Chris Christie

This morning on the Today Show Mitt Romney and Chris Christie repeated their call for Rick Perry to disassociate himself from pastor Robert Jeffress because of the pastor’s denigration of Romney’s Mormon faith. Yesterday, Christie even compared Jeffress to “those folks in New Jersey who disparaged in both parties my decision to appoint a Muslim judge” and said that any “campaign that associates itself with that type of comment is beneath the office of President of the United States, in my view.”

Ironically, one of the people who slammed Christie over his criticism of anti-Muslim activists is Jay Sekulow, who endorsed and introduced Romney at the Values Voter Summit last week and in 2008 was a member of Romney’s “National Faith and Values Steering Committee.”

In fact, Sekulow and his organization, the American Center for Law and Justice, which was founded by Pat Robertson, tried to prevent American Muslims from exercising their First Amendment rights by suing to block the construction of a mosque in lower Manhattan and also issued a pamphlet which claims that Sharia law is on the brink of eclipsing the U.S. Constitution that “devout Muslims cannot truthfully swear the oath to become citizens of the United States of America.” Tim Murphy pointed out the irony in Romney condemning anti-Muslim bigot Bryan Fischer while praising Sekulow, and People For the American Way urged Romney to disavow Sekulow in the same way he has urged Perry to “repudiate” Jeffress:

“Mitt Romney is right to criticize his rivals for silently standing by and accepting bigotry,” said Michael Keegan, President of People For the American Way. “Now it is time for him to apply those standards to his own campaign. The truly courageous position for Romney to take would be to stand up against religious bigotry of all stripes – including the GOP’s increasingly prevalent scapegoating of American Muslims.

“Romney endorser Jay Sekulow’s American Center for Law and Justice has suggested that devout Muslims cannot become true citizens of the United States. Sekulow himself has perpetuated the debunked claim that the Constitution is under a threat from Sharia law and was a leader of the extremist backlash against the building of an Islamic community center in lower Manhattan, including overseeing the ACLJ’s lawsuit attempting to stop the community center’s construction.

“Last weekend, Mitt Romney called Sekulow a ‘treasure.’ If Romney wishes to show that he is a true champion of the American values of religious freedom and tolerance, he must apply the same standard to his own endorsers as he does to those of Rick Perry.”

But Sekulow isn’t the only anti-Muslim activist in the Romney camp.

Walid Phares was recently named a foreign policy adviser to Romney. As the Council on American Islamic Relations pointed out in a letter [pdf] to Rep. Peter King, Phares has close ties to a Lebanese militiamen and even served as an official in a militia that was “implicated, by Israel’s official Kahan inquiry and other sources, in the 1982 massacre of civilian men, women and children at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon.”

Phares also claims [pdf] that “jihadists within the West pose as civil rights advocates, interested solely in the ‘rights’ of their immigrant communities” in order for their “institutions [to] fall into their hands,” and warns of the “spread of Wahhabism” through Muslim infiltration of “the U.S. armed forces and ultimately even into the Pentagon.”

While Romney was willing to call out Jeffress and Fischer over their intolerant rhetoric, it is uncertain if he will apply that standard to his own campaign.

• I imagine that if the American Cancer Society rejected an effort by Christians to raise money for the organization, we'd never hear the end of it from the Religious Right.
• Eddie Long wants his money back.
• Michele Bachmann's campaign staff continues to lose key members.
• Will Chris Christie's announcement that he will not run for president finally satisfy the media? 
• Finally, Bradlee Dean must be really desperate for attention.

Earlier this month, Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy accused New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie of “misprision of treason” for appointing lawyer Sohail Mohammed, who is Muslim, to the state’s Superior Court. While speaking with Rick Joyner of MorningStar Ministries and The Oak Initiative yesterday, Gaffney said that more people need to be investigated for misprision of treason - the failure to report treasonous activity to a federal official - a federal offense punishable by up to seven years in prison.

After lauding the House Un-American Activities Committee, which was notorious for using ‘red scare’ tactics in government and the entertainment industry in the 1950’s, Gaffney called for the establishment of a “House Anti-American Activities Committee” that would investigate people involved in treasonous activities or their concealment.

Joyner, who Gaffney called one of his “personal heroes,” is also an anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist who previously argued that educators are replacing the Founding Fathers with Muslims in history textbooks and that Christianity and Islam are on the verge of merging into a religion called Chrislam.

Watch:

Joyner: Yet we have people who are part of an organization whose mission statement is to destroy America and we’re putting them in top level government positions, I mean this is at best, it is shocking incompetence on the part of those who have taken a vow to defend us from these very ones. So we want to be bold about that, you know some people when they see this they’re starting to call it, this treason on an unbelievable level, it could be treason, it could be incompetence, both could be deadly.

Gaffney: There is evidence of at best incompetence and at worst, you could argue, it’s treasonous. There’s something else that I would like to introduce as a concept I didn’t frankly know of it myself until fairly recently, also a felony offense in the U.S. code, it’s called misprision of treason. And that is a crime in which an individual, doesn’t have to be a government official but it would apply there but also to private citizens, who knows or has reason to know that seditious activity is under way and does nothing about it. I think we need to include that in the possibilities here because what our friend and co-author Andy McCarthy has called willful blindness may actually be a criminal offense under our statutes and people need to be held accountable.

I’ve called in a column I wrote a couple of weeks ago in the Washington Times for a new congressional oversight committee. Back in the Cold War as we talked about in our first program we wrestled with another totalitarian ideology that was determined to destroy us back when the McCarren Act was enacted, we had what was then called the House Un-American Activities Committee to explore what was going on, who was doing it, who was helping them do it, what the implications would be if it weren’t stopped. I think at the very least a new House Anti-American Activities Committee.

• Hey, CBN's David Brody got a book deal. Should be an objectively journalistic look at why Democrats hate God.
• Gary Bauer can't believe anyone would think Gov. Rick Perry partnered with a bunch of extremists for his prayer event ... and that just proves that those people are extremists!
• Les Kingsolving says "for President Obama and his new secretary of defense to rejoice as they force our armed forces to accept the self-announced sodomites who are the nation's leading AIDS-spreaders is a national outrage that truly should be remembered at the polls one year from this November."
• Not surprisingly, Robert Spencer is not pleased with Gov. Chris Christie.
• Finally, I am sure that is someone warming up the crowd for an event with President Obama called conservatives "political suicide bombers," the Right would lose their minds.

At a Saturday CPAC panel attacking public sector unions, the crowd cheered the news that the new Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, has set out to destroy public sector unions by moving to strip employees of collective bargaining rights.

For 63 years, not one sitting New Jersey Supreme Court Justice who had sought to be re-appointed by the Governor had been refused ... until Gov. Chris Christie took office and decided to replace Justice John Wallace with a Republican nominee of his own.

That move did not sit well with the Democrats in the state Senate who announced that they would refuse to even consider confirming Christie's nominee, leading Chief Justice Stuart Rabner to appoint a senior judge of the appellate division to serve as a temporary justice in order to fill the vacant seventh seat.

And everything seemed fine until Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto, whose term expires in 2011, discovered an article from The Federalist Society [PDF] claiming that allowing the Chief Justice to fill this vacant seat is unconstitutional.

And now, inspired by this article, Rivera-Soto announced that he will refuse to participate in any more decisions because the current make-up of the court is unconstitutional:

In an unexpected action that rocked New Jersey's legal community Friday, New Jersey Supreme Court Justice Roberto A. Rivera-Soto declared he will abstain from the high court's decisions because he maintains Chief Justice Stuart Rabner did not have the constitutional power to appoint Judge Edwin Stern to temporarily fill a vacant seat on the seven-member panel.

...

In two routine decision made public Friday, Rivera-Soto stated it was not necessary to appoint a temporary justice, and that he is abstaining from decisions because the court's current makeup is unconstitutional. He argued that only the governor has the power to appoint a justice.

"The assignment of a Superior Court judge to serve on this court to fill a vacancy resulting from a political impasse between the executive and the legislative branches thrusts the judiciary into that political thicket, all the while improperly advancing one side's views in preference over the other's," Rivera-Soto wrote. "The Constitution, sober and reflective court practice, and everyday common sense each counsels against the foolhardy steps the court today takes."

Democrats in the state Senate are now demanding that Rivera-Soto resign from the court, accusing him of waging this stunt in an attempt to curry favor with Gov. Christie in hopes of being re-appointed when his term expires:

"Today's dissent from Justice Rivera-Soto shows contempt for the law, disregard for his fellow jurists and utter disdain for the right of New Jerseyans to have their cases heard by a full Court," [Senate President Stephen M.] Sweeney said. "It officially cements his place as the worst and most ethically challenged justice in the history of the modern judiciary.

"If he is so disinterested in fulfilling his constitutional duties, then he should step down and let the governor nominate and the Senate confirm a new justice who will actually participate in court matters," Sweeney said. "It's very telling that not one of his colleagues — nor any other jurist since 1947 — would agree with his cynical, transparent and politically motivated temper tantrum, which is either a hail-Mary attempt to curry favor among conservatives to save his own reappointment or an effort to undercut the state Supreme Court's authority on the eve of legislative redistricting.

"This isn't the first mistake Rivera-Soto's made since joining the Court, but it should be his last," Sweeney added.

...

Sen. Nicholas P. Scutari (D-Union) chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also called on Rivera-Soto to resign.

"Justice Rivera-Soto's outright refusal to perform his judicial duties demonstrates a complete disregard for the position he holds and for the residents of this state," Scutari said. "The timing of his move is suspect. With his reappointment around the corner, this smacks of a desperate attempt to distract from his ethical lapses and grab the attention of right wing pundits who share a disdain for the court. This is an act of true arrogance. He is making an absolute mockery of the judiciary, and is clearly no longer fit to serve on the court. He should immediately step down."

• Gary Bauer is very excited by the idea of Chris Christie running for president in 2012.
• Um ... who cares what Peter LaBarbera has to say on the issue of gerrymandering?
• Are we back to this already?
• So it's having a candidate that is good at selling a message that wins elections?  Wow, thanks for that brilliant insight.
• You have got to love that Randall Terry is looking for candidates in 2012 "who will show aborted babies in their television ads." That is his sole criteria. 
• Brian Fischer puts the GOP on notice that they are now the enemy: "The battle now is no longer between the Republicans and President Obama. The battle royale now is between citizen class Republicans and ruling class Republicans. It is a battle between the Jim DeMints of the world and the Mitch McConnells of the world. It is a battle between the Sarah Palins of the world and the John McCains of the world."

I was fully prepared for conservative gloating in the event that Scott Brown won the special election for the Senate seat held by the late Ted Kennedy.  It was, after all, a significant victory ... but according to the early commentary from right-wing analysts, it was not only an impressive upset but rather the single most important election in the history of America, ever - an election which signals the complete and utter downfall of everything from health care to immigration reform, and the end of President Obama and the (still sizable) Democratic majorities in Congress:

The Christian Defense Coalition:

Let me be clear. Tonight a second American Revolution has begun in the great state of Massachusetts. It is a revolution fueled by passion and the belief that the voice of people matters more than the narrow views of the political elite.

"A republican win in Massachusetts for the seat held by Senator Ted Kennedy for over 40 years was unthinkable even a few months ago.

"What changed?

"The American people have become angry and frustrated by the policies of President Obama and Speaker Pelosi and the arrogant way they have completely disregarded the voice of the people.

"You cannot promise to be transparent in the health care debate and ensure it is shown on television and then try to hammer out closed back room deals and expect the American public to sit idly by.

"President Obama has been tone deaf when it comes to the desires, wishes and dreams of the American people.

"For example, 71% of the American people oppose public monies being used to pay for abortions yet President Obama has ignored this fact and pressed forward with this flawed health care reform.

"Tonight is a clear signal that hope and change has turned into anger and frustration and the revolution has begun.

"Bring on November 2010."

Concerned Women for America:

Today's vote in Massachusetts was as much about the Obama/Reid/Pelosi regime as it was to select a new senator. The voters in the bluest of states rejected the candidate who supported the latest power grab of ObamaCare.

"Massachusetts' citizens know what ObamaCare would be like -- their state passed oppressive health care 'reform' that subsidizes abortions. They're paying the high prices and getting less health care because of it.

"But that doesn't mean President Obama, Sen. Reid or Rep. Pelosi will listen to this extraordinary message. They never quit -- they just get sneakier.

Deacon Keith Fournier:

On the day before the anniversary of the swearing in of President Barack Obama, the people of blue collar Massachusetts have sent a strong message. They showed that there is a growing angst in the US electorate over the economy, unemployment, bailouts, deficits and the expansion of the power and role of the federal government.

This special election in Massachusetts will be the subject of continuing speculation among the pundits for months. Already, the finger- pointing has begun in efforts to assess blame. Whether it will spark a wave of retirements among Democrats whose seats are up this year and whether it signals a national trend against the Democratic Party are just two of the many topics which will serve as fodder for talking heads in the days ahead.

However, there is no doubt that Senator Elect Brown’s significant victory is a wake up call to the current national leadership of the Democratic Party. Several media personalities who not only disparaged Scott Brown but ruthlessly savaged him will be eating a lot of crow. Their commentary will most certainly be played over and over again as the pundit class smells blood in the waters.

What is also clear is that the election in Massachusetts signals a major shift in the sentiment of US voters. It is not a sign of a new partisan movement, but a movement away from many of the big government approaches of the current administration. The emergence of the Independent voter in the two Commonwealth States of Virginia and Massachusetts will become the story of the campaigns of 2010 and 2012.

Susan B. Anthony List:

"On the heels of last fall's victories by Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie, Scott Brown's victory is just the beginning of the consequences Congressional incumbents will face this November. Anyone who votes to advance health care legislation that funds abortion on-demand should consider themselves on notice.

"The election of Scott Brown is no accident. This election is about more than parties or candidates. The election is just one more sign of the overreach of the President and Congress. The American people have spoken tonight.

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC:

"The Brown victory not only breaks the Democratic 60 vote hold on the U.S. Senate needed for cloture votes, but it sends a clear message that voters prefer pro-enforcement candidates instead of pro-amnesty candidates." said William Gheen, president of ALIPAC. "We will be working hard to defeat the Amnesty legislation filed in Congress and to repeat the Brown-Coakley scenario in hundreds of races this November."

...

"Americans are sick and tired of politicians who are servants of powerful special interests, instead of the American public." said Gheen. "A political revolution has begun in America, illegal immigration is a core issue fueling that revolt, and a lot of politicians are about to join the unemployment lines."

Fred Barnes:

Oh, yes. The health care bill, ObamaCare, is dead with not the slightest prospect of resurrection. Brown ran to be the 41st vote for filibuster and now he is just that. Democrats have talked up clever strategies to pass the bill in the Senate despite Brown, but they won’t fly. It’s one thing for ObamaCare to be rejected by the American public in poll after poll. But it becomes a matter of considerably greater political magnitude when ObamaCare causes the loss of a Senate race in the blue state of Massachusetts.

Then there’s the House, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi insists some version of ObamaCare will be approved and soon. She’s not kidding. She’s simply wrong. At best, she has the minimum 218 votes for passage. After the Massachusetts fiasco, however, there’s sure to be erosion. How many Democrats in Republican-leaning districts want to vote for ObamaCare, post-Massachusetts? Not many.

And finally Joseph Farah:

I hate to say it, but I really did tell you so.

...

This is just the beginning.

It's not the Republican Party that made this happen.

It was an awakening by the American people.

They don't want to live under socialism.

They don't want to live under tyranny.

They don't want to live in a nanny state.

They don't want to live in misery.

They don't want to live under government's thumb.

They want to be free.

So let's celebrate today. Let's smile and rejoice. Let's take comfort in what appears to be a second chance for America.