Jim Inhofe

Yesterday I noted that Family Research Council President Tony Perkins had co-authored an op-ed opposing the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell with General John Sheehan who earlier this year blamed the 1995 massacre at Srebrenica on gay soldiers.

Today I noticed that FRC has scheduled an event for next week that will address DADT, ENDA, and other such issues that includes not only Sheehan, but also Sen. Jim Inhofe and the AFA's Bryan Fischer: 

FRC will be tackling these topics -- and more -- next Tuesday, June 22 with the people who know this issue best. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) from the Senate Armed Services Committee will join us, as will retired Marine General John Sheehan, who served as the Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic for NATO and as Commander-in-Chief for the U.S. Atlantic Command. FRC's Bob Maginnis will speak, along with Commander Jim Sims of the Military Order of the Purple Heart, Austin Nimocks of Alliance Defense Fund, and Bryan Fischer of American Family Association. Circle your calendars for next Tuesday at 8:30 p.m. (ET) to hear from leaders who know exactly what's at stake in this debate.

Fischer's vicious anti-gay attacks are well-known and yet FRC has decided to include him once again .. maybe hoping that he and Sen. Inhofe can recapture some of their magic:

In December, the Oklahoman reported that Sen. James Inhofe had regularly been making trips to Africa, using taxpayer money, in order to spread the gospel of Christ

In the past decade, Sen. Jim Inhofe of Tulsa has made at least 20 trips to Africa as part of a mission that he frequently describes in religious terms.

Inhofe’s African trips have cost taxpayers more than $187,000 since 1999, according to a review of expenses Inhofe and staff members have submitted through the Armed Services Committee.

Inhofe insists that his trips have either been paid for personally or stemmed directly from his work in Congress on humanitarian, national security and economic matters. But Inhofe’s own words make it sound as if these trips are more about using his office and standing as a US Senator in order to evangelize:

Some of the trips have been taken on military planes that cost thousands of dollars an hour to operate. The military does not disclose the cost of flying members of Congress to their destinations.

The trips — which Inhofe has referred to publicly as "a Jesus thing” — have spanned the continent, though the senator has spent most of his time in a few countries, including Uganda and Ethiopia.

In an interview with an Assemblies of God publication in 2002, Inhofe said, "I’ve adopted 12 countries all the way from Benin, Cote d’Ivoire, Togo, and Gabon in West Africa as far east as Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi. I’m planning to meet with nine presidents in Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire. My focus will be to meet in the spirit of Jesus.”

…

Inhofe said he wasn’t trying to push a specific religious agenda in Africa and that he considered Jesus "a common denominator” in his meetings with African leaders of different faiths … I’m guilty of two things. I’m a Jesus guy, and I have a heart for Africa.”

In fact, in this video posted today by Faith and Action’s Rob Schenck, it sounds an awful like Inhofe is using these trips for exactly that purpose, as he relates how, before his first trip to Africa, he found out that his daughter was also going to be there doing missionary work and told her that “if you go with me, it’s free.”  He also explains that the trips are part of the “politics of Jesus” whereby Christians are instructed to take the name of Jesus to the kings. Being a US Senator, Inhofe says, means Africans think he is important and so he can always get in to see the kings, where he can tell them that he has come “in the spirit of Jesus.”  Inhofe even holds up a copy of the Oklahoman featuring the above-mentioned article to defend himself, saying the article is an example of “persecution” and insisting that he is doing this work as a private citizen before trumpeting the fact that, through his work, he has managed to bring entire African villages to Jesus:

With the passing of right-wing luminaries such as Jerry Falwell and D. James Kennedy in recent months, coupled with the aging of many of the Right’s traditional leaders, the movement itself appears to be in flux and some are getting worried about just what will become of it in the future.  Just last week, James Dobson voiced these concerns while addressing the National Religious Broadcasters Convention:

“It causes me to wonder who will be left to carry the banner when this generation of leaders is gone. The question is, will the younger generation heed the call? Who will defend the unborn child in the years to come? Who will plead for the Terri Schiavos of the world? Who’s going to fight for the institution of marriage, which is on the ropes today.”

The emerging conventional wisdom is that the Religious Right is on the verge of being replaced by a “new evangelical” movement that shares the old-guard’s opposition to gays and abortion, but also cares about issues like poverty and the environment.  The standard-bearer of this “new breed” is Mike Huckabee who, as he puts it, drinks “a different kind of Jesus juice” than the traditional leaders and routinely says things like this: 

I don’t see [the right-wing movement] going into decline. I see it going into a maturing process. I think the issues are going to broaden and force Evangelicals to expand their horizons of concerns to poverty, disease, issues of education and homelessness. These are issues that I think are going to become increasingly important along with the environment as part of an overall focus that you’re going to see from - I would use a broader term - values voters - that would include not only Evangelicals but also Catholics and conservative Jewish voters as well.

Of course, just because a bunch of young upstarts think that caring about the environment is important doesn’t mean that the old-guard has any interest in broadening their agenda.  As we noted last year, when the National Association of Evangelicals started to voice concerns about the environment and global warming, right-wing stalwarts like Dobson, Tony Perkins, Don Wildmon, Gary Bauer, Rick Scarborough, and Paul Weyrich dashed off an angry letter essentially demanding that the NAE fire its own Vice President over it.

The NAE didn’t back down, but the Right didn’t give up.  Instead, they formed their own organization, the American Environmental Coalition, and now seek "to bring balance to the debate by being an alternative source of reliable information to Americans who seek the best way forward for our country.” 

Jerry Falwell dedicated this week’s sermon at his Thomas Road Baptist Church to debunking “The Myth Of Global Warming.”

Almost right off the bat, Falwell issued the disclaimer that “I am quick to say that I am not a scientist,” but that didn’t stop him from making a series of boldly incoherent statements:  

The endless hysteria and alarmism over alleged global warming has increasingly become a national and international nuisance and loses credibility with every passing day. The entire myth has little to do with science and much to do with politics.

Falwell lays the blame for the perpetuation of this myth squarely at the feet of Al Gore, liberal politicians, the media, “radical Hollywood,” … and the Weather Channel:

The Weather Channel has taken up that task with its series ‘It Could Happen Tomorrow’. The Weather Channel started its "It Could Happen Tomorrow" series in January 2006. The program includes episodes where a tornado destroys Dallas, a tsunami destroys the Pacific Northwest, Mount Rainier erupts and destroys nearby towns, and San Diego is devastated by wildfires. What is the Weather Channel up to? … The big lie, conceived by the Weather Channel in cahoots with environmental extremists, is to get us in a tizzy over global warming.

Despite admittedly having no scientific credibility whatsoever, Falwell nonetheless feels that he is perfectly qualified to declare:

This so-called fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.

As for why Hollywood, liberals, and The Weather Channel are so intent on pushing this myth, Falwell offers three simple explanations:

(1) To Create Major Economic Damage to America.

(2) The Desire To Change the Subject Concerning the World’s Moral Bankruptcy.

(3) Most importantly, it is Satan’s Attempt to Re-direct the Church’s Primary Focus.

You can’t argue with that sort of rigorous scientific reasoning, especially since Falwell’s presentation appears to have been based largely on “A Skeptic’s Guide to Debunking Global Warming Alarmism,” (PDF) a report released by that other noted scientific expert, Sen. James Inhofe.