Home ›

Richard Viguerie

Printer-friendly version Send to friend

Santorum Wins Backing of Fringe Religious Right Leaders

Submitted by Brian Tashman on January 20, 2012 - 5:30pm

One day before the crucial South Carolina primary, Rick Santorum is beginning to win the endorsements of not just Religious Right luminaries but also fringe activists, including some who previously backed the failed presidential campaigns of Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry. Santorum recently won the backing of Religious Right activists such as James Dobson, Gary Bauer, Richard Viguerie, Maggie Gallagher, Penny Nance and most recently, former Perry booster John Stemberger.

Today, Viguerie released the names of additional Religious Right figures that are supporting Santorum, including Paul Pressler, the Southern Baptist leader who hosted the recent Texas meeting of social conservatives.

But other Santorum endorsers are less well-known:

  • Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness, who has dedicated her career to fighting the rights of gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, argued that it would lead to a draft along with “forcible sodomy.”  
  • Michael Geer of the Pennsylvania Family Institute who has crusaded against marriage equality, calling it a “tragedy.” 

All in all, about the people you would expect to endorse Rick Santorum.

PFAW
Filed under:

Gingrich Says Obama's "Ego" Will Force Him to Accept Lincoln-Douglas Debate Challenge

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on December 8, 2011 - 10:52am

Yesterday, Newt Gingrich addressed some 60 conservative and Religious Right leaders suburban Washington, DC at a gathering organized by direct mail guru Richard Viguerie.

Yesterday afternoon, following the meeting, Viguerie's ConservativeHQ posted a report on the meeting, noting that Gingrich was "interrupted numerous times by applause" as he called upon those in the room to "be with me, not merely for me – because if you are merely for me that implies you can vote and go home and expect me to fix things, but for this level of change to occur I need you working with me every step of the way to make it happen."

Gingrich also talked about his plans for getting President Obama to agree to participate in several Lincoln-Douglas-style debates, predicting that Obama will eventually accept the challenge because of his ego. 

But if Obama won't accept his challenge, then Gingrich plans to just follow him around the country and "show-up within four hours to take apart whatever he said":

When asked about how he intended to win the general election Gingrich said he expected Obama to have $1 billion to spend, but that he would counter that by challenging Obama to a series of seven Lincoln – Douglas-style un-moderated debates, “…and he'll say yes. There are two reasons: The first is his ego. Can you imagine him looking in the mirror? Graduate from Columbia, Harvard Law, and editor of the Law Review. How is he going to say that he's afraid to be on the same podium as a West Georgia College teacher? Plus, if he says ‘no’ I’m going to say ‘the White House is now my scheduler’ and wherever he goes I will show-up within four hours to take apart whatever he said, that’s how Lincoln got Douglas to debate.”

PFAW
Filed under:

Conservatives Seeks To Reform Justice System To Lock Up Fewer Criminals

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on December 15, 2010 - 2:33pm

Here is something that you don't see every day: a group of leading conservatives calling for legal reform because we are locking too many people up in prison:

A group of national conservatives led by Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, Russell Keene of the American Conservative Union, and former Attorney General Ed Meese unveiled the“Right On Crime” initiative and website. The group held a conference call this morning to unveil the website.

Texas Public Policy Foundation President Brooke L. Rollins told reporters that Texas saved billions while its crime rate declined 9 percent. Rollins said the project will help cash-strapped state save money while continuing to crack down on violent crime.
Levin added that the Texas crime rate is the lowest since 1993. He also noted that probationers pay dramatically more in restitution to victims than prisoners.

Norquist noted that criminal justice is a legitimate function of government but that conservatives ought to be interested in saving money and performing that function as efficiently as possible. He added that much of the conservative interest in rehabilitation and prison reform started with faith-based organizations.

Chuck Colson with Prison Fellowship Industries and Pat Nolan with the Justice Fellowship are among the supporters of the Right On Crime Initiatives. “As many lives as we could turn around, the system was eating up even more,” said Nolan, explaining why his group has been active in working toward avoiding hyper-technical application of parole violation laws. Nolan emphasized that it’s important to hold the criminal justice system accountable for results, including changed lives. Nolan added that having tough-on-crime conservatives like Meese associated with this effort provides both sides cover to do what they know is right without having to worry about being portrayed as soft-on-crime.

Of course, they aren't doing this because they are a bunch of bleeding-heart liberals, but rather because it is a way to controlling government spending and make the justice system more cost-effective:

Conservatives are known for being tough on crime, but we must also be tough on criminal justice spending. That means demanding more cost-effective approaches that enhance public safety. A clear example is our reliance on prisons, which serve a critical role by incapacitating dangerous offenders and career criminals but are not the solution for every type of offender. And in some instances, they have the unintended consequence of hardening nonviolent, low-risk offenders—making them a greater risk to the public than when they entered.

Applying the following conservative principles to criminal justice policy is vital to achieving a cost-effective system that protects citizens, restores victims, and reforms wrongdoers.

1. As with any government program, the criminal justice system must be transparent and include performance measures that hold it accountable for its results in protecting the public, lowering crime rates, reducing re-offending, collecting victim restitution and conserving taxpayers’ money.

2. Crime victims, along with the public and taxpayers, are among the key “consumers” of the criminal justice system; the victim’s conception of justice, public safety, and the offender’s risk for future criminal conduct should be prioritized when determining an appropriate punishment.

3. The corrections system should emphasize public safety, personal responsibility, work, restitution, community service, and treatment—both in probation and parole, which supervise most offenders, and in prisons.

4. An ideal criminal justice system works to reform amenable offenders who will return to society through harnessing the power of families, charities, faith-based groups, and communities.

5. Because incentives affect human behavior, policies for both offenders and the corrections system must align incentives with our goals of public safety, victim restitution and satisfaction, and cost-effectiveness, thereby moving from a system that grows when it fails to one that rewards results.

6. Criminal law should be reserved for conduct that is either blameworthy or threatens public safety, not wielded to grow government and undermine economic freedom.

These principles are grounded in time-tested conservative truths—constitutionally limited government, transparency, individual liberty, personal responsibility, free enterprise, and the centrality of the family and community. All of these are critical to addressing today’s criminal justice challenges. It is time to apply these principles to the task of delivering a better return on taxpayers’ investments in public safety. Our security, prosperity, and freedom depend on it.

Signatories include Newt Gingrich, Grover Norquist, Edwin Meese, William J. Bennett, Asa Hutchinson, David Keene, Richard Viguerie, Chuck Colson, Tony Perkins, Rabbi Daniel Lapin, Penny Nance, Ward Connerly, and Viet Dinh.

PFAW
Filed under:

Right Hails Health Care Ruling As Victory For the Constitution

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on December 13, 2010 - 3:21pm

When a federal judge declared the military's ban on openly gay soldiers to be unconstiutional, the Family Research Council blasted it as unconscionable judicial activism: 

This is the very definition of judicial activism -- when you are unable to achieve your desired policy goals through the democratic process, simply go to court and get a judge to decree that it must be so.

Today, a right-wing Bush-appointed judge declared that a key portion of the health care reform legislation was unconstitutional, and FRC hails him as a hero: 

"We applaud Judge Hudson for striking down the individual mandate recognizing that no part of the Constitution empowers the federal government to command American citizens to spend their own personal money to purchase health insurance.

...

"We call on the incoming Congress to quickly move to repeal this unconstitutional law in its entirely not merely to tinker with various provisions. Such tinkering would likely doom the legal challenges that are the best hope for dooming this fundamentally flawed law that is a high taxing, poorly thought out, and taxpayer funding of abortion monstrosity."

Amazing, isn't it, how when a judge rules in a way the Religious Right dislikes, it is unadulterated judicial activism but when a judge rules in their favor, it is a heroic stand for the Constitution?

Liberty Counsel:

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, said: “I applaud the ruling by Judge Hudson. There is absolutely no authority in the Constitution that would allow the federal government to force every person to purchase a particular kind of health insurance. Today marks the beginning of the end of this federal power grab. I am confident when the Supreme Court hears the cases of Liberty University and the Virginia Attorney General that the final nail will be driven into this monster’s heart.”

Concerned Women for America:

"It is good to see that we still have judges who take seriously the oath they took to operate within the powers granted to them by the Constitution. The court recognized that the federal government has no power to force Americans to buy a private good and penalize them if they do not. It is nonsensical for the federal government to argue that not engaging in an economic activity is, in fact, an 'economic activity' in the law.

"The individual mandate is just one part of the many troubling issues with ObamaCare. This ruling represents the first step in protecting families from an overreaching federal government that is out of control.

American Center for Law and Justice:

"We're very pleased the federal court reached a sound decision and concluded that the individual insurance mandate is an unconstitutional violation of the Commerce Clause," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "This decision guts ObamaCare and represents a decisive and significant victory for America against the largest power-grab by the federal government in U.S. history. The court correctly concluded that forcing someone to buy health insurance is not economic activity and that Congress does not have that authority under the Commerce Clause. We're already working on an amicus brief on behalf of members of Congress in support of the Commonwealth of Virginia as this case proceeds through the appeals process."

Traditional Values Coalition:

TVC warned last year that ObamaCare was unconstitutional and was a violation of our right to determine our own health care needs. We also warned that it was going to destroy private health insurance in this country and was designed to force all Americans into a government-run system. This socialist system would include death panels, taxpayer funded abortions, and the creation of dozens upon dozens of bureaucracies that would control our future health needs.

We have pushed for the repeal of ObamaCare since it was enacted – and have repeatedly detailed the numerous flaws in it. In fact, President Obama has admitted that what he really wants a "single payer" system – code for a government-run system. ObamaCare is carefully designed to destroy private health insurance in America.

...

Hudson has correctly determined that Congress has no constitutional authority to force Americans to purchase health insurance or face a financial penalty.

I hope this is the beginning of the end for ObamaCare. It was a bill that no one had read in its entirety and it was rammed through on Christmas Eve last year. It should be gutted and repealed.

Richard Viguerie:

"Congratulations to Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli for his hugely important first-round victory over Obamacare today in federal district court.

"Mr. Cuccinelli has been a true leader in the cause of freedom and constitutionally limited government. His win is also a victory for the entire Tea Party movement and constitutional conservatives everywhere.

"Now more than ever, Tea Partiers and constitutional conservatives must rally behind and support Ken Cuccinelli as he takes his case--and the Gadsden flag ('Don't tread on me') that decorates his office--through the appeals process.

PFAW
Filed under:

DeMint Will Give GOP Incumbents a Pass in 2012, Viguerie Will Not

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on December 3, 2010 - 2:50pm

It has been no secret that many of Sen. Jim DeMint's Republican colleagues have been unhappy with his willingness to back radical candidates to challenge, and in some cases defeat, establishment-backed candidates and to openly attack them for failing to embrace his ultra-right-wing agenda.

Of course, DeMint's ideological zealotry has made him a hero to the Religious Right and the Tea Party Movement. But now comes word that DeMint is privately assuring his Republican colleagues that he will not support any candidates who might decide to offer a primary challenge to a sitting senator:

South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint is privately reassuring his Republican colleagues up for reelection that he won’t recruit or endorse any primary opponent against them, vowing to raise more than $10 million aimed mainly at taking down Democratic incumbents.

In a letter obtained by POLITICO, the tea party favorite appears to be taking steps to soothe post-election tensions with his GOP colleagues, including some who say his political tactics have been counterproductive.

At the same time, however, the South Carolina conservative’s latest move could disappoint some of his most fervent grassroots supporters who are preparing to line up tea-party-backed candidates in states like Indiana, Utah and Maine where Republican senators have become targets of the right wing.

...

“First, despite rumors to the contrary, I want to assure you that I will not recruit or support primary challengers to incumbent Republicans, and you can also be assured I will support all of our Republican nominees for the Senate,” he wrote in the letter he sent Wednesday.

Given that there are several Senators up for re-election in 2012 who are regularly derided as RINOs, this move by DeMint seem likely to anger Tea Party activists ... and, in fact, Richard Viguerie is already declaring that "other conservatives cannot, and will not, give these out-of-touch Republicans a pass":

"Senator DeMint has repeatedly taken heat from establishment Republicans for his strong conservative stances and support for the tea party movement, and no doubt feels tremendous pressure from his colleagues to fall in line with the GOP leadership.

"All small-government, constitutional conservatives are deeply in Senator DeMint's debt for his sacrifices, work, and leadership in behalf of our cause.

"However, four or five of the ten Republican Senators up for re-election in 2012 need to be voted out, and if Sen. DeMint feels that he cannot involve himself in those primary races, then it is up to grassroots conservatives and tea partiers to provide the leadership to replace RINO Republicans or ineffective Republicans with effective and principled conservatives."

PFAW
Filed under:

Right Lines Up Squarely Behind DeMint, Threatens to Take Out Any Republican Who Opposes Him

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on November 12, 2010 - 2:36pm

Since the election, it has become abundantly clear that Sen. Jim DeMint has become the member of Congress who represents the agenda of the GOP's right-wing base and Tea Party movement.

Earlier this week, the Family Research Council announced that it was seeking one million people who were willing to pray for DeMint as takes on the Republican establishment and seeks to remake it in his own image.

And now Richard Viguerie and dozens of right-wing leaders are opening threatening the entire GOP establishment that they will seek to destroy any Republican who stands in DeMint's way:

Prominent conservative leaders are putting critics of Sen. Jim DeMint on notice: Stop blaming the South Carolina Republican for the GOP’s failure to take back the majority in the Senate -- or else.

Led by conservative icon Richard Viguerie, who heads the Web site ConservativeHQ.com, a group of three dozen high-profile DeMint backers, say they will respond to the senator’s detractors “in word and deed.”

“Conservatives will not only challenge and beat more Republican senators in Republican primaries, but conservatives will stop funding and volunteering for the NRSC and the RNC,” Viguerie wrote in a letter addressed to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele. “Instead, conservatives will send their money to, and volunteer for, Senator DeMint’s Senate Conservative Fund and the candidates Senator DeMint supports.”

And Viguerie and his counterparts didn’t stop there:

“It would be our goal for the Senate Conservatives Fund to raise more money than the NRSC,” the letter continues. “Conservatives will also work to defeat in Republican primaries those Republicans who retain consultants who criticize or try to undermine Senator DeMint.”

...

In his letter Viguerie warned that “such false and unfair attacks aid and abet President Obama, the Democratic Party and the liberal media,” adding: “We consider such attacks on Senator Jim DeMint an attack on us and all conservatives.”

As of Friday the letter was co-signed by 36 leaders and the writers are seeking to double that number by Monday.

The Republicans made huge gains in the election just over a week ago ... and they are already at each others throats.

PFAW
Filed under:

Religious Right Lining Up Behind Bachmann

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on November 9, 2010 - 2:24pm

When Rep. Mike Pence announced that he was stepping down from his position as head of the House Republican Conference, the Family Research Council immediately issued a statement saying that choosing his replacement would be the "first major test for the new Republican majority."

The two leading candidates for the position are Rep. Jeb Hensarling and Rep. Michele Bachmann, and while Hensarling appears to be emerging as the front-runner and racking up the support of GOP leaders, it looks like the Religious Right is backing Bachmann:

Concerned Women for America thinks ... [t]here are plenty of competent and fearless leaders at the ready who deserve a seat at the table. Rep. Michele Bachmann from Minnesota comes to mind. She has been an outspoken conservative leader of the Tea Party movement from the beginning, and we think she deserves serious consideration for a leadership position.

Conservative women won big this election cycle, and the Tea Party helped to propel them to victory. In fact, women in general swung 14 points for Republicans. It seems time to add a stiletto to the clubby, well-heeled leadership team.

And Richard Viguerie has even unveiled a petition asking Reps. Boehner and Cantor to "withdraw your endorsement of Rep. Hensarling for the House Republican Conference and allow Rep. Bachmann (or anyone else who wishes to join the race) a fair and open election process that equally respects the voice of each Republican House member." 

Ostensibly, Viguerie's petition is just asking for a fair election, but he is making no secret of his support for Bachmann:

Viguerie told Newsmax in an e-mail: "Yes, I think it's important that Michele Bachmann be elected as the House Republican Conference Chair. All other leadership positions, including committee chairs, are controlled by [presumptive House Speaker] John Boehner and Eric Cantor — men associated with the big-government Republicans that so angered the GOP's base and most of America.

"The Republican congressional leaders need to send a message that they are open under new management," he wrote. "Unfortunately, while Congressman Jeb Hensarling is a good conservative, his close association with the old guard Republican failed leadership sends the wrong message to tea partiers."

PFAW
Filed under:

The Mystery of Richard Viguerie's Sudden Support For The Mount Vernon Statement

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on February 17, 2010 - 5:09pm

Earlier today I wondered just what Richard Viguerie's name was doing on The Mount Vernon Statement since, on Monday, he called it embarrassing pablum.  But today he went ahead and signed it and even issued his own statement praising it as a good first step:

"I am pleased to be a signer of the Mount Vernon Statement.

"I feel it's a good first step, and I applaud those conservatives who have provided the leadership to produce this statement of conservative principles.

"In the coming weeks, I look forward to working with all principled conservatives, including the newest branch of the small-limited government coalition, the Tea Partiers, to take the steps necessary to maximize our victories in 2010 and beyond.

This doesn't really make any sense; why would he dismiss the statement as a meaningless joke on Monday only to turn around two days later and add his name to it?

I wonder if it might have had something to do with the fact that initially it looks like he wasn't asked to sign on. 

The first mentions of this statement appeared last week, first on The Atlantic and Politico, both of which listed key signers but didn't include Viguerie:

The Atlantic - "Some key conservative luminaries will be in attendance at the Collingwood Library and Museum in Alexandria, VA (an original part of George Washington's Mount Vernon properties): Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, David Keene of the American Conservative Union, former Reagan policy adviser Kenneth T. Cribb, Kenneth Blackwell of Coalition for a Conservative Majority, and Federalist Society co-founder David McIntosh."

Politico - "The big names attached to it include former Attorney General Ed Meese, Heritage Foundation President Edwin Feulner, Family Research Council head Tony Perkins, Media Research Center leader Brent Bozell, Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist and David Keene, head of the American Conservative Union, which is putting on CPAC, among others."

On Monday, the Washington Times wrote about it and quoted Viguerie dismissing the statement as meaningless.

And guess what? The very next day, Politico wrote another article about the statement and guess who's name appeared in the list:

The statement's drafters, who will sign it near George Washington's Mount Vernon home Wednesday afternoon, include figures from differing wings of the movement: former Attorney General Ed Meese, Heritage Foundation President Edwin Feulner, Family Research Council head Tony Perkins, Media Research Center leader Brent Bozell, Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, direct-mail guru Richard Viguerie and David Keene, the head of the American Conservative Union, sponsor of this week's Conservative Political Action Conference, with which the signing of the Mount Vernon statement is meant to coincide.

This list is nearly identical to the list Politico provided last week, with the exception of the sudden inclusion of Viguerie.

So what happened between Monday, when Viguerie was telling the Washington Times the whole thing was a pathetic joke, and Tuesday when he name was being listed among the statement's primary supporters? 

I'm guessing that organizers reached out to him and asked him to add his name, which was all it took to make this embarrassing pablum into a demonstration of conservative leadership and principles.

PFAW
Filed under:

Does Richard Viguerie Support The Mount Vernon Statement?

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on February 17, 2010 - 10:22am

I have to say I am a little confused to see Richard Viguerie's name on The Mount Vernon Statement:

After all, it was just the other day that he told The Washington Times that the document was a joke:

Not all prominent conservatives are on board.

"This is embarrassing," activist and longtime direct-mail advertiser Richard Viguerie told The Washington Times. "If the people in the leadership of the conservative movement are going to put out pablum like this, the tea party people are going to make them seem irrelevant. And the tea party people are going to march to the forefront."

In a dig at current and former Republican congressional leaders whom many blame for betraying conservative principles of limited government and reduced spending, Mr. Viguerie added, "This is almost as if the movements leaders were taken over by Tom DeLay and John Boehner."

But now he's signed on and is proclaiming it the key to unifying the conservative movement:

Among those in attendance will be Richard Viguerie, the chairman of Conservative HQ.com, who believes the conservative movement "got seriously off track during the big government days of George Bush, Karl Rove and Tom DeLay." This document, Viguerie says, is designed to unite conservatives.

"This is an attempt to draft a document that conservatives -- whether they're Tea Party conservatives or social or economic or foreign policy conservatives -- can get behind and begin the process of reclaiming the Republican Party for small-government conservatives," Viguerie explains.

So which is it: the Mount Vernon Statement is embarrassing pablum that shows the conservative movement has been taken over by people like Tom DeLay, or it is a bold statement of principle that will unite the conservative movement by signaling its break from people like Tom DeLay?

PFAW
Filed under:

Obama's Noble Prize Proves That Everyone Is a Stupid Communist!

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on October 9, 2009 - 3:29pm

For the most part, right-wing and Religious Right groups have been silent on the news that President Obama has been awarded the Noble Peace Prize, but a few have issued predictably inanely incoherent statements.

Such as the Catholic League proclaiming that "Abortion Haunts Peace Prize Winner":

Unlike another Nobel Peace Prize Winner, Mother Teresa, who said abortion was “the greatest destroyer of peace,” Obama has never indicated that abortion undermines the cause of peace. Indeed, he champions abortion as if it were a sacred right. If he wants to pivot at this juncture, Catholics will welcome it. If he doesn’t, he will have to live with the consequences.

And then there is Concerned Women for America's "Dumbing Down The Nobel Peace Prize":

According to the Associated Press, there were rumors consideration was being given to “…Zimbabwe’s Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, a Colombian senator and a Chinese dissident, along with an Afghan woman’s rights activist.” Wow – that’s tough competition. It’s amazing that the president of the United States would be considered amidst such an august group of candidates.

When Alfred Nobel wrote his will in 1895 he insisted that the peace prize should go “…to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses.” One wonders if Nobel ever considered there could have been a year where the crop of candidates was so bad that the award would be given to someone who had accomplished none of the things stipulated in his will. Apparently when there is a year where the prospects are so bleak, the lowest common denominator wins. That doesn’t say much for the world’s prospects for peace.

Not to be outdone is Richard Viguerie, whose press release claims that the award just goes to prove that Obama and everyone else is a Communist:

"The announcement from the Nobel Peace Prize Committee says as much about the Norwegian voters and their parliament as it does President Obama. All involved should be embarrassed and ashamed for using this Prize to advance a radical, leftist agenda.

"It's clear that the Marxist leaders in Europe know what most Americans don't know--that the American president is a kindred spirit who they recognize as one of their own.

"Freedom-loving people should no longer respect or take seriously the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, as they have become an arm of the worldwide Marxist cause, evidenced by their previous selections of Yassar Arafat and Le Duc Tho and now Barack Obama.

"The award has been cheapened beyond repair and the Nobel Committee has insulted all who labor and sacrifice for true peace and freedom under God's laws."

PFAW
Filed under:
Syndicate content