convey the full meaning, and his communication was using the other side’s language but with the idea of forging common ground on ultrasound, because he’s a true believer on that.”

Walker signed legislation in 2013 requiring both that women seeking abortions get ultrasounds first and that the doctors who perform abortions have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. Dannenfelser said he defended his use of the phrase “leaves the final decision to a woman and her doctor” as a way of co-opting pro-choice rhetoric for the pro-life cause.

“To the extent that we use the other side’s rhetoric to undermine their positions, we’re better off,” Dannenfelser added.

She said she was impressed with Walker’s way of talking about abortion.

“It’s the whole style of communication and content of communication that you want to see moving into a presidential cycle that will make it different from 2012,” she said.

Here's Walker's "Decision" ad:

Jindal: Protecting LGBT Rights Will Hurt Businesses In The Long Run

Lousiana Gov. Bobby Jindal told the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins yesterday that the corporations that oppose his recent anti-LGBT executive action “are making a big mistake” by abandoning their “traditional alliance” with social conservatives and “teaming up with the left’s radical social agenda” on LGBT rights.

After a Louisiana House committee voted down a proposed “religious liberty” bill that would have given for-profit corporations the right to discriminate against same-sex couples, Lousiana Gov. Bobby Jindal issued an executive order yesterday protecting such discrimination. As has been the case in similar fights around the country, some of the staunchest opponents of Louisiana’s “religious liberty” bill were corporations that feared it would hurt their ability to recruit employees.

In an interview with Perkins on his “Washington Watch” program, Jindal said that Republican presidential candidates need to make promoting the freedom to discriminate a priority “because the left has made their assault on religious liberty a priority” and if they succeed, America is “going to lose the freedoms that are so fundamental,” including the freedom of speech and of association.

Jindal told Perkins that Republicans should avoid being “the party of big business,” but at the same time told pro-LGBT corporations that Republicans would do their bidding on issues such as environmental regulations and labor laws.

“One of the things, Tony, we’ve got to be on guard against, sometimes big business has allied itself with the radical left — you saw it in Indiana, you saw it in Arkansas, you saw a little bit of it here in Louisiana — against religious liberty,” he said. “They’re making a big mistake. The radical left, they want to tax and regulate businesses out of existence, they’re not for profit. So these businesses need to be careful. Economic liberty is the other side of the coin of religious liberty, two sides of the same coin.”

Perkins agreed, saying, “the left is not going to help them when it comes to the environmental blockades when they try to expand, or the labor laws and issues that they deal with. In many ways, I see big business, by teaming up with the left’s radical social agenda, they’re cutting the path of expansion and prosperity out from underneath themselves.”

“Absolutely, it’s very short-sighted, these politically correct, these short-term alliances,” Jindal responded. “And then you wake up. Because you’re exactly right, the same radical left that doesn’t want Keystone, doesn’t want to lower the corporate tax rates, the same radical left that wants the EPA to strangle our economy, that also wants to pursue radical environmental agendas that will make energy more expensive, more scarce at home, this is the same left that corporate America has gotten into bed with.

“It’s an unholy, unnatural alliance, is what I’ve argued. They should remember they need to go back to fighting for liberty and freedom and understand that the two of them always go together. And that has been the traditional alliance, and I think that’s what we need to get back to.”

Earlier in the interview, Jindal claimed that LGBT rights proponents are at war with religion, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution:

One of the greatest threats to our freedom is the area of religious liberty. The left clearly wants to erode the right to religious liberty guaranteed in the First Amendment, and that’s the basis of our freedom of speech and freedom of association rights. The left wants to erase these firmly held religious beliefs they don’t agree with. Their battle’s not just with us, it’s with the Bill of Rights, it’s with the United States Constitution.

Anti-Choice Leader Admits Rape Exceptions Are 'Political,' Goal Is To Outlaw All Abortion 'From Conception'

A long-simmering debate within the anti-choice movement about whether anti-choice bills should contain exceptions for survivors of rape and incest emerged yet again in the recent debate over a House bill that would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks, had been bogged down twice in the past two years with internal disputes over a rape exception, and finally passed last week with a limited rape exception that included a 48-hour waiting period.

The bill’s rape exception split the anti-choice movement, which has been divided between “incrementalists” who want to ban abortion by gradually chipping away at access and legal protections and “immediatists” who want to swiftly declare that fertilized eggs and fetuses have the full rights of “personhood” under the 14th Amendment.

While some personhood leaders opposed the bill because of the rape exception, the main incrementalist groups, which oppose rape exceptions in principle but not necessarily in practice, lobbied behind the scenes to limit the rape exception while publicly supporting the final bill.

One of those groups was the Susan B. Anthony List, whose president, Marjorie Dannenfelser, spoke candidly about the political calculations behind rape exceptions in an interview Saturday with the Iowa conservative radio program Caffeinated Thoughts.

“Regrettably, there is a rape and incest exception” in the bill, she said. “It is the only way it was going to be allowed onto the floor by the leadership. I mean, I say regrettable, I really mean it. Any child at any stage should be protected from conception, and certainly at 20 weeks excepting anyone is just wrong.”

Host Shane Vander Hart told her that while he’d “love to see abortion completely outlawed and see some sort of a personhood amendment or a human life amendment,” he thought the 20-week ban did “move the ball forward.”

“Well, that’s why this is big,” Dannenfelser responded, adding that the 20-week bill shifted the debate to “talking about the child and his or her rights.”

Later in the interview, the program’s cohost Brian Myers asked Dannenfelser what it would take to make the GOP leadership realize that rape exceptions are “intellectually…inconsistent with the pro-life position.”

“It’s going to take winning,” she responded, citing anti-choice victories in the 2014 elections where “we had unapologetic pro-life people who didn’t talk about rape and incest.”

“I believe that it’s going to take winning the presidency for there to be a little more injection of courage, which will be required to understand the consistency of life that you’re describing,” she said.

“Do you think that at the end of the day that’s what it’s all about for a lot of those politicians, that they realize [rape exceptions are] an inconsistent position to take but they take it because they think it’s a political reality?” Myers asked.

“Yes. I think that’s why,” Dannenfelser agreed. “I think that they think they can’t get, that they will lose if they don’t. Most of them don’t believe in it in principle. Some do, which, as you say, is completely intellectually dishonest, but most of them don’t. And I think that sometimes, especially when you’re in that insular world on Capitol Hill that’s not in touch with reality, you make sacrifices that you don’t need to make.”

“I think you’re right,” she added. “It’s a political judgement. It’s not a principled judgement. And I think they made the wrong judgement, but we would have no bill at all and no 15,000 children saved if we had not allowed it to move forward with the exception.”

Interestingly, Dannenfelser held up Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina as an example of “a joyful warrior going in there and boldly arguing” on the issue. Graham has said he’s “always had exceptions for the life of the mother, rape and incest,” even while acknowledging that opponents of exceptions are being “intellectually consistent.” She also recently wrote a glowing profile of presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, who favors such exceptions.

Trent Franks: 20-Week Abortion Ban Will Make Americans Realize Legal Abortion Is Like Slavery

In an interview with the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins this weekend, Rep. Trent Franks acknowledged that his 20-week abortion ban, which passed in the House last week, is meant to “completely undermine” Roe v. Wade, and hoped that it would help Americans “realize that as a country, we’ve been here before,” when “African Americans were considered property.”

Franks, an Arizona Republican, lamented that the bill that passed last week included a limited exception for survivors of rape and incest. The exception was first added to the bill in 2013 after Franks implied in a hearing that rape rarely results in pregnancy; a planned vote on the bill in January was scuttled after a group of Republican women raised concerns that the rape exception required women to report assaults to the police. After months of negotiations, the reporting requirement was removed from the bill but a 48-hour waiting period and other hurdles were restored in its place.

“Now, many of your listeners, including this one, Tony, would do everything that we could to protect all unborn children, and the only thing that we would ever say should be an exception to taking the life of a child would be to save another life, which is, you know, a very, very unusual situation,” Franks told Perkins.

But, he added, including the exceptions was all in service of the larger goal of launching a legal attack to undermine Roe v. Wade and making Americans realize that legal abortion is like slavery.

“But the point is, if we protect these children, now we begin to really examine, once again, the development and the humanity and the pain-capable nature of these children to where I think it gives us a chance to completely undermine the Roe v. Wade structure and to realize that as a country, we’ve been here before,” he said.

“We were here, African Americans were considered property, and somehow we rose up as a nation and turned back that evil. And now by the grace of God we’re going to turn back the evil of killing little children before they’re born.”

Franks has previously insisted that African Americans were better off under slavery than with legal abortion.
 

Pat Robertson: Eating Disorders 'Can Be Treated As A Demonic Possession Thing'

Today, “The 700 Club” aired a report on a rehab facility for people with eating disorders, which got Pat Robertson to thinking about someone he knew who had had an eating disorder as well as Karen Carpenter, the singer who died after suffering from anorexia.

Robertson agreed that those with eating disorders need “a whole rehab program,” but added that such disorders could also “be treated as a demonic possession thing.”

“This can be treated as a demonic possession thing,” he said, “it is like a demon and it needs to be rebuked and cast out.”

Pat Robertson: 'I Knew' That Iraq War 'Was A Bad Mistake'

Pat Robertson, who assured Christians in 2003 that the invasion of Iraq would result in few civilian casualties and was thus “on solid ground, not only in terms of Christian, biblical concepts, but also in terms of public relations" and later claimed that criticism of the war amounted to “treason,” said today that he knew all along that the Iraq war was “a bad mistake.”

Robertson made similar comments last year, saying “we were sold a bill of goods” on the war.

“We don’t really gain anything by looking back at what would you have done and couldn’t have done and so forth,” Robertson said today on "The 700 Club" in response to the recent remarks of GOP presidential candidates on the Iraq war. “The thing is, what are you going to do now? You’ve got an immediate threat and you’ve got to deal with it.”

“But the truth is, going into the Iraq in that war was a big mistake,” he said. “We interviewed on this program, I interviewed Saddam’s bombmaker, he was the man who was supposedly in charge of thermonuclear weapons for Iraq and Saddam Hussein, and he basically said they do not have the technology and ability to bring out a nuclear bomb.

“And I knew it, I hope the CIA knew it, I hope the president knew it. But he was being fed a tissue of lies, and you’re hearing all these reports about yellow cake and all this nonsense. And it was a snow job to try to sell that war, and we shouldn’t have gone into it, it’s cost a trillion or more dollars, it was a big mistake, and going in then, we shouldn’t have, and looking at it in hindsight you shouldn’t have. It was a bad mistake.”

“But,” he added, “what was done later by Obama has been a worse mistake.”
 

 

Liberty Counsel: Obama 'Must Hate America' Because He 'Will Bring A Curse On Our Country'

Citing an unconfirmed report from a onetime Israeli partner of WorldNetDaily, Liberty Counsel claimed yesterday that President Obama is secretly working with the French to file a UN security council resolution on Palestinian statehood, thereby bringing  “a curse on our country.”

LC’s Mat Staver declared in a press release that the supposed move shows that “President Obama must hate America” and is "dragging every American citizen with him into the pit of Hell":

“President Obama must hate America because his hostility towards Israel will bring a curse on our country,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “No nation that has opposed Israel or taken the land of the Jews has survived. Babylon, Persia, Rome, and Nazi Germany have all ceased, but Israel and the Jewish people remain,” Staver points out.

“President Obama is playing with fire and he is dragging every American citizen with him into the pit of Hell,” continued Staver. “I am ashamed that a sitting President would side with those who hate Israel. This act of rebellion by Obama is childish and dangerous. President Obama’s death wish is not shared by the people of the United States of America.”

Syndicate content