Phyllis Schlafly

Right Wing Leftovers

  • WND sure does love promoting anti-gay books.
  • Phyllis Schlafly sure does get worked up over the oddest things.
  • Judicial Watch has filed a FOIA lawsuit on behalf of the Family Research Council "for records related to the DOJ's decision not to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act."
  • Poor Frank Turek.  He keeps losing jobs because of his anti-gay activism.
  • Finally, Gary Cass says that ten years after the 9/11 attacks "this murderous ideology has infiltrated all the way to the White House."

If Dominionism Is A Liberal Conspiracy, Why Does It Have Conservative Critics?

Over the last week Kyle has been rebutting claims by some journalists and Religious Right activists that Dominionism, which contends that fundamentalist Christians must take ‘dominion’ over society and government, is nothing more than a liberal conspiracy. Dominionism has been gaining attention as Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry’s close ties with outspoken propagators of the radical dominionist ideology come to light.

In a post today, Rachel Tabachnik takes on the Washington Post’s Lisa Miller’s much-discussed article dismissing dominionism. Tabachnik notes that Miller’s article quoted Mark DeMoss downplaying the prevalence of dominionism in the Religious Right - without noting that the DeMoss Group has ties to Bill Bright, the founder of the dominionist Seven Mountains ideology, and Gary DeMar, who is a chief proponent of the Christian Reconstructionism, a hardline dominionist ideology.

As Kyle noted last week, Pat Robertson denied knowing anything about Dominionism, even though he delivered a speech where he urged his audience to “get ready to take dominion!” and Matt Barber of Liberty University School of Law called it a “scary Christian monster that lives under liberals’ beds,” despite the fact the Liberty University School of Law sponsored DeMar’s conference last year, called "2010 Sovereignty and Dominion conference — Biblical Blueprints for Victory!" In fact, the Communications Director of Truth In Action Ministries, which until recently was called Coral Ridge Ministries, claimed that “dominionism is a sham charge-one reserved for Christians on the right,” even though prominent dominionist Janet Porter was once the head of a Coral Ridge Ministries affiliate. So if domininionism doesn’t exist and is merely a construct of the left, then why was Porter fired by two conservative Christian radio stations for promoting…“dominionism”?

Last year, Voice of Christian Youth America (VCY America) fired Porter because of what they called the “drift of [Porter’s] program toward ‘dominion theology.’” VCY America says it is dedicated to “featuring solid Bible teaching programs” and features conservative programming like ‘The Phyllis Schlafly Report’ and ‘Freedom’s Call,’ Liberty Counsel’s radio bulletin.

Listen to VCY’s decision on Porter’s firing, which states that “VCY America does not believe in Dominion theology or waging spiritual war for the establishment of an earthly kingdom of power, that is dominion theology and it is being promoted by many who are guided by their own dreams and visions and not necessarily the Word of God”:

VCY America also hosted Sarah Leslie of the Discernment Research Group and the Herescope blog, who has worked to expose dominionism. Leslie is the former head of Iowa Right to Life, hardly a liberal activist, who talked to VCY America about the rise of Seven Mountains Dominionism:

VCY America wasn’t the only Christian radio station to fire Porter for promoting dominionism. Worldview Radio also dropped Porter for promoting “Dominion theology” and working “with the Dominion theory theology people” during her May Day prayer rally.

Surely, Barber can ask Porter herself why she was fired, since she was a featured speaker at Liberty Counsel’s Awakening 2011 and Liberty Counsel sponsored Porter’s How To Take Back America conference. Or ask Dominionism’s many conservative critics.

If you want a taste of what dominionism sounds like, watch Janet Porter preach with Cindy Jacobs about taking control of the mountain of government:

Did Michele Bachmann Destroy Feminism?

When Sarah Palin was chosen as the GOP nominee for vice president, Phyllis Schlafly hailed her as a role model of the non-feminist woman who by her very existence discredited the women’s movement. Feminists “are really spooked by Palin because she’s done everything and she is a success,” Schlafly said, “besides she is pretty and they cannot stand her.”

Now that Palin’s star has significantly subsided and she has become one of the most unpopular politicians in America, Schlafly’s niece Suzanne Venker is crowning Michele Bachmann as the new conservative woman who destroyed feminism. Venker, who co-authored The Flipside of Feminism with Schlafly, told James Dobson that women shouldn’t pursue challenging professions like brain surgery because it might prevent them from having children.

In an article for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch today, Venker lauded Bachmann for showing the bright side of biblical “submission” and proving that the women’s movement has contributed nothing beneficial to society. Venker writes that for “the first time in decades, the liberal feminist establishment is up against something new: outspoken conservative women who undermine the feminist agenda.” But haven’t conservative women, like say, Phyllis Schlafly, been involved in politics for decades?

Venker argues that now Bachmann is being unfairly depicted as “a religious nut and a doormat,” and says a man would never be asked about biblical submission (not so). And even though Bachmann may be one of the easiest GOP candidates for President Obama to defeat, Venker says that she is actually making liberals run scared:

For 40 years, this country has endured a social movement that has been relentless in its goals. Women on the left believe the feminist movement is responsible for liberating women from constricted lives; women on the right see things differently. Feminists are consumed with their place in society; conservative women are not. They are especially uninterested in fighting a gender war. That's why the Submission Question could be asked only of a conservative female candidate. It's women on the right, we're told, who want to keep women in their place. Conservative women are anti-woman.

So what to do when faced with a female candidate who's conservative and popular? Why, portray her as a religious nut and a doormat, of course! Indeed, feminists know most women won't identify with that kind of woman. And they're right: they won't. Women on the left don't appreciate that traditional values, even Biblical values, are not at odds with female empowerment. No matter what you think of Bachmann or Sarah Palin, these women have proved this in spades. No one gets to their position by being oppressed or mousy.

For the first time in decades, the liberal feminist establishment is up against something new: outspoken conservative women who undermine the feminist agenda. Conservative women are supposed to stay home! Conservative women are supposed to lead nice, traditional lives: raise a gaggle of children, be subordinate to their husbands and stay out of the public sphere. Why are they asserting their independent minds?



The implication that Michele Bachmann is a Stepford wife in disguise was a pitiful attempt to bring down a female conservative candidate who has sinned in the worst way possible: She does not carry the feminist torch. And, yet, she still won the Iowa straw poll.

Perhaps feminism really is dead.

Bachmann's Mentor Calls On Christian Leaders To Bring Biblical Law To America Or Face God's Judgment

Congresswoman and presidential candidate Michele Bachmann has touted Oral Roberts University law professor John Eidsmoe as her mentor and guide, bolstering her already impeccable credentials with Religious Right voters. Profiles by writers such as Ryan Lizza and Michelle Goldberg offered further insight into how Eidsmoe shaped Bachmann’s thinking, and highlighted some of Eidsmoe’s more controversial views, such as his commitment to biblical government and belief that the abolition of slavery was devastating for African Americans. In an interview with Lizza, Eidsmoe said that he thinks Bachmann mirrors the political views he outlined, and Bachmann told an Iowa pastor conference that Eidsmoe was “one of the professors who had a great influence on me” who is “absolutely brilliant.”

In 1984 Eidsmoe wrote God & Caesar, which is essentially a manual to why and how Christians should work in politics and government. Eidsmoe dedicated the book to his children, “in the hope that their generation will more fully implement biblical norms and standards.” In the book, Eidsmoe finds that the biblical view and the conservative agenda virtually always coincide, while the liberal position represents the rejection of God and godly principles. No matter the issue, economic, social, family, law, and foreign policy, Eidsmoe finds that conservatives are always on the right side of the Bible while liberals are on the side of godlessness.

As Julie Ingersoll writes in Religion Dispatches, Eidsmoe is a proponent of Christian Reconstructionism, a philosophy designed by R. J. Rushdoony that wants America governed  according to Biblical law.

Eidsmoe frequently promotes Rushdoony in God & Caesar and his dominionist teachings about the role of “God’s Word” in the political field:

God’s Word has a lot to say about government, about crime and punishment, about abortion, about national defense, about war and peace, about the many political issues that face us daily. Paul declared that he had ‘not shunned to declare unto all the counsel of God’ (Acts 20:27). The fundamentalist who refuses to preach or consider what God’s Word has to say about politics is not declaring the whole counsel of God and has a serious gap in his ministry. R. J. Rushdoony put it well when he said,

Man must exercise dominion in the name of God, and in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness…. The world, moreover, cannot be surrendered to Satan. It is God’s world and must be brought under God’s law politically, economically, and in every other way possible. The Enlightenment, by its savage and long-standing attack on Biblical faith, has brought about a long retreat of Christianity from a full-orbed faith to a king of last-ditch battle centering around the doctrines of salvation and of the infallible Scripture. The time has come for a full-scale offensive, and it has indeed begun, to bring every area of thought into captivity to Christ, to establish the whole counsel of God and every implication of His infallible word. (p. 56)

Eidsmoe believes that God brings people into the political arena and then uses them to enforce his will. He cites right-wing activist Phyllis Schlafly as one such leader that God used to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment, and Texas activists Mel and Norma Gabler to “analyze and critique textbooks and expose humanist, anti-Christian, immoral, or anti-American content. I’m sure the Gablers never dreamed God would use them like that” (p. 60).

He goes on to say that America is facing “political and economic decline” as a result of “moral decay” and God’s judgment because of the government’s failure to embrace biblical law. Eidsmoe argues that unless Christians that follow his Reconstructionist positions enter politics, God will judge America in the same way he judged Judah before exiling the Jews to Babylon:

We should add that this political and economic decline is a natural and logical consequence, but it is also a supernatural consequence. It is the result of God’s judgment (Leviticus 26:14-29).

I believe the political and economic decline that grips America today is the result of moral decay. I believe God is calling upon believers today to lead the spiritual awakening that can overcome that moral lapse. That’s how believers can truly be the salt of the earth, preserving their nation from divine judgment.

After decrying the sin of Judah, their oppression and robbery, their vexation of the poor and needy and the sojourner, God declared in Ezekiel 22:30, ‘And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it.’

God is looking for believers today to ‘stand in the gap,’ to assert themselves in the political arena and transform America’s political institutions.

But I omitted the last four words of that verse: ‘…but I found none.’ The Lord continued in the next verse, ‘Therefore have I poured out mine indignation upon them; I have consumed them with the fire of my wrath: their own way have I recompensed upon their heads, saith the Lord God.’

God’s judgment indeed came upon Judah: seventy years of exile in Babylon.

That was true of Judah. I pray it won’t be true of America. Will you do your part, as others have done theirs? (p. 68)

Schlafly: Violence Against Women Act Protects Women Too Much

Eagle Forum’s Phyllis Schlafly wants Congress to hold up the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act until it is altered so that it doesn’t benefit women. Schlafly, a long-time critic of the landmark law who believes that married women cannot be raped by their husbands, contends that the Violence Against Women Act goes too far in protecting women from abusive spouses and that the law is merely a feminist plot to tear down men:

The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), now up for reauthorization, is in major need of revision. Its billion-dollar-a-year price tag spent by the radical feminists to pursue their ideology and goals (known as feminist pork) make it an embarrassment to members of Congress who voted for it.

For 30 years, the feminists have been pretending that their goal is to abolish all sex discrimination, eliminating all gender differences no matter how reasonable. When it comes to domestic violence, however, feminist dogma preaches that there is an innate gender difference: Men are naturally batterers, and women are naturally victims (i.e., gender profiling).

Starting with its title, VAWA is just about as sex discriminatory as legislation can get. It is written and implemented to oppose the abuse of women and to punish men.



Women who make domestic violence accusations are not required to produce evidence and are never prosecuted for perjury if they lie. Accused men are not accorded fundamental protections of due process, not considered innocent until proven guilty and in many cases are not afforded the right to confront their accusers.

Legal assistance is customarily provided to women but not to men. Men ought to be entitled to equal protection of the law because many charges are felonies and could result in prison and loss of money, job and reputation.

Feminist recipients of VAWA handouts lobby legislators, judges and prosecutors on the taxpayers' dime (which is contrary to Section 1913 of Title 18, U.S. Code), and the results are generally harmful to all concerned. This lobbying has resulted in laws calling for mandatory arrest (i.e., the police must arrest someone – guess who) of the predominant aggressor (i.e., ignore the facts and assume the man is the aggressor) and no-drop prosecution (i.e., prosecute the man even if the woman has withdrawn her accusation or refuses to testify).

Random Book Blogging: Sally Kern Is a Modern Day Anita Bryant

So guess what I received in the mail today?

That is right, Sally Kern's new book "The Stoning of Sally Kern: The Liberal Attack on Christian Conservatism - And Why We Must Take a Stand."

Having just received it, I have not yet had an opportunity to read it, but I will be providing updates as I make my way through it.

Kern made a name for herself by declaring that "homosexual agenda is destroying this nation ... it's the biggest threat that our nation has, even more so than terrorism or Islam."

That, of course, made Kern a hero to the Religious Right and many of those leaders provided glowing blurbs for her book, including Tony Perkins, Phyllis Schlafly, William Federer, David Barton, Paul Blair, Dick Bott ... and none other than Anita Bryant:

I was before her time, but Sally Kern is here for such a time as this. I am grateful for her life and her friendship. Reading The Stoning of Sally Kern was at times like déjà vu, reminding me of my stand in Dade County in 1977. I can highly recommend this book to anyone who loves God, their family, and their country. It is a must-read for any believing woman or man who wants to make a difference in these perilous times. Those soldiers who have counted the cost of character assassination or endured other losses yet are willing to take a stand in truth and love for the glory of God, our children, and future generations will especially enjoy this inspiring book.

Schlafly Reminisces About The Days Of The Shotgun Wedding

Phyllis Schlafly is out with another article on the rise of single motherhood. According to Schlafly, the usual culprits are to blame: feminists, Barack Obama, ‘big government,’ and gay people who want the right to marry. Schlafly also says that single motherhood is increasing and marriage is declining because the legalization of abortion is “diminishing the custom of shotgun marriages, which in earlier years was often the response to surprise pregnancies.” Schlafly’s nostalgia for forced marriages shouldn’t be a surprise, as she is also a long-time apologist for marital rape.

Schlafly writes:

Prior to Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty, husbands and fathers provided for their families. The 1.7 million out-of-wedlock babies born last year and their unmarried moms now look to Big Brother as their financial provider.

The left is content to let this problem persist because 70 percent of unmarried women voted for Barack Obama for president. They vote for the party that offers the richer subsidies.



Among other unfortunate effects, the trends toward non-marriage and toward same-sex marriage are a direct attack on fathers. The bond between a child and his mother is an obvious fact of nature, but marriage is the relationship that establishes the link between a child and his father.

There are many causes for the dramatic reduction in marriage, starting with unilateral divorce, which spread across the United States in the 1960s and '70s, putting government on the side of marriage breakup. Then came the legalizing of abortion, diminishing the custom of shotgun marriages, which in earlier years was often the response to surprise pregnancies.

The feminist notion that women should be independent of men, followed by affirmative-action/female quotas in employment, tended to carry out the goal stated by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg that the concept of husband-breadwinner and wife-homemaker "must be eliminated." These feminist ideas and practices demean marriage by discriminating against men and also against fulltime homemakers.

Mamas Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Brain Surgeons

For the last two days, James Dobson has dedicated his "Family Talk" radio program to interviewing Phyllis Schlafly and her niece, Suzanne Venker, about their new book "The Flipside of Feminism: What Conservative Women Know -- and Men Can't Say."

While Schlafly was her usual cranky and out-of-touch self, rambling on about how all feminists had horrible childhoods and hate men and babies and husbands shouldn't be expected to change diapers, Venker was the voice of today's modern anti-feminist ... the sort who tells her eleven year-old daughter not to become a brain surgeon because it'll interfere with her baby-making:

The other, very taboo thing to say to young women is "you need to look for a man who can support you." And the reason why you want to do that is not because you're never going to make your own money and go out into the world; it's because you're going to hit a point - particularly in those years when the children are not in school, the first five years - when you are not going to want to be bothered with making an income because you're going to want to be with those babies.

So that doesn't mean you have to find a rich man, it just means you have to find somebody who is ambitious and capable of holding down a job and finding a path that is consistent and where he does not flounder.

Another point is why I say the reality is there are going to be some careers that are probably not going to be good options for you as a woman. I have an eleven year-old daughter and if we got into the conversation of what am I going to be in X number of years and she comes to me and says "Mom, I want to be a brain surgeon," I would ask her "Okay, is there anything else that you want in your life?"

And if she presumably then says "well, I'd like to get married and have children too," I'd say "then you'd probably better pick something else." And here's why: these two things are going to conflict majorly. You're going to spend ten years preparing for this major life as a brain surgeon - which is one kind of life, all consuming - and then right as your body is winding down biologically, you want to get married and have children. That ain't gonna work.

Hartzler Stands By Her Anti-Gay Comments

During the Eagle Forum Collegians 2011 Summit with Phyllis Schlafly, Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) delivered a speech on why young conservatives should oppose marriage equality, claiming that legalizing gay marriage is akin to legalizing pedophilia, incest, and letting three-year olds drive a car. We attended the conference and posted the video:

Hartzler: Some people say, why does it matter to you as a government official? I care about someone else, I’m committed, I should be able to marry. Well, think about it. That starts you down the road to opening up licensure to basically meaning that the license would mean nothing if you let everybody with that standard. For instance, if you just care about somebody and you have a committed relationship, why not allow one man and two women, or three women to marry? There are a lot of people in this country that support polygamy. Why not? If they’re committed to each other, why should you care?

Why not allow group marriage? There are people out there who want that. I think it’s called polyamory, it’s got some big name. But anyway, group marriage, I understand. Well, is that the best policy? Why not allow an uncle to marry his niece? Why not allow a 50-year-old man to marry a 12-year-old girl if they love each other and they’re committed? So, pretty soon, if you don’t set parameters, you don’t have any parameters at all, the license means nothing — the marriage means nothing.



It’s their right to marry whoever they want, but we’re saying marriage is between a man and a woman. So, there’s a difference there. But it’s not a right in the Constitution as far as that goes either. It’s not a right of anybody — of a 3-year-old to be able to drive a car. You know, the government has set some parameters that they think is correct.

After the video was posted, Hartzler reiterated her argument while also suggesting that her comments were “misconstrued.” The Congresswoman told PoliticsMO.com that she stands by her ‘slippery slope’ analogy, adding that she only meant to say that gay people getting married is like thirteen year olds driving cars:

Speaking to PoliticMo Monday, Hartzler clarified, saying she said – or meant to say – 13 year old, not three year old.

“I was saying that if you change the standard in the country to having marriage be, which is what they want, that just anybody that has a loving and committed relationship, then you set yourself on a slippery slope legally in courts to having other people come forward with similar arguments that would be objectionable to almost everyone,” she said. “So, that’s another reason why it makes sense to just keep the traditional definition of a man and a woman and that it’s my main point there is that it’s wide public policy.

“So, obviously those comments are just being misconstrued by those,” she said.

West: "Gay Marriage Is An Oxymoron" And Will End Society

Congressman Allen West (R-FL) joined Phyllis Schlafly at Eagle Forum Collegians to slam marriage equality, saying: “the term ‘gay marriage’ is an oxymoron.” He even tried to link gay marriage with the country’s debt and legal abortion. West, who recently criticized the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell because he believes that gay and lesbian servicemembers “can change [their] behavior,” warned the audience of young conservatives that if gay marriage becomes legal then “it just becomes a matter of time before we don’t have society.”

Watch:

The term ‘gay marriage’ is an oxymoron. Because marriage is a union and a bond between a man and a woman to do one thing: the furtherance of society by procreation, through creating new life. Have you ever read the book America Alone by Mark Steyn? It’s about demographics. And if we continue with a cycle of debt and punishing our unborn then it just becomes a matter of time before you don’t have society.

Hartzler: Gay Marriage Is Like Incest, Letting Three-Year Old Children Drive

Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) built her political career on opposing gay rights: she spearheaded the Missouri campaign to enshrine discrimination in the state constitution and since her election to Congress last November has fought to preserve the Defense of Marriage Act and block the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Yesterday, Hartzler addressed Eagle Forum Collegians 2011 Summit in Washington on why young people should oppose marriage equality.

Joined by Eagle Forum head Phyllis Schlafly, Hartzler compared gay marriage to polygamy and incest, and later argued that we shouldn’t give equal marriage rights to gay couples just as “it’s not a right of a three-year old to drive a car.”

Watch:

Opposition to marriage equality was a major theme at the conference, due in part to fears that young people disproportionately favor legalizing gay marriage. Participants even received a pamphlet “77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Man/Woman Marriage” from Jennifer Roback Morse of The Ruth Institute, a project of the National Organization for Marriage. The pamphlet harshly criticized gay families as “unjust and cruel to the child” and argues that “we will not be able to maintain a free society” if gay marriage is legalized.

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Joseph Farah says "Newt Gingrich is a liberal."
  • Micah Clark, executive director of the American Family Association of Indiana, says Mitch Daniels "has a bit of a weakness on the homosexual demands."
  • Phyllis Schlafly gets worked up over the strangest things.
  • Mitt Romney hires Mark DeMoss.
  • From the latest FRC prayer update: "May Tennessee enact this bill to prevent ENDA-like ordinances! May Congress do so likewise, if the President dares to circumvent Congress by issuing an ENDA-like Executive Order!"
  • Finally, quote of the day from Gingrich spokesman Rick Tyler: "The literati sent out their minions to do their bidding. Washington cannot tolerate threats from outsiders who might disrupt their comfortable world. The firefight started when the cowardly sensed weakness. They fired timidly at first, then the sheep not wanting to be dropped from the establishment’s cocktail party invite list unloaded their entire clip, firing without taking aim their distortions and falsehoods. Now they are left exposed by their bylines and handles. But surely they had killed him off. This is the way it always worked. A lesser person could not have survived the first few minutes of the onslaught. But out of the billowing smoke and dust of tweets and trivia emerged Gingrich, once again ready to lead those who won’t be intimated by the political elite and are ready to take on the challenges America faces."

Right Wing Leftovers

Eagle Forum Wonders, "Is Arizona State Promoting a Left-Wing Agenda?"

Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum Collegians is on the case to investigate whether Arizona State University is promoting socialism…through a sports motto. If the SunDevil wasn’t bad enough, a video celebrating the college’s sports teams ends with an image of a clenched fist with the Sun Devil’s pitchfork that turns into the college’s pitchfork hand gesture. But Eagle Forum finds a far more nefarious message in the video, accusing the school of trying “to communicate its traditional leftist message on the ASU campus” by using “a symbol of socialism, communism, and other extreme left-wing organizations”:

Is Arizona State Promoting a Left-Wing Agenda?

The Sun Devils of ASU are gearing up for this year’s football season with redesigned uniforms and logos. The school is promoting this greatly anticipated change with several YouTube videos.

Several of these videos end with an image of a clenched fist. After a second or two, the fist lifts three fingers, turning into the Sun Devil’s “pitchfork” hand-symbol.

The raised fist is a symbol of socialism, communism, and other extreme left-wing organizations, according to Wikipedia, It was first used as the emblem of the Red Front Fighter’s League of the Communist Party of Germany in 1932 and has since been used by groups such as the Black Panther Party and the Socialist Workers Party of the UK.

Why would ASU choose to put a symbol representing left-wing organizations at the end of a video promoting its football team?Will this symbol be used to express the Sun Devil's team spirit or will it continue to communicate its traditional leftist message on the ASU campus?

We all know sports teams already promote collectivism by encouraging cooperation and teamwork but see for yourself if you agree with the Eagle Forum. The image in question is 1:15 into this video from ASUAthletics:

GOP Congressmen Line-Up To Attend Ralph Reed's Conference

Leading Republicans have signed up to address the conference led by disgraced Religious Right activist Ralph Reed this summer in Washington. Following commitments by potential presidential candidates Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), numerous Republican congressmen are now confirmed to speak to Reed’s 2011 Conference and Strategy Briefing.

Reed, who also plans to speak alongside presidential candidate Herman Cain and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) in Florida next week, has just announced a new list of speakers: Rep. Allen West (R-FL); Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO); Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX); Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL); Rep. Tom Price (R-GA); Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX); Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA); Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA), and Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC).

The freshmen Congressmen slated to speak are strongly tied to the Religious Right: West’s anti-gay and anti-Muslim rhetoric has made him a darling of leaders like Pat Robertson; Hartzler has consistently fought against gay rights in both Congress and Missouri, and even wrote a book about tips for Religious Right activists running for office; Webster is a Christian Reconstructionist and close to David Barton and Phyllis Schlafly, and Mulvaney was a legislative leader of the far-right Palmetto Family Council.

Schlafly Didn't Need Feminism, But She Did Need Domestic Help

Phyllis Schlafly is enjoying a bit of a renaissance at the moment, thanks to the recent publication of the book she penned with her niece Suzanne Venker entitled "The Flipside of Feminism: What Conservative Women Know -- and Men Can't Say."

The point of the book is that feminism, as Schlafly puts it, has "made women unhappy and it's to make them believe that we live in a discriminatory and unjust society, and that they should look to government to solve their problems."

As Schlafly likes to remind everyone who will listen, she managed to obtain a college degree, a master's degree, a law degree, run for Congress, stop the ERA, and raise six children, all without any assistance from feminism or anyone else for that matter:

MARTIN: How did you manage, though? As a mother of six, as your husband was -certainly had a busy career of his own, and being as significant a national figure as you have been, how did you manage?

Ms. SCHLAFLY: Well, politics was my hobby. And I really spent 25 years as a full-time homemaker before I did any particular traveling around. And by that time the children were well along in school or college. And they were very supportive. My husband was very supportive. I told the feminists the only person's permission I had to get was my husband's.

But, as it turns out, Meghan Daum of the Los Angeles Times got Schlafly's niece Venker to admit that she did, in fact, have help:

I recently called Venker at her home in St. Louis because I had some questions, not least among them: How did Schlafly manage to raise all those kids and pursue such a prominent career? Granted, at 25 Schlafly married an older, well-established lawyer, and granted, she herself didn't go to law school until she was in her 50s, but did she have help? If so, she never seemed to mention it.

Venker seemed to almost despair at the question: "I'm in a pickle because I haven't been asked this directly before," she said. "I'm going to say this the best way I can. She had domestic help.... She wouldn't have called them nannies, but she had people in her home. That's what she chose. Did she mention that fact enough to get her point across to young people about how she managed to do it? No, she did not."

Right Wing Leftovers

  • A judge has blocked the Wisconsin law designed to strip unions of their collective bargaining rights.
  • I am guessing that the polls showing that more than half of Americans support marriage equality will not get a lot of attention from the Religious Right.
  • Guess what?  Phyllis Schlafly doesn't know what she is talking about.
  • Just so know you know, Herman Cain is the butter that rises to the top.
  • Finally, quote of the day from Rep. Randy Forbes: “The most important thing that we want to establish is not whether or not you are a Christian, but we have to stop the tide that suggests that America has lost its right to trust in God. I don't believe it has lost that right. I think it still has it. We just want to make sure that we are there to protect it and defend it.”

Right Wing Leftovers

  • FRC talked a big game about how they were going to hold the GOP responsible if they passed another Continuing Resolution that didn't defund Planned Parenthood.  That is just what the GOP did and all FRC can do is thank those members who voted against it.
  • Phyllis Schlafly says she has had a great career and owes exactly none of it feminism ... just relentlessly attacking feminism, I guess.
  • Hey, Stephen Baldwin directed a music video.  You know you want to watch it.
  • Sharon Angle is running for Congress.
  • Richard Land demonstrates that dedication to fighting equality begins at home.
  • We can now add Rep. Tim Huelskamp to the growing list of members of Congress who have no problem associating with Bryan Fischer.

Right Wing Leftovers

  • The LA Times perfectly sums up last night's Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition event: "The candidates essentially pledged the same thing, with a few variations in language and emphasis: defending marriage as a covenant between man and woman; curbing abortion; slashing the federal deficit; and shifting power away from Washington in favor of state and local governments."
  •  

  • Supporters of Fred Grandy, aka Gopher, claim some nefarious Muslim conspiracy to silence him has cost him his radio show.
  •  

  • Phyllis Schlafly sure does find the oddest things to get worked up about.
  •  

  • Rep. Michele Bachmann says she'll decide about running for president by summer. Could we really be so lucky?
  •  

  • Reminder: Peter LaBarbera doesn't like acceptance of gays.
  •  

  • Finally, Sarah Palin will speak at an "Extraordinary Women Conference" at Liberty University in October.

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Sen. John Ensign will not seek re-election.
  • Matt Barber says President Obama is a dictator for not defending DOMA.
  • Shockingly, Phyllis Schlafly doesn't know what she is talking about.
  • Bryan Fischer says Mike Huckabee "is exactly right about Natalie Portman's out-of-wedlock pregnancy. She made two poor life decisions: conceiving a child outside marriage, then celebrating it before the nation."
  • ABC is apparently preparing a pilot for a new show called “Good Christian B**ches.” The AFA has already announced a boycott.
  • Finally, the quote of the day from Larry Klayman: While I firmly believe that Obama, Hillary Clinton and many Democrats around them have been ... bribed by foreign regimes – such as the radical Islamic regime in Iran – I cannot prove it at this time. However, from what has already occurred, the offenses of the 'mullah in chief' are 'already' so compelling as to warrant immediate impeachment and conviction for his high crimes and misdemeanors, before the United States is totally destroyed by him."
Syndicate content

Phyllis Schlafly Posts Archive

Kyle Mantyla, Friday 02/14/2014, 5:30pm
The organization behind the most recently debunked tale of Christian victimization is standing behind its original bogus claims. Tom DeLay will be joining Rick Joyner and Jerry Boykin at an upcoming conference at Joyner's Morningstar Ministries. On a semi-related note, "Prophet" Bob Jones has died. Phyllis Schlafly thinks feminists ought to be speaking out against polygamy but won't "because the feminists are not pro-women; they just want to kill the nuclear family." Finally, "Coach" Dave Daubenmire is mad that pastors didn't come... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Thursday 02/13/2014, 12:54pm
On Secure Freedom Radio yesterday, Frank Gaffney invited Phyllis Schlafly to discuss her new Eagle Forum report making the case that Republicans should oppose immigration reform because immigrants will always vote Democratic. Schlafly repeated her usual talking points that people from other countries don’t “understand the concept of limited government” so expanding legal immigration would be “suicide for the conservative movement and the Republican party.” Gaffney agreed, adding that if immigration reform “dooms” the Republican Party it also “... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Friday 02/07/2014, 5:30pm
The New York Times reports that Sen. Pat Roberts has "acknowledged that he did not have a home of his own in Kansas. The house on a country club golf course that he lists as his voting address belongs to two longtime supporters and donors." It is genuinely amazing the way right-wing groups are framing proposed restrictions on 501c4 organizations as an attack on conservatives. Do they not realize that liberals groups have c4 arms as well? Phyllis Schlafly issues a warning: "Once there is no objective morality, no universal good and evil, laws that are not... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Thursday 02/06/2014, 11:27am
As Miranda noted the other day, Phyllis Schlafly "has never been very good at hiding partisan motivation for right-wing policy," frequently coming right out and admitting the petty, partisan motivations behind the supposedly "principled" stands that conservatives inevitably take in opposing things supported by Democrats or President Obama. And this was a trend she continued when she appeared on Newsmax yesterday to discuss her new report warning that immigration reform legislation will doom the Republican Party when she declared that conservatives ought to oppose such... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Monday 02/03/2014, 12:12pm
Phyllis Schlafly, one of the strongest proponents of the theory that the Republican Party can survive simply by solidifying its base of white voters, is out with a new report arguing that all the GOP needs to do to thrive is to cut legal immigration in half. In the report, Eagle Forum argues that immigrants – particularly Latino and Asian-American immigrants -- are inherently “leftist,” drawn to “the left’s race-based grievance politics,” and reliant on the country’s “racial spoils system and a huge welfare state,” and so therefore legal... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Thursday 01/30/2014, 12:43pm
Buzzfeed’s John Stanton today managed to get Republican lawmakers on record admitting that the movement to stop immigration report is at least party driven by racial animosity. One Southern Republican member of Congress, who requested anonymity, told Stanton outright that “part of it…it’s racial.” South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham put it a little more delicately, referring to “ugliness around the issue of immigration.” While it’s unusual to have Republican members of Congress saying it aloud, it’s hardly a secret that today’s anti-... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Friday 01/24/2014, 12:10pm
The latest issue of Rolling Stone has a great article by Janet Reitman about the anti-choice movement’s new embrace of incremental measures to “chip away at reproductive rights in a way that will render Roe's protections virtually irrelevant.” We also covered this strategy in depth last year in our report, “ Chipping Away at Choice.” Reitman discusses how anti-choice groups, most prominently Americans United For Life, are pushing incremental state-level measures that are billed as “health and safety” protections for women, but are really meant... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Thursday 01/23/2014, 11:57am
We’ve all heard anecdotal stories of gay and lesbian couples traveling or even moving to marriage equality states to tie the knot. But according to Phyllis Schlafly, there’s a migration going the other way too. In her latest radio commentary, Schlafly claims that “many Americans are dissenting with their feet, by moving away from same-sex marriage states and into the many states that continue to recognize the value of marriage as being between only one man and one woman.” The liberal media must be covering up this mass exodus from marriage equality states, because... MORE >