C4

Erik Rush Fears Federal Plot To Put Cliven Bundy In A FEMA Camp And Seize Control Of The Food Supply

Add Erik Rush to the list of conservatives who have fallen in love with Cliven Bundy.Rush writes in WorldNetDaily today that Bundy is America’s last hope in stopping the federal government’s “blatant efforts to control our food supply.”

Rush insists that arms are required for Bundy’s stand against the “diabolical Manchurian President,” warning that otherwise Bundy and his militia allies may be “slaughtered” by law enforcement offices.

“Do we wait until Department of Homeland Security operatives come around to arrest ‘domestic terrorists’ as designated by Harry Reid and ship them off to FEMA camps?” Rush asks. “[W]hen jack-booted government thugs appear at one’s doorstep, praying them away might not quite cut it.”

In the end, I believe all that is intended to remain will be megalithic agribusiness entities that will pay the same fealty to the federal government as those industries that have already been similarly corrupted.

If the federal government intends to control everything – which has become painfully evident – why are we ignoring its blatant efforts to control our food supply?

Senate Majority Leader (and as it would happen, land-grabbing wheeler-dealer) Harry Reid has called Cliven Bundy’s supporters “domestic terrorists” and misrepresented them as well as Bundy with regard to their view of federal authority. If President Obama embodies the diabolical Manchurian President, clandestinely working to destroy America (which he most certainly does), Reid embodies the imperious, smug, progressive elite whose concept of government is so antithetical to our nation’s founding principles that crimes against the Constitution are, for him, a matter of his daily routine.

If not Bundy, then who? If not now, when? If we won’t stand up for a small rancher’s grazing rights, then I would like to know where this imperceptible line, beyond which government encroachment will allow Americans to act, is. Not necessarily in the vein of armed insurrection, but in the fashion of Cliven Bundy’s supporters, even if they aren’t as organized as one of Beck’s rallies. Do we wait until a family is slaughtered because they opened fire on government agents executing an illegal raid on their home? Do we wait until Department of Homeland Security operatives come around to arrest “domestic terrorists” as designated by Harry Reid and ship them off to FEMA camps?

I am very much in agreement with Mr. Beck that American patriots must align themselves with God, as did the founders, and that prayer and peaceful assembly are integral to our struggle against tyranny. A cadre of Bible-toting, hymn-chanting prayer warriors at the Bundy Ranch probably would have been a stellar idea, in fact.

But I also know that Beck is an ardent supporter of the Second Amendment for a reason, and that when jack-booted government thugs appear at one’s doorstep, praying them away might not quite cut it.

Todd Starnes Attacks Government 'Jihad' Against Cliven Bundy

Fox News pundit Todd Starnes has championed lawless rancher Cliven Bundy’s armed standoff with the Bureau of Land Management, even going as so far as to claim that “they used to string folks up” for what the BLM did to Bundy.

In his radio alert yesterday, Starnes attacked the “government agents waging jihad” against Bundy, while dismissing the “legalese” surrounding Bundy’s extremist legal claims.

The Five Most Racist, Anti-Semitic Claims From The American Thinker's Puff Piece On White Nationalist Jared Taylor

Today, the American Thinker – an online magazine that also publishes the writing of Concerned Women For America’s Janice Shaw Crouse, World Congress of Families spokesman Don Feder and “ex-gay” activist Robert Oscar Lopez, published a lengthy, fawning profile of Jared Taylor, the prominent white nationalist and founder of American Renaissance.

American Thinker writer Jeff Lipkes, whose last article for the publication explored the alt-birther theory that President Obama’s real father was communist organizer Frank Marshall Davis, asked Taylor to expound at length on “the concept of an ethnostate,” the doomed future of a diverse America, “the Jewish question,” and Taylor’s own “pure heart.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Taylor as “a kind of modern-day version of the refined but racist colonialist of old” who “projects himself as a courtly presenter of ideas that most would describe as crudely white supremacist.” We’ll just include that rather than going into Lipkes’ several paragraphs on Taylor’s “civility and dapper appearance.”

1. Racist Internet commenters give Taylor hope for the future.

Taylor spends a good deal of his interview with Lipkes lamenting the fact that people are leaving racist comments on his racist website. “How could people who generally agree with us be so uncivilized?” he asks. But then, later in the interview, he says that racist comments on other websites give him hope for the growth of “race realism” in the future: “More and more Americans are pointing out the obvious so long as they can remain anonymous,” he says.

“When people can post comments anonymously, they often write crude, offensive things they would never say to someone’s face. At first I was surprised and disappointed -- how could people who generally agree with us be so uncivilized? -- but every website has this problem. Most of our commenters learn good manners eventually; those who don’t get the boot.”

But if commenters don’t use vulgar language, they are free to say what they like about African-Americans, and of course the stories of heinous crimes are red meat to readers. While it may be cathartic for Whites to write things they are unable to say in public under the multicultural regime, the comments on the news stories undoubtedly lend credence to the familiar accusation of “hate-mongering.”

The crime stories sometimes inspire more interesting comments: accounts by readers of their own experiences with minorities and with the enforcers of multiculturalism. Blacks, just under 13% of the population, commit 52% of murders and still higher percentages of other violent crimes, and about 90% of all inter-racial violence is attacks by Blacks on Whites. So lots of readers have first-hand experience of the subject. Some have written about the transformation of their neighborhoods or towns. Other news stories generate more amusing anecdotes: tipping by Blacks in restaurants, adventures at the DMV, etc.

Still, the stream of abuse is depressing, and it troubles Taylor.

“I wish our commenters were better behaved. I agree that they are sometimes mean-spirited, and I wish nothing ever appeared on the site that was mean-spirited.”

Derogatory comments about Asians, less frequent, naturally, sometimes elicit counter-attacks by others. One of the divisions among readers seems to be between “White Nationalists,” who want to see the return of a White ethnostate, and color-blind “race realists,” who admire East Asians for their high IQs and test scores and low crime rates, and, occasionally, Hispanics for their work ethic. The defenders are are usually outnumbered and outgunned.

Taylor is both optimistic and pessimistic about the future.

On the one hand, he sees a growth of “race-realism.”

“There are two very clear signs of this. One is the comments sections of mainstream Internet news sites. More and more Americans are pointing out the obvious so long as they can remain anonymous.”

2. Taylor explains why "racially conscious whites" are ‘"suspicious of Jews."

When Lipkes asked Taylor about “the Jewish question,” Taylor responded that “racially conscious whites tend to be suspicious of Jews” because of their “effort to demonize any sense of white identity” and their “annoying” support for Israel. Lipkes goes on to speculate

On “the Jewish question,” Taylor seems to walk a tightrope.

Taylor acknowledges the animosity of a lot of his followers toward Jews: “Racially conscious whites tend to be suspicious of Jews for two reasons. First, Jews have been prominent in the effort to demonize any sense of white identity. Second, Zionist Jews support an ethnostate for Jews -- Israel -- while they generally promote diversity for America and Europe. This is annoying, but understandable for historical reasons.”

3. Taylor says he’s not a “white nationalist,” just supports “the concept of an ethnostate.”

Because “white nationalist” implies violent revolution…and Taylor seems himself more like Abraham Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt.

Is Taylor then a “White Nationalist”?

He rejects the term: “To me, it has an unpleasant whiff of gunpowder. One thinks of Basque nationalists and Kurdish nationalists. But,” he adds, “I entirely agree with the concept of an ethnostate that reflects the heritage and aspirations of a people.” He prefers the French word “identitaire ,” but there’s no English equivalent.

“There is no good term for racially conscious white people. This is because their views were taken for granted and needed no name. How did contemporaries characterize the racial view of Thomas Jefferson -- or those of Abraham Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt or of Woodrow Wilson? There was no word for someone with their views for the same reason there was no word for someone who expected the sun to rise in the East or who loved his own children more than he loved the children of strangers: Our language does not need words for unnecessary distinctions. My views on race are natural, normal, healthy, and entirely moral, just as Lincoln’s were.”

4. Taylor warns that a decline in the white population will lead to the collapse of America.

And laments that there is no party representing “race realists,” who he is confident would win “a majority of the white vote in the rural South.”

“The United States is one of the least democratic of democracies, in that our system practically bars the door against anyone not a Republican or a Democrat. Who is served by such an oppressive system? Why, the very Republicans and Democrats who pass our laws and the lobbies that cultivate them. It is this closed political structure, not a lack of racial identity, that prevents political progress.

“Imagine a system of proportional representation, and a list of attractive race-realist candidates. How many votes would we win? Fifteen percent? Twenty percent? A majority of the white vote in the rural South? As parliamentary democracies in Europe show, numbers like that have a powerful impact on policy.”

By 2034, if current trends continue, the United States will have a bare majority of whites, many of whom will be elderly. The working-age population will be heavily black and Hispanic. To give you an idea of what sort of country we will have, I could cite endless statistics on rates of crime, AIDS, diabetes, poverty, welfare dependence, etc. but I’ll cite just one figure. By the time they graduate from high school, blacks and Hispanics are reading and doing math at the level of theaverage white 8th grader. That will not have changed in 20 years, and it will mean we are well on our way to becoming another Brazil.

“We will have a painfully stratified society, run by a mixed elite that keeps the masses of poor browns and blacks at a safe distance. Our rulers will continue to mouth slogans about equality and redemption-through-diversity but their lives will be even more hypocritical than they are today. They will live in fortified enclaves, and will increasingly see America not as a beloved nation whose destiny they hold in trust but as a herd to be milked. In 20 years, their cynicism will have begun to dull the patriotism even of Southern whites.

Our increasingly Third-World and unproductive population will force more cities into bankruptcy, and the federal government will lurch from crisis to crisis. Our decline in world stature will not be graceful.

“There will still be pockets of white civility, but only for the wealthy. The middle class will shrink, as school quality declines and more and more whites are forced into low-wage service jobs. Marriage will increasingly be a relic practiced only by the elite, and more whites will copy the degenerate behavior of the black and Hispanic underclasses.

“We will slowly lose the public trust and moral infrastructure that prevents bribery, nepotism, kickbacks, and government looting. Politicians will begin to buy and rig elections, especially at the local level. Fewer people will feel they have a stake in society, so there will be less volunteer work or charitable giving.

“Too pessimistic? Show me trends that prove me wrong.”

5. Taylor says he's being persecuted by “elites” despite his “pure heart.”

Taylor’s views, according to political elites, their media allies, and the indoctrinated, are not only wrong, but evil.

“When I began this work 25 years ago, I was naïve enough to think that because I am right and have a pure heart, I could reach and persuade ever larger numbers of people. I did not understand the forces opposed to me or how fearful Americans have become."

Ann Coulter Warns 'De Blasio Wants To Hold Down Our Legs While The Central Park Five Rape Us'

Ann Coulter is pushing back on overwhelming evidence that “The Central Park Five” were wrongly convicted of rape in 1989, writing today that it is all a left-wing conspiracy to set rapists free.

In 2002, the ancient Robert Morgenthau, Manhattan district attorney, issued a report recommending that the convictions in the Central Park rape case be vacated. Justice Charles Tejada (Fordham Law 2009 Hispanic Heritage Award winner!) granted his request. Liberals are opposed to rape in the abstract, but when it comes to actual rapists, they’re all for them.

The D.A.’s report was based solely on the confession of Matias Reyes, career criminal, serial rapist and murderer. Reyes had absolutely nothing to lose by confessing to the rape – the statute of limitations had run – and much to gain by claiming he acted alone: He got a favorable prison transfer and the admiration of his fellow inmates for smearing the police.

While dumping on the police for screwing up the investigation, Morgenthau wouldn’t let the cops interview Reyes themselves, even though his “confession” was the sole evidence that he raped and brutalized the jogger by himself.



The media proclaim those five rapists innocent based on their own over-excited reports that the DNA found on the jogger matched that of Reyes, but none of the others!

Yeah, we knew that. It was always known that semen on the jogger did not match any of the defendants. (“DNA Expert: No Semen Links to Defendants,” Associated Press, July 14, 1990.)

Hallmark should have a greeting card: “Guess whose semen wasn’t found anywhere on the rape victim?” (Open card) “I’m so proud of you, son!”

Prosecutor Elizabeth Lederer expressly reminded the jurors of the missing rapist in her summation to the jury: “Others who were not caught raped her and got away.” Now we know who “got away.”



But now de Blasio wants to hold down our legs while the “Central Park Five” rape us, again.

GOP's Bad Bet: Right-Wing Lionization Of Cliven Bundy Backfires In Wake Of Racist Outburst

Cliven Bundy, the lawless Nevada rancher whom conservatives touted as a champion of freedom akin to Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr., said at a press conference attended by the New York Times yesterday that slavery helped the “Negro” people feel free by learning “how to pick cotton” and stop going to jail, collecting welfare and having abortions.

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

Likely Republican presidential candidates including Rand Paul and Ted Cruz hailed Bundy’s cause and Nevada Republicans, including Senator Dean Heller, rallied around Bundy and allied militia groups. Colorado GOP gubernatorial candidate and former congressman Tom Tancredo said Bundy was defending the “rule of law” against the “anarchist” President Obama even while the rancher was in defiance of several court orders.

As it is often the case, Fox News took the lead in creating the new GOP rock star by fetishizing the Bundy armed standoff as a triumph of ordinary patriots who, in the mode of the Founding Fathers, stood up to evil Big Government…seeming to forget the Founders also played a role in quashing Shay’s Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion. Fox commentators like Sean Hannity and Todd Starnes touted Bundy even as the rancher’s group was making violent threats against the government.

Fox also took the lead in hailing Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson after he claimed that black people were well treated and “happy” during the Jim Crow era and that problems in the black community are only a result of government welfare.

Gun groups, Tea Partyers, Religious Right activists, and the Koch brothers-funded Americans for Prosperity all joined Fox News in lauding Bundy as a hero who stood up to Obama.

No one should be surprised that a violent, militia-aligned, anti-government extremist turned out to be a racist nostalgic for slavery, and neither should anyone be surprised that Republicans jumped on his cause.

During the Iowa caucus campaign, two Republican presidential candidates signed a Religious Right group’s declaration which said the black family was stronger under slavery, and attacking government programs as slavery has become a common right-wing talking point.

Now that Republicans and Fox News commentators may move to distance themselves from Bundy, it will serve as a reminder for the next time the GOP decides to get in bed with an anti-Obama extremist for freedom’s sake.

Sandy Rios Explains God Will Allow More Terrorist Attacks Against America Because He's A 'Gentleman'

Last week on her radio show, Sandy Rios of the American Family Association addressed criticism she received over her claim that the Boston Marathon bombing memorial opened up the country to more terrorist attacks.

She told one listener, Michael, that all Americans — not just Bostonians — are responsible for the looming attacks that she said will occur because the country has not paid enough attention God and is ignoring his moral laws.

Channeling her AFA colleague Bryan Fischer, who made similar remarks about the Sandy Hook shooting, Rios said that God won’t protect Americans in the face of terrorist attacks because he’s a “gentleman” and won’t go where he’s not wanted.

All of you who hate me, I am glad you are listening, thank God you’re listening. And this is what I said and I will repeat it. I didn’t say that [there will be] more terrorist attacks because the Boston mourners had ignored God. I did say that I think we are opening ourselves wide to more terrorist attacks because the nation is refusing to acknowledge God. We are mocking him, we are turning our back on him, we are saying, ‘Oh yeah, you said we should do things this way, you said it was a moral law, oh yeah, are you kidding me, we don’t mention you at ceremonies, we don’t pray in public places, we can’t let our kids talk about it in school, oh yeah, just get out of here God.’

And I guarantee you, Michael, he will, he’s a gentleman. The Judeo-Christian God doesn’t force himself on people or nations, he’s not like Allah, he doesn’t force his way, it’s your choice. So if you choose to ignore him, trust me he’ll be gone. And certainly if you demand that he leave, he’s not going to stay around. It’s your choice, and it’s the same way with all of us collectively as a country.

Liberty Counsel Fears It Will 'Soon Be Taboo To Be Heterosexual In America'

The anti-gay group Liberty Counsel is afraid that it will “soon be taboo to be heterosexual in America.”

The article the group links to concerns recent elections for central committee posts in the Illinois Republican Party where “six of the seven officials who signed on to a letter last year to hold a vote on removing [Pat] Brady as chairman” over “his statements supporting same-sex marriage” lost their races.

Not only does Liberty Counsel equate heterosexuality with homophobia, but the group’s vice president, Matt Barber, seems to think he will be killed due to gay rights laws.

WorldNetDaily's New Birther Conspiracy Just Got Crazier

WorldNetDaily super reporter Jerome Corsi is positively giddy about a court case in the UK in which a “self-proclaimed intelligence expert,” Michael Shrimpton, insists he will reveal proof that President Obama was born in Kenya and DNA evidence showing that Stanley Ann Dunham was not the president’s real mother.

According to Shrimpton, “the DNA samples were collected at a fundraising dinner from water glasses that were bagged after the dinner,” and “NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, as part of his negotiations to leave Hong Kong, agreed to deliver to Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow the classified U.S. military intelligence file on Obama’s DNA.”

WND commentator Lord Christopher Monckton, a voca lbirther who wants Obama imprisonedhas jumped on the Shrimpton case in hopes that it will vindicate the birther movement and is denouncing the “monumentally stupid and fatally misconceived hate campaign” against Shrimpton.

As Ben Dimiero of Media Matters writes, “Apparently WND is desperate enough to keep birther conspiracies alive that they are willing to highlight allegations that even they seemingly find implausible.”

WND has also reported on Shrimpton’s related conspiracy theory that a terrorist group planned to launch an attack on the London Olympics with a nuclear weapon stolen from a sunken Russian submarine.

But that’s not all, as Shrimpton even claims to have evidence showing that “a secret German intelligence agency” known as DVD is behind a major pedophile ring linked to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and is responsible for Madeleine McCann’s abduction. On top of that, Shrimpton claims that the purported German secret intelligence unit/pedophile ring worked with China to blow up the missing Malaysia Airlines plane with a submarine.

Corsi naturally interviewed WND “investigative reporter” Jack Cashill to corroborate Shrimpton’s Malaysia Airlines claim:

Shrimpton believes Madeleine McCann was murdered in or about December 2008, after she had been transported by German submarine to pedophile rings operating in Argentina and Chile.

Since 2008, Shrimpton in various published reports has tied EU President Jose Manuel Barroso and former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair to the international pedophile rings that abducted the McCann child.



Monckton observed that by forcing Shrimpton to defend himself in a jury trial in November, the Crown Prosecution Service could force disclosure of documents and testimony in a sex scandal that could conceivably involve government officials in the U.K. and the EU, assuming Judge McCreath allows Shrimpton to pursue the topic to establish a factual basis for his suspicions.

Shrimpton faces his own sex-related charges. He is appealing his conviction in a summary court judgment of a criminal misdemeanor charge for having on his computer pornographic images. The images were discovered by British police after government officials in conjunction with filing criminal indictments regarding the 2012 Olympics case seized from his home his computers and electronic equipment.

Shrimpton insists he did not place the images on his computer. He contends the government has no evidence that would link him to the source of the images.

On March 15, Shrimpton published in his blog at VeteransToday.com an article claiming a 636 Kilo class Chinese submarine brought down the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 using a Chinese-made copy of a Hughes Aircraft AIM-54A Phoenix missile, originally supplied to Iran in the 1970s.

The search for the missing Boeing 777 most recently focused on a wide expanse of the Indian Ocean to the west of Australia, but now befuddled searchers say they may have to start the investigation from scratch.

An investigation of past airline disasters suggests Shrimpton’s claim is plausible.



Cashill explained that while he might not agree with Shrimpton that the Chinese intentionally shot down Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, he remained suspicious the Chinese might have shot down the airliner accidentally and were seeking to cover-up the incident.

Joe Miller Invites Extremist Gun Group To Help Launch His Alaska Senate Campaign

Just last week, we were compelled to write a post explaining that Gun Owners of America – which bills itself as a less reasonable version of the NRA – remains an influential force in American politics despite being run by Larry Pratt, a racist conspiracy theoriest with ties to white supremacists.

So we can’t really say that it’s a surprise that when Alaska Republican Joe Miller – the Tea Party candidate endorsed by Sarah Palin in 2010 – launched his second Senate campaign yesterday, he chose Gun Owners of America to help kick things off.

Miller’s launch event in Wasilla prominently featured a speech by Tim Macy, Gun Owners of America’s vice chairman, who the Alaska Dispatch reported “said his staff has been tracking Miller for years without his knowing it, in order to determine if he’s a true believer in gun rights and protecting the Second amendment.”

In an email in February, Miller proudly touted GOA’s endorsement. North Carolina Republican Greg Brannon also touted his GOA endorsement in a Senate debate last night.

As we noted last week, in any reasonable political party, GOA would be politically toxic given the views that its director, Larry Pratt, frequently shares in media appearances on behalf of the organization. For instance, shortly after a gunman killed 12 people at a movie theater in Colorado in 2012, GOA sent out a press release implying that it could have been an inside job. And there's more:

That Larry Pratt is an influential Republican lobbyist who is regularly quoted by mainstream news sources shows that it is basically impossible to be too extreme to be taken seriously in today’s right wing.

After all, back in 1996, Pratt was too extreme for even Pat Buchanan. Pratt stepped down from his role in Buchanan’s presidential campaign after his ties to white supremacists and promotion of the right-wing militia movement came to light. As Southern Poverty Law Center director Morris Dees said at the time, “He's got one foot in that far-right fringe and another foot in mainstream Washington, which makes him really dangerous."

That certainly hasn’t changed. In just the past couple of years, Pratt

Ted Cruz: Bundy Ranch Standoff 'Tragic Culmination' Of Obama's 'Jackboot of Authoritarianism'

In an interview with Texas radio host Chad Hasty yesterday, Sen. Ted Cruz said that the armed standoff between anti-government militias and the Bureau of Land Management at a Nevada ranch is the “unfortunate and tragic culmination of the path that President Obama has set the federal government upon.”

Rancher Cliven Bundy failed to pay federal grazing fees for over 20 years because he refused to recognize federal authority over the land he was using. When the Bureau of Land Management started to remove Bundy’s cattle from federal land, militia members gathered at his ranch and staged an armed standoff with federal officials, which Bundy threatened could turn into a “range war” or another Waco. The agency eventually backed down in order to prevent violence, but militia members havestayed at the ranch and the event has emboldened the anti-government militia movement.

When Hasty asked Cruz about the Bundy standoff, the senator conceded that “the details of the Bundy matter may be complicated,” but insisted “the reason this issue is resonating…is that for five years, we have seen our liberty under assault. We have seen our liberty under assault from a federal government that seems hell-bent on expanding its authority over every aspect of our lives.”

“It is in that context that people are viewing this battle with the federal government,” he said. “We should have a federal government protecting the liberty of the citizens, not using the jackboot of authoritarianism to come against the citizens. And I think this is the unfortunate and tragic culmination of the path that President Obama has set the federal government upon.”

Pamela Geller Misrepresents Hate Crimes Reporting Bill To Warn Sharia Law Is Coming To America

As we reported yesterday, conservative activists are livid about a new bill to update a 1993 National Telecommunications and Information Administration report “on the current prevalence of hate crimes and hate speech in telecommunications,” which anti-Muslim activist Pamela Geller said “is Sharia.”

While speaking to Janet Mefferd yesterday, Geller alleged that the bill will “silence” any “criticism of the left and of the Islamic machine,” while Mefferd called the legislation “creeping Sharia like crazy.”

The 1993 report [PDF] unmistakably denounced the very hate speech measures that Geller suggests are included in the bill: “NTIA endorses the belief, expressed by virtually every commenter, that the best remedy to hate speech is not government restrictions, but more speech, to disseminate views that challenge notions of hate and bigotry.”

Geller then cited the disputed claim that Matthew Shepard’s murder was not motivated by anti-gay animus to argue that the bill is like a “steaming pile of dung [packaged] in a Tiffany box with a little white ribbon.”

Mefferd: Boy, you know, this just is creeping Sharia like crazy. What is going on with this legislation? I understand the House version was actually filed back in December but now Senator Markey is on board with it.

Geller: We saw this coming, Janet, and you’ve been on top of it, really on the tip of the spear so I thank you for that, most press folks are ignoring it because it may very well be something that they would support because it would silence, as if we weren’t silenced enough, any criticism of the left and of the Islamic machine.



Geller: This is completely and utterly unacceptable because at the end of the day, this is the Sharia, that’s exactly what this is. Believe me, they’ll package it the way they packaged hate crimes. If you recall they used Matthew Shepard as a vicious gay killing when we then found out that it was really a drug deal gone bad with a previous lover, it doesn’t matter, this is the steaming pile of dung they package in a Tiffany box with a little white ribbon.

Right-Wing Radio Host Says She Won't Go In A Taxi With A Somali Driver

Conservative talk show host Lisa Benson warned on Sunday that Somali refugees control the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport and insisted that she will not ride in taxis with Somali drivers out of fears for her safety.

“There is an exclusive contract with the Somali community both for janitorial services and for taxi driving” — not exactly sure how an airport has an “exclusive contract” with an ethnic community, but she goes on — “the refugee community has unrestricted access at my airport to baggage, to planes, to many, many things.”

“Getting out of the plane last weekend I went to a taxi stand and quietly asked the attendant to put me in a cab, preferably not a Somali cab – that was my first mistake as I was trying to protect myself,” she said, suggesting that she would be a victim of an anti-Semitic attack if she was in a car with a Somali driver.

CAIR reported on Benson’s remarks and noted that “Benson’s Board of Advisors includes notorious Islamophobes such as Nonie Darwish, Steven Emerson and John Guandolo.” 

Gary Bauer Badly Distorts Poll Of GOP Voters To Claim 'Most Americans' Oppose Marriage Equality

It didn’t take long for Gary Bauer and Tony Perkins to misrepresent a recent poll their groups commissioned which found that “82 percent of Republican and Republican-leaning independents believe marriage ‘should be defined only as a union between one man and one woman.’”

Speaking with Perkins on Washington Watch yesterday, Bauer claimed that the poll actually proves that most Americans opposed legalizing same-sex marriage: “While certainly, particularly among young people, there is some shift on this issue, most Americans still understand that marriage is between a man and a woman,” Bauer said of the Family Research Council/American Values poll.

In fact, the poll explicitly states [PDF] that it only surveyed Republicans and independents who typically vote Republican.

While the poll used heavily slanted Religious Right language when asking GOP voters if they “agree or disagree that politicians should support the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples,” Perkins and Bauer accused nonpartisan polling firms — which have consistently found that a majority of voters support gay marriage — of using misleading questions to trick people into supporting marriage equality.

“I think, Tony, we both agree that there is an effort underway here to use polls not to measure public opinion but to form public opinion and move it in the direction of the demands of the gay rights movement,” Bauer said. Perkins agreed: “Absolutely, and a lot of that is done by the way the questions are worded.”

“If there had been really been a massive shift among the American people to the redefinition of marriage, I don’t think we would see all over the country the gay rights movement vehemently opposing every effort that happens in any state to actually vote on the issue,” Bauer added, ignoring the fact that gay rights supporters in 2012 successfully led a marriage referendum in Maine.

Bauer later said that the polls are “cooked” in favor of gay marriage and insisted that gay rights advocates are afraid of having a “national referendum” on marriage rights … even though there is no mechanism in election law or the US Constitution to trigger a national referendum on any issue.

“One would assume if there had been a big shift of opinion, the gay rights movement would say, ‘Let’s have a national referendum, we’ll prove it to you.’ But the fact that they will spend millions of dollars to keep off of the ballot in states a reaffirmation of the traditional meaning of marriage I think is further evidence that they know the polling data, which is often being touted in contrast to the poll we’ve got today, are really in many cases — the numbers have been cooked in order to advance a particular social agenda,” Bauer said.

Cruz: Obama Provoked 'Constitutional Crisis' With Marriage Equality, Immigration, Drug Sentencing Moves

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas joined Frank Gaffney yesterday to discuss Cruz’s bill aimed at stopping Iran’s new United Nations ambassador, who had been involved in the Iranian hostage crisis, from entering the United States. The bill was passed unanimously by Congress and signed by President Obama, who had already refused to grant a visa to the Iranian official, but that didn’t keep Gaffney and Cruz from using the issue to criticize the president.

Like President George H.W. Bush had done with a similar bill, the president noted in a signing statement that the bill might not pass constitutional muster because only the president — not Congress — has constitutional authority to receive ambassadors, so he would have to take the bill as “advisory.”

This led Cruz to berate the president for his refusal to defend the unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act in the courts (both Republican and Democratic administrations have refused to defend laws they believe to be unconstitutional), his executive orderdeferring deportations of some DREAMers, his widely misrepresented decision to grant the request of Republican governors to modify welfare-to-work requirements, and the attorney general’s move to broaden clemency opportunities for nonviolent offenders serving time for drug crimes.

When Gaffney asked if such actions “constitute a Constitutional crisis in our time,” Cruz responded, “That is exactly right.”

Cruz: You’re right, he did put out that signing statement, and if nothing else I have to praise him for his candor. Because one of the most dismaying aspects of the Obama administration has been that this president seems to regard all legislation as advisory. And so he said so explicitly here that the legislation was now written in the law books as part of the US code, but if he so desires he might ignore it sometime in the future. None of that surprises me because that has been the approach President Obama has taken to the entire rest of the US code, whether it has been immigration laws or marriage laws or drug laws or welfare laws or Obamacare, which he 30 times has ignored the text of the law and disregarded it.

Gaffney: Or rewritten it on his own authority. This raises the question – and I think you’ve very directly addressed it in the past, and I’d invite you to do so again – does this constitute a Constitutional crisis in our time as the result of the man simply departing from his oath, sworn responsibilities to uphold the Constitution, which clearly makes it the Congress’s role to enact legislation.

Cruz: That is exactly right.

Pat Robertson: Consider Divorcing Wife For Withholding Sex, She Was Probably 'Molested As A Child'

Pat Robertson told a 700 Club viewer today that he has “grounds for divorce” because his wife is not having sex with him regularly, speculating that she was “molested as a child” and needs serious psychological counseling.

The viewer told Robertson that he has “only been intimate with my wife a handful of times” and that “she has no interest in the bedroom,” adding: “I believe the Bible says withholding sex is wrong. Correct me if I’m wrong.”

Robertson agreed that the Bible condemns withholding sex and wondered whether the viewer’s wife has “psychological problems” resulting from childhood sexual abuse.

AFA Warns 'Homosexual Aggression' Has Banned Christians From '7 Common Careers'

In a fundraising email today, American Family Association president Tim Wildmon warns that the list of careers that Christians can hold in America “is quickly shrinking as homosexuals pro-actively seek opportunities to wreck the personal business and career of any Christian who declines to support the gay lifestyle.”

The email lists “7 common careers Christians may no longer hold in America,” which it says includes photography, broadcasting and teaching. Wildmon cites a few cases in which business owners have been sued for refusing to provide services to gay people and have sought broad exemptions from anti-discrimination laws that apply to businesses operating in the public square. He also cites the case of Craig James, who was hired by a regional Fox Sports network before being fired by the national network, which he claimed was because of his “personal religious beliefs.” Wildmon claims that James, who has since been hired by the Family Research Council , is a martyr who has been banned from broadcasting thanks to “homosexual aggression.”

7 common careers Christians may no longer hold in America

April 23, 2014

Many Christians choose self-employed careers because they want to be able to run their business according to the dictates of their faith and conscience.

That list is quickly shrinking as homosexuals pro-actively seek opportunities to wreck the personal business and career of any Christian who declines to support the gay lifestyle.

Don't be fooled. This is a focused effort to ostracize and humiliate faith-based businesses and their owners. Here are a few recent examples:

  • Photography - A Christian photographer in New Mexico was fined $6700 for politely declining to photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony. The Supreme Court allowed this fine to stand.
  • Baker - A Christian baker in Oregon is facing both civil and criminal penalties, including jail time, for politely declining to bake a cake for a gay wedding ceremony. Her business has closed.
  • Florist - Baronelle Stutzman, a Christian florist in Washington, is being sued by the state attorney general for politely declining to prepare an arrangement for a gay wedding ceremony.
  • Broadcasting - Craig James was fired by Fox Sports Southwest after only one day on the job for expressing his support for natural marriage while he was a candidate for the United States Senate.
  • Counseling - Jennifer Keeton was dismissed from the counseling program at Augusta State University for her religious reservations about the homosexual lifestyle.
  • Innkeeping - The Wildflower Inn in Vermont was fined $30,000 and forced to shut down its wedding reception business after politely declining to host a lesbian ceremony.
  • Teaching - Ms. Gillian John-Charles was kicked out of a doctoral program in education at Roosevelt University for expressing in class her belief that homosexuals aren't born gay.

What you can do about it…

AFA is improving the way we communicate, so you can get the latest information quickly and effectively engage the culture when our Christian brothers and sister come under attack from homosexual aggression.

Michael Bresciani Chides Gay People As Lower Than Monkeys

Christian Post blogger Michael Bresciani is out with another warning that the “gay agenda” and the purported rise of “perverted and libidinous behavior” is creating a “world that is plunging in unison to what we now well know will lead to – Armageddon.”

Insisting that “we are not the dung under the feet of Barack Obama,” Bresciani calls on conservatives to fight gay rights with the zeal of soldiers, adding that monkeys are more moral than gays: “Academics are assuring our children that they are the progeny of monkeys who are now on the cusp of conquering the stars. Yet, even the monkeys have not blurred gender distinctions nor do they indiscriminately destroy their young on a daily basis.”

Noting the backward slide into every prurient, perverted and libidinous behavior Americans can conger, is largely treated like scolding and rebuke rather than a call to return to the faith of our fathers.



This idea is now replaced with academically sanctioned dismissal of God, gay agenda indoctrination and mealy mouthed churches raising the white flag of apostasy and condescension. But not all!

Bill O’Reilley shrugs off the plunge into the gay “marriage” battle as social inevitability due to emergent acceptance of it into the fabric of our nation and yet, he still dares to refer to himself as a “culture warrior.”

Take a hint from your noble friends in the Wounded Warrior Project Bill - real warriors never give in or give up!



It will take a national revival to call God back to our side. First to forgive us, second to renew our commitment to righteousness and lastly to show our resolve to a world that is plunging in unison to what we now well know will lead to - Armageddon.

Academics are assuring our children that they are the progeny of monkeys who are now on the cusp of conquering the stars. Yet, even the monkeys have not blurred gender distinctions nor do they indiscriminately destroy their young on a daily basis. They exist without hoarding gold and silver or prepare for retirement. Is it time to tell the Darwinists that acting like monkeys is not proof of evolution?



Revival is a return to following only the voice of the Good Shepherd. We are not the children of O’Reilly; we are not the dung under the feet of Barack Obama and his horrible notion of ‘Change.’ We are not the dupes of indoctrination for academic fools who soothe themselves with tenure, turpitude and depravity masquerading as classical formal education.

CBN Hails Rand Paul For Wearing Blue Jeans

CBN’s chief political reporter David Brody fawns over every Republican politician he meets, and a recent blog post gushes over Rand Paul’s presidential prospects. You see, Brody explains, Rand Paul sometimes wears blue jeans, and his jeans “could take him into straight into The White House.”

“While other politicians are wearing a suit and tie, Paul is different,” he writes. “Paul’s choice of leg attire represents something. Whether the senator from Kentucky knows it or not, it’s his calling card to say he’s unique, different, and a trendsetter within the Republican Party.”

He goes on to hail Paul’s decision to wear jeans as a sign that “he’s leading” and “creating a new playbook and trying to create a new, younger, more diverse GOP voting constituency.”

Brody’s belief that Paul is radically transforming the foundering public image of the GOP is sadly not that unlike the general Republican playbook of changing the party’s appearance while not actually altering any of their ultraconservative stances.

Let’s be clear: Anyone who thinks Rand Paul can’t win the GOP nomination for president of the United States is foolish. He can. And if he wins, his “jeans” will be the reason. The jeans symbolize something that no other potential candidate for president possesses. Let’s explore.

You see, Rand Paul likes to wear jeans. While other politicians are wearing a suit and tie, Paul is different. At the recent CPAC event, all the other politicians went with the traditional look. Not Paul. Jeans were in order.

Some conservative commentators were upset. Peggy Noonan remarked that, “it’s not unusual for a man to wear jeans with a tie and jacket. They look like happy farmers, or cable TV anchors whose desks don’t show their legs. That being said, could we not wear grown-up suits when we are running for high office?”

But Noonan fails to grasp the deeper meaning.

Paul’s choice of leg attire represents something. Whether the senator from Kentucky knows it or not, it’s his calling card to say he’s unique, different, and a trendsetter within the Republican Party. His libertarian “genes” are represented in those blue jeans.

What we are witnessing is a man who has no desire to use the same tired old GOP playbook that’s been trotted out for decades. He’s creating a new playbook and trying to create a new, younger, more diverse GOP voting constituency.



So when he wears those blue jeans, it neatly fits in with his persona. After all, his libertarian “genes” fit perfectly inside those blue jeans. It’s non-traditional, just like libertarians. He’s not waiting around for others to figure out what the Republican Party needs to do and be. He’s stepping to the plate first. He’s leading.



He also understands that the traditional Republican orthodoxy of the past needs to change in order to win future elections. Does that mean those conservative principles need to change? No, of course not. But a fresh, different approach is needed.

And Rand Paul is going to do his best to walk that new path…in a pair of blue jeans that could take him into straight into The White House.

Kevin Swanson Speculates That Kacey Musgraves Would Have Been Killed For 'Promoting Homosexuality' In The 1960s

Kevin Swanson is not happy that country singer Kacey Musgraves won album of the year at the 2014 ACM Awards, warning that the singer is pushing the destruction of America and causing demons to dance in its ashes.

Swanson said on his April 10 radio program that if Musgraves had performed her song “Follow Your Arrow” any time between the 1880s and the 1960s, it would have prompted calls for her to be killed: “Let me say this, if she had sang [sic] that thing in a country bar in the 1920s or 1880s in Denver, Colorado, somebody would’ve called for a rope, ‘Get a rope!’ You know what would have happened, she would not have made it out of town in the 1880s, 1920s, 1940s or 1960s.”

“But things have changed, friends,” he lamented.

The Religious Right talk show host later explained that Muscraves’ “promotion of homosexuality” is undermining America.

“When you can turn a once-Christian nation into Sodom, that’s when the demons do their celebration, their dance in the end zone,” he said. “So she’s got to promote homosexuality and she’s got to promote the abandonment of the traditional church in the same song. That’s critical for the dismantling of the Christian faith in the heartland.”

Rick Scarborough Praises Lawless Rancher's Stand Against 'Tyrannical' Government's 'Gestapo Tactics'

On last week’s Tea Party Unity conference call, TPU founder Rick Scarborough praised lawless rancher Cliven Bundy for giving Americans “hope and courage,” likening the rancher and allied armed militias to the colonists who fought in the American Revolution.

While conceding that “clearly the man has some issues, he should’ve been paying his grazing rights,” Scarborough condemned the government’s “Gestapo tactics” against Bundy: “If people want to see what tyranny is, take a close look at that…. This is an illustration of where we’re headed if the American people don’t wake up to the tyranny that’s encroaching on our lives.”

“There’s a big pushback coming and it’s going on now,” Washington Times columnist Robert Knight added. “If you see the video of maybe one hundred riders on horses, most of them armed, riding up the road to help their neighbor against the federal assault, I don’t know about you but that reminds me of Lexington, these people meant business.”

Syndicate content