Civil Rights

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Bill O'Reilly has offered to pay the cover $16,500 in legal costs for the father of a fallen U.S. Marine who sued Westboro Baptist Church for picketing his son's funeral.
  • PFOX is now targeting Pepsi.
  • Molotov Mitchell once again defends Uganda's "kill the gays" bill.
  • Harry Jackson's astroturf "Stop the War on the Poor" effort is back, but now known as the Affordable Power Alliance.
  • Gary Bauer says "there just can be no doubt here that this is the most anti-Israel president of the United States that we have seen in the history of our country."
  • Finally, allow me to make a few small changes to this assertion from the AFA's Bryan Fischer to highlight its ridiculousness: "Despite the ACLU's contention that Ms. McMillen was being treated unfairly, in point of fact she was being treated with absolute equality. She had exactly the same right to bring a white date to the dance that every other student had. The same rule applied to her and to everyone else. You can't get any more equal than that. The ACLU and civil rights activists are not after equal rights, since Constance already had that. No, they're after special rights, rights based exclusively on race."

Matt Barber Tells The SPLC To Stop Picking on Peter LaBarbera

Earlier this week it was reported that Peter LaBarbera's Americans for Truth About Homosexuality was included on the Southern Poverty Law Center's list of anti-gay web sites.

So far, LaBarbera hasn't had anything to say about it, but now Liberty Counsel's Matt Barber has come rushing to AFT's defense, accusing the SPLC of picking on poor little Peter:

Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel tells OneNewsNow the SPLC had done a fair job during the civil rights thrust in America in identifying and labeling neo-Nazi hate groups, ones that truly fall within the definition of hate.

"They have instead turned into what amounts to a leftist, extremist, partisan, Democrat organization, and they use the credibility that they've built up over the years as a weapon against people who have an opposing worldview, particularly to oppose biblical Christianity," Barber explains.

One question is why SPLC would pick on a small ministry like AFTAH.

"They started with them and have not yet gone after groups like Focus on the Family for instance, or the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, Liberty Counsel -- other groups that adhere to biblical Christianity in terms of sexual morality," the attorney notes. "They haven't started targeting them yet because that's what bullies do. They pick on people that they perceive as smaller and weaker."

Of course, while its entirely understandable that Barber would come to LaBarbera's defense given their close ties, it's a little ironic considering that Barber's own rabidly anti-gay views will probably get his Liberty Counsel eventually added to the SPLC's list as well. 

UPDATE: It turns out that this OneNewsNow article was based on a press release issued by Barber:

Preparing For the Inevitable Fight Over Immigration Reform

Yesterday, People For the American Way released our latest Right Wing Watch In Focus entitled "(P)reviewing the Right-Wing Playbook on Immigration Reform" which lays out the attacks the Right used to fight efforts at immigration reform in the past and will undoubtedly deploy again the issue is taken up by Congress in the near future: 

The public debate over comprehensive immigration reform in 2006 and 2007 was marked by appalling anti-immigrant rhetoric and was accompanied by a rise in anti-Latino hate crimes tracked by the FBI. In a report last year, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights called "the legitimization and mainstreaming of virulently anti-immigrant rhetoric" one of the "most disturbing developments of the past few years." Among the pundits promoting "fear and loathing" on cable television was Glenn Beck, who said "our country is on fire, and the fuel is illegal immigration." Since then, the swine flu scare and the deep economic recession in the United States have given right-wing opponents of comprehensive immigration reform new fuel for inflaming anti-immigrant and anti-Latino sentiment. In September 2008, for instance, right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin even blamed "illegal immigrants" for the mortgage crisis.

The 2006-2007 push for comprehensive immigration reform was supported by the Bush administration, much of America's business and labor establishments, and congressional leaders from both parties. But in spite of that broad support, the passage of reform was derailed by right-wing pundits who inflamed anti-immigrant sentiment, some members of Congress who gleefully participated in the fearmongering, and others who were simply afraid to resist it.

In October 2008, the Anti-Defamation League criticized anti-immigrant groups for utilizing the strategies of hate groups and "resorting to hateful and dehumanizing stereotypes and outright bigotry to demonize immigrants." To the categories identified by the ADL we can now add demagoguery over the swine flu virus and exploitation of the nation's economic woes.

Here is a review of the rhetorical strategies used to inflame anti-immigrant sentiment and build political opposition to comprehensive immigration reform.

The report lays out nine specifc attacks the Right has used in the past to kill immigration reform legislation:

1: Appeal to Racial Fear and The 'Brown' Threat to 'White' America - "What is happening to us? An immigrant invasion of the United States from the Third World, as America's white majority is no longer even reproducing itself." - Pat Buchanan

2: Appeal to Racial Resentment by Portraying Immigrant Rights Advocates as Racists -- "[NCLR is] the Ku Klux Klan of the Hispanic people" - Michael Savage

3: Portray Immigrants and Their Supporters as Invaders, Conquerors, Enemies of the U.S. - "The homegrown multiculti-mau-mau-ers know exactly what they believe, and they know exactly what they are doing. They aim to mainstream the 'Stolen Land' mantra and pervert history. They aim to obliterate America's borders by sheer demographic and political force." - Michelle Malkin

4: Portray Immigrants as Criminals and Terrorists - "Illegal immigration" is a "slow-motion Holocaust," and a "slow-motion terrorist attack on the United States." - Congressman Steve King

5: Portray Immigrants as Carriers of Disease and Weapons of Bio-Terrorism - "The next time you eat in a restaurant or sleep in a hotel or motel....just remember to bring your own food, dishes, untensils [sic], glasses, towels, and maybe your own water. The person who cooked your meal or made your bed may very well be the one who picked your fruit and vegetables, yesterday....and we've heard the stories about what they do in the fields....haven't we?" - Mothers Against Illegal Aliens

6: Stop Reform by Shouting 'Amnesty' - "'Comprehensive' is the code word for amnesty." - Pat Buchanan

7: Denigrate Reform Efforts as Vote-Buying -- "The Democrats know it's to their advantage to bring in Third World hordes who will one day become Democratic voters." - Rick Scarborough

8: Portray Anti-Immigrant Stance as 'Pro-Worker' (While Voting Against Worker Interests) -- "If they were not in the country, we wouldn't have to worry about emergency room or health insurance costs at all. And Americans would have these jobs." - Congressman Virgil Goode

9: Push Divisive Black-Brown Wedge - "[Illegal immigration is] the greatest threat to black people since slavery." - Ted Hayes

For those who are committed to passing much-needed immigration reform, it is vital to know the various strategies used by anti-immigrant, right-wing activists in the past ... and that is exactly what our latest report seeks to chronicle and analyze.

Muslim Denied a Job So Christians Can Pray At Work With Your Tax Dollars

Via AU, we get this story about Muslim man who had volunteered for six months for World Relief helping to resettle Iraqi refuges who was told, when he applied for an Arabic-speaking caseworker position with the organization, that he could not be considered for the position because he was not a Christian.

Oh yea, and approximately 70% of World Relief's funding comes from government sources:

Saad Mohammad Ali had volunteered for six months at World Relief, helping the agency resettle arriving Iraqi refuges, when a manager suggested he apply for an Arabic-speaking caseworker job.

The 42-year-old SeaTac resident had been an interpreter for the U.S. government in Iraq before coming to the U.S. two years ago — himself as a refugee.

With a degree in statistics, strong English skills and basic knowledge of American culture, Mohammad Ali, who now works as a baggage handler at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, could help his arriving countrymen temper their typically high expectations of life in America.

But a few days after he applied for the position last December, the Muslim and father of three got an unexpected call from the same manager at World Relief: She was sorry, she told him, but the agency couldn't offer him the job because he is not Christian.

The response may have surprised Mohammad Ali and others who hear his story, but the practice is not new: World Relief is well within its right to reject him for employment.

Recognizing the need of faith-based organizations to maintain an atmosphere of shared values and principles, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 permits them to hire based on religion. Such groups, largely philanthropic, range from soup kitchens and drug-counseling services to refugee-resettlement agencies.

Among these are organizations like World Relief, which provides aid to some of the world's most vulnerable, and operates in the U.S., helping resettle refugees from all cultural and religious backgrounds.

Grounded in evangelical faith, the Baltimore-based organization receives up to 70 percent of its funding from government sources, with the rest from private donors, including churches seeking assurances that the religious values of those carrying out the agency's work are similar to their own.

Staff members at the agency also say the work they do can be stressful and so they pray during meetings to help ease that stress — a practice they believe might make non-Christians uncomfortable.

Meet The New Texas Social Studies Requirements

The New York Times reports on the changes made to Texas' Social Studies curriculum that have been forced through by the right-wing members of dominate the state Board of Education:

The conservative members maintain that they are trying to correct what they see as a liberal bias among the teachers who proposed the curriculum. To that end, they made dozens of minor changes aimed at calling into question, among other things, concepts like the separation of church and state and the secular nature of the American Revolution.

“I reject the notion by the left of a constitutional separation of church and state,” said David Bradley, a conservative from Beaumont who works in real estate. “I have $1,000 for the charity of your choice if you can find it in the Constitution.”

They also included a plank to ensure that students learn about “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schalfly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association.”

Dr. McLeroy pushed through a change to the teaching of the civil rights movement to ensure that students study the violent philosophy of the Black Panthers in addition to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s nonviolent approach. He also made sure that textbooks would mention the votes in Congress on civil rights legislation, which Republicans supported.

“Republicans need a little credit for that,” he said. “I think it’s going to surprise some students.”

Mr. Bradley won approval for an amendment saying students should study “the unintended consequences” of the Great Society legislation, affirmative action and Title IX legislation. He also won approval for an amendment stressing that Germans and Italians were interned in the United States as well as the Japanese during World War II, to counter the idea that the internment of Japanese was motivated by racism.

Other changes seem aimed at tamping down criticism of the right. Conservatives passed one amendment, for instance, requiring that the history of McCarthyism include “how the later release of the Venona papers confirmed suspicions of communist infiltration in U.S. government.” The Venona papers were transcripts of some 3,000 communications between the Soviet Union and its agents in the United States.

In economics, the revisions add Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek, two champions of free-market economic theory, among the usual list of economists to be studied, like Adam Smith, Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes. They also replaced the word “capitalism” throughout their texts with the “free-enterprise system.”

“Let’s face it, capitalism does have a negative connotation,” said one conservative member, Teri Leo. “You know, ‘capitalist pig!’ ”

In the field of sociology, another conservative member, Barbara Cargill, won passage of an amendment requiring the teaching of “the importance of personal responsibility for life choices” in a section on teen suicide, dating violence, sexuality, drug use and eating disorders.

“The topic of sociology tends to blame society for everything,” Ms. Cargill said.

Even the course on World History did not escape the board’s scalpel.

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among the conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)

“The Enlightenment was not the only philosophy on which these revolutions were based,” Ms. Dunbar said.

Mavis B. Knight, a Democrat from Dallas, introduced an amendment requiring that students study the reasons “the founding fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring the government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion above all others.”

It was defeated on a party-line vote.

Christian Defenders Baselessly Demand DOJ Investigation of Florida Murder

Several weeks ago, two men who were preaching Boynton Beach, Florida were murdered and ever since Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission has been convinced that this was an anti-Christian hate crime, claiming without any justification or evidence whatsoever that the crime is proof that a "violent anti-Christian spirit is growing in America" and that the two men were killed "for preaching the gospel."

Cass eventually got Pat Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition involved and the two groups held a press conference/vigil for the victims last week at which they demanded Attorney General Eric Holder "launch a federal investigation to see if these murders broke federal laws or federal civil rights statutes."

And now Mahoney and Cass have sent a letter to Holder asking for a Department of Justice investigation:

"The gruesome murder of Tire Sifra and Steven Ocean while sharing the Word of God in their neighborhood has raised some very serious civil rights issues," said Dr. Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission. "If they were targeted for their exercising their religion then their murder is not simply routine gang violence but raises important matters of civil rights. We have sent a letter to US Attorney General Eric Holder asking for an investigation."

"We are pleading with the city of Boynton Beach, do not sweep the faith issue under the carpet," Rev. Pat Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition. "We want the police to ask questions about religious issues involved here. We just don't want them to say this is just another episode of gang violence."

Of course, there is no evidence that this crime had anything at all to do with religion:

Faith not a factor, police say ... The shooting suspect, Jeriah Woody, 18, turned himself in last week. And a local history of gang violence and revenge killings makes for an attack scenario that requires much less imagination.

One of the dead preachers, Ocean, was arrested outside the Boynton Beach Mall four years ago with a loaded automatic pistol. He was with three other reputed gang members, one of whom was shot dead in the mall a month later on Christmas Eve.

"We have spoken with numerous witnesses, as well as the suspect," Boynton Beach Police Chief Matt Immler said Friday in a statement, "and at this point we have no reason to believe that the victims' religious activities or beliefs factored into the commission of this crime."

So basically, Cass and Mahoney have decided for themselves that this was some sort of anti-Christian hate crime. And based entirely upon their own say so, they are now calling for a Department of Justice investigation in hopes of finding some actual evidence that might justify their groundless claims.

And when the DOJ refuses to carry out the investigation requested, you can rest assured that Cass and Mahoney will declare that decision to be further proof of the Obama administration's antipathy toward Christians.

Fischer, LaBarbera Hail Sorba For This Anti-Gay Rant at CPAC

Last week we posted this video of California Young Americans for Freedom's Ryan Sorba blasting CPAC organizers for allowing the gay conservative group GOProud to serve as a conference co-sponsor:

Not surprisingly, Sorba is now being hailed as a hero by the likes of Peter LaBarbera:

I am so proud of this young man, Ryan Sorba of California Young Americans For Freedom, for having the guts to hold CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference, accountable for allowing a homosexual activist group, GOProud, to sponsor its conference. Organized homosexuality has no part in a truly “conservative” movement. We need a few dozen more Ryan Sorbas in our pro-family movement to put the “queer” activists on their heels for a change – instead of constantly being put on the defensive by a perversion lobby that equates sexual misbehavior and gender confusion with “civil rights.

The AFA's Bryan Fischer likewise praised him:

Sorba showed the courage of his convictions by simply declaring the truth. Said Sorba, "Civil rights are grounded in natural rights, and natural rights are grounded in human nature...and the intelligible end of the reproductive act is reproduction...civil rights, when they conflict with natural rights, are contrary..."

...

Sorba was certainly right to condemn CPAC for this move. The bottom line here is if conservatives are looking for an annual convocation of genuine conservatives - those who are fiscal, national security and social conservatives - the place to be is the Values Voter Summit.

VVS, sponsored each fall by the Family Research Council and the American Family Association, will never waver on the truth that protecting one man - one woman marriage is the most fundamental conservative value of all.

Bishop Jackson Defends His Anti-Gay Activism

Just yesterday, Bishop Harry Jackson used his syndicated column to attack the Washington Post for its coverage and stance on the issue of marriage equality in the District of Columbia (having apparently forgotten all about the puff piece the paper ran on his last year).

So it was a little odd to see him show up as the focus in this new "Faith Complex" video in the Post's "On Faith" section.  Most of the interview revolves around Jackson's anti-marriage activism in DC , but around the 6:30 mark, host Jacques Berlinerblau asks him how he'd react to the news that a well-educated, well-to-do Black gay couple wanting to adopted a young black child and Jackson struggled to explain his position, saying that he could only support such a move if he "had no other choice" and even then, he'd be very reluctant and would want assurances that it wouldn't cause "further psychological damage" to the child.

Later, around the 9:30 mark, Berlinerblau asked Jackson how he feels, given his professed commitment to civil rights, to think that by his activism he is denying another minority group their civil rights.  Predictably, Jackson responded by saying that it was actually his civil rights that were being denied by the District's refusal to allow him to vote on the issue of marriage equality:

Hate Crimes Protection for Gays Is "Demeaning [to] the Black Community"

Last week we noted that the Thomas More Law Center had filed suit against Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 on behalf of right-wing activists and pastors in Michigan. One of those pastors was Levon Yuille, who tells OneNewsNow that he opposes hate crimes protections for gays because he finds it "demeaning [to] the black community": 

A black pastor who is challenging the constitutionality of the recently enacted federal "Hate Crimes Act" says he's offended by comparisons to the civil rights struggles of African-Americans with those who engage in homosexual behavior ... Yuille tells OneNewsNow that he also finds it insulting to equate the supposed "civil rights" struggle of homosexuals with the real civil rights struggle of African-Americans.

"I feel like individuals [are] demeaning the black community in trying to equate us to what someone chooses to do sexually," Yiulle remarks. "The totality of black people is far greater than what one would prefer to do in expressing themselves in the manner I've already stated."

The Michigan pastor says the spotlight should be on how the HIV virus is devastating his community -- women in particular. "I'm most certainly disheartened to see that there's so little focus being placed on this issue relative to so many black men participating in heterosexual and homosexual behavior -- and ultimately and regrettably a lot of black women contract AIDS through this type of behavior," he shares.

Pastor Yuille says he is taking a stand for truth, and believes he is doing what is right from a biblical, social, and health perspective.

Liberty University Hosting Two Day Anti-Gay Conference

Mat Staver, Matt Barber, Elaine Donnelly, Alan Chambers, Robert Knight and various other anti-gay activists will be gathering at Liberty University for two days next week to discuss all things gay ... or rather, the threat that the "homosexual agenda" poses to this nation:

Liberty University School of Law will host a one-day conference followed by a one-day symposium addressing homosexuality and its consequences. The Friday, February 12, conference is entitled “Understanding Same-sex Attractions and Their Consequences.” On Saturday, February 13, the Liberty University Law Review will host a legal symposium entitled “Homosexual Rights and First Amendment Freedoms: Can They Truly Coexist?”

The first day of the conference will focus on the issues underlying same-sex attractions with personal and ministry insights shared by Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International. Conference leaders will then discuss the American Psychological Association Task Force Report on counseling people with same-sex attractions. Current research and therapies will be discussed by experts from the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and the American Association of Christian Counselors. The first day is designed for lay people, counselors, pastors, educators, attorneys, and those interested in learning more about the subject. The second day will focus on the legal implications arising from the clash between the quest for homosexual rights and freedom of speech, religion and association.

This two-day long symposium begins at 10:00 a.m., Friday, February 12, in the Vines Center of Liberty University at Liberty’s convocation service during which Alan Chambers, President of Exodus International, will speak. The afternoon event, titled “Understanding Same-Sex Attractions and Their Consequences,” begins at 2:00 p.m. in the Supreme Courtroom of Liberty University School of Law. Speakers include Alan Chambers; Julie Harren-Hamilton, President of NARTH; Tim Clinton, President of the American Association of Christian Counselors; Rena Lindevaldsen, Associate Professor of Law at Liberty University School of Law, and Mathew Staver, Dean of Liberty University School of Law.

The symposium reconvenes at 9:00 a.m., Saturday, February 13, at the School of Law, and ends with a banquet held in the Grand Lobby of Liberty University, located in DeMoss Hall, at 5 p.m. Saturday speakers include: Professor Lynne Marie Kohm of Regent University School of Law; Professor Lynn D. Wardle of Brigham Young University and J. Reuben Clark Law School; Elaine Donnelly, Founder and President of the Center for Military Readiness; Robert H. Knight, Senior Writer for Coral Ridge Ministries and Senior Fellow for American Civil Rights Union; Matt Barber, Associate Dean at Liberty University School of Law, and others.

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented: “The clash between free speech, religious and homosexual rights is a like the grinding of two tectonic plates. It is imperative to understand the implications of same-sex attractions and the broader homosexual agenda. Those struggling with same-sex attractions need understanding and hope for a life without conflict. The politicized radicalism of the homosexual agenda on the other hand is aggressive and intent on trampling upon the fundamental freedoms of anyone who may disapprove. That is why this conference at Liberty University is vitally important.”

Engle and Company Protest Genocide in Houston

Earlier this week, we posted a video from Lou Engle's "The Call - Houston" four-hour prayer rally against abortion.  But that was just part one of the festivities, as the following day Engle and the participants gathered with a crowd esitmated at 10,000 outside a new Planned Parenthood facility to protest and accuse the organization of engaging in genocide against minority groups:

Samuel Rodriguez said the "spirit of Herod" is alive and well, referencing the desperate king's attempts to kill the baby Christ. Rodriguez said the building's location specifically targets minorities and begs the question, "Why is the devil so afraid of black babies and brown babies? It's time to turn the tide. Abortion is anti-Latino, anti-black and anti-life," he declared to the cheers of estimated 8,000-9,000 people gathered for a worship and prayer rally at the Catholic Charismatic Center, a few blocks from the 78,000-square-foot Planned Parenthood facility.

...

Pastor Stephen Broden of Fair Park Bible Fellowship in Dallas said the acceptance of Darwinism escalated racist ideals as blacks were seen as below par on the evolutionary scale. As blacks were dehumanized -- as Jews were in Germany -- there was little to no moral outcry within the circles of the intellectual elite who supported and promoted the practice of eugenics, the theory of improving humanity through selective breeding and discouraging breeding among those considered less fit.

Broden said Sanger supported the practice by promoting the use of birth control among the black populations in America.

"To the community of death," Broden declared, "no more eugenics. We will push back."

Harry Jackson, who led opposition to the push for same-sex "marriage" in Washington, D.C. said, "We are in danger of the civil rights movement selling us out. This is about the rights of the unborn."

Jackson said he understood intimately the struggles of blacks in America. He told of how his father's life was threatened when he tried to vote and of seeing lynchings and the burned body of a black man dragged through town.

Referencing that brutal history, Jackson said, "I'm here to tell you, right now is the same kind of lynching, the same kind of burning. But you are seeing us come together. I believe Dr. King would say, 'Save the unborn.' The ultimate civil right is the right of life."

What Tea Party Convention Organizers Don't Want You To See

The upcoming National Tea Party Convention featuring the likes of Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Joseph Farah, Rick Scarborough, Roy Moore, and others seems to be causing a bit of rancor among Tea Party activists:

In the latest sign of rancor in Tea Party circles, a convention billed as an effort to bring together conservative activists from across the country is being attacked by some leading Tea Partiers as inauthentic, too tied to the GOP, and -- at $549 per head -- too expensive for the working Americans the movement aspires to represent.

The National Tea Party Convention, scheduled for early February in Nashville, grabbed headlines after announcing that Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann would appear as speakers, Palin as the keynote. According to a message on the convention's website, the event "is aimed at bringing the Tea Party Movement leaders together from around the nation." But organizers are a long way from unifying the notoriously fractious movement.

Tea Party Patriots, which helped put together a September rally that drew tens of thousands to Washington, view the confab -- which is being held at Nashville's swank Opryland Gaylord hotel -- as the "usurpation of a grassroots movement," according to Mark Meckler, a leader of the group. "Most people in our movement can't afford anything like that," Meckler told TPMmuckraker, referring to the price tag. "So it's really not aimed at the average grassroots person."

Robin Stublen, a Tea Party Patriots volunteer, echoed that view. "This convention is $550 dollars," said Stublen. "How grassroots is that?"

Not only is the price of the convention exorbitantly prohibitive for most, but organizers don't seem to want any press coverage either.

Today, David Weigel pointed out the preliminary list of scheduled breakout topics and among them is one entitled "Why Christians Must Engage," run by Rick Scarborough.  Maybe the event organizers are afraid that the media might see Republican leaders like Palin and Bachmann sharing the stage with the likes of Scarborough:

Scarborough, who served on Mike Huckabee's Faith and Values Committee during the latter's presidential campaign, unleashed a fiery sermon more befitting a Sunday sermon than a political gathering. But since the two are essentially one in the same for Scarborough and the other participants, his proclamations that he is neither a Republican nor a Democrat but rather a "Christocrat" who will support only candidates who proudly stand up on the campaign trail and say "yes, there's a God" and who realizes that the Constitution is a godly document designed to guide this nation by Christian principles, just as the Bible is designed to guide the lives of all of mankind. He then rails against Republican failures to defund the Department of Education and Planned Parenthood before turning his attention to President Obama and "his minions" who are intent on giving civil rights to "sodomites" while banning the Bible and putting Christians in jail. Eventually he turns to the "shadow government" constructed by President Obama filled with "well-financed, well-heeled, and highly-staffed professional infidels who have dedicated their life" to destroying America.

Another Day, More Bigoted Attacks On Amanda Simpson

The bigoted attacks from Religious Right activists on transgender Commerce Department appointee Amanda Simpson just keep coming:

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality is not surprised that Simpson was appointed. "This is a man -- and by the way he is a man; he's not a woman -- who is one of the leaders in crusading for so-called 'civil rights' based on gender-confused behavior," he points out.

...

But LaBarbera says there is a bigger issue than just the one appointment to a federal government post.

"Obama is supporting ENDA -- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act -- with a transsexual provision," he shares, "meaning that if that version of the bill gets through and Obama signs it, we will have businesses being forced to accommodate gender-confused individuals in the name of civil rights."

LaBarbera adds it is time for America to wake up to the agenda of the Obama administration.

Tying the appointment of Simpson to their fear-mongering about ENDA seems to be the newest right-wing talking point, as judging by this "action alert" from the Family Research Council which, like LaBarbera, insists that Simpson is really a man and puts her name in quotes: 

Mitchell Simpson, a man who had sex-change surgery and now calls himself a woman (named "Amanda"), was appointed as Senior Technical Advisor to the Commerce Department. Simpson announced that "as one of the first transgender presidential appointees to the federal government, I hope that I will soon be one of hundreds."

The day after Simpson began work, The New York Times reported that the main website advertising jobs with the federal government now says there will be no "discrimination" based on "gender identity"-even though Congress has never passed a law saying that.

This new policy applies only to the federal government. But there is a bill being considered in Congress, the so-called "Employment Non-Discrimination Act" (ENDA), which would require every employer in America to open every position to homosexuals (by making "sexual orientation" a protected category) and "transgenders" (by protecting "gender identity").

All American employers including Christian owned businesses and potentially Christian ministries would be affected.

"Gender identity disorder" is a recognized mental illness that should be treated-not affirmed and protected. And the right of employers to set "dress and grooming standards" for their employees should include the most basic standard of all-that people dress in a way appropriate for their biological sex.

Don't let Congress and President Obama force American employers to hire homosexuals, transsexuals, and cross-dressers.

Usually, the Right goes to great lengths to hide its bigotry, but when it comes to commenting on the appointment of Simpson, they aren't even bothering to try.

Right Loses It Over Transgender Appointee

Amanda Simpson is believed to be the first openly transgender presidential appointee, after being named senior technical adviser in the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security, where she will monitor the exports of U.S. weapons technology.

But she fears that the Right will ignore her thirty years of experience and degrees in physics, engineering, and business and focus instead on her gender:

But what gnaws at her, she says, is the fear of being labeled a token who was hired because of her sexual identity rather than on her merits.

"Being the first sucks," she told ABC News.com. "I'd rather not be the first but someone has to be first, or among the first. I think I'm experienced and very well qualified to deal with anything that might show up because I've broken barriers at lots of other places and I always win people over with who I am and what I can do."

...

"[There will be] questions like: Is this a token? Are you here to do a job or just to fill a quota or appease other people? In that regard it makes it a bit more difficult," she said. "I'm sure I will have to do and intend to do a far superior job than any other person. But I'm sure I will always be second guessed."

And of course that is exactly what is happening: 

"Simpson's nomination was forwarded through to President Obama by a gay activist group, making it appear that this appointment of a male-to-female 'transgender' activist to a high level Commerce Department position to be payback to his far-left base for their political support," Monica Schleicher, spokeswoman for Christian group Focus on the Family, said in statement.

"Efforts to promote 'transgenderism' in public policy deconstruct one of the most fundamental concepts known to mankind. It renders gender, the most basic organization of social systems, completely meaningless. In doing so, activists like Simpson are asking the rest of society to radically reorder the ways in which the culture makes reasonable and rational accommodation for the two genders," she said.

And predictably Matt Barber and Peter LaBarbera are likewise outraged

"Is there going to be a transgender quota now in the Obama administration?" asked Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth. "How far does this politics of gay and transgender activism go? Clearly this is an administration that is pandering to the gay lobby."

According to most estimates, "transgender" individuals account for less than a fraction of 1 percent of the population. Yet, LaBarbera said, they have convinced the Obama administration to affirm their position that gender is fluid and changeable.

"We should consider what transgender activism is about," he said," which is essentially recognizing civil rights based on gender confusion."

Matt Barber, associate dean at Liberty University, said the appointment "boggles the mind."

"This isn't like appointing an African-American in order to try to provide diversity and right some kind of discriminatory wrong," he said. "This is about political correctness.

"President Obama, before he was inaugurated, told the world that he had signed off on every single demand of the homosexual-activist lobby."

LaBarbera said it's just another way to normalize homosexuality and transgenderism.

"It's always the incremental change that keeps moving forward and keeps getting more radical," he said. "It's hard for the American people to keep up."

You know, I can at least understand the "logic" behind the right-wing opposition to appointees like Kevin Jennings or Chai Feldblum since they were placed in positions at the Department of Education and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission respectively where they could theoretically have an impact on policy in a manner that the Religious Right would oppose. 

But Simpson is at the Commerce Department monitoring the export of U.S. weapons technology ... and apparently transgender people shouldn't be getting jobs in the federal workplace. The Right's opposition to her is nothing more than flat-out bigotry.

LaBarbera and Martin: Birds of a Feather

I've tried to ignore the latest nonsense from Senate candidate Andy Martin and his allegations that Rep. Mark Kirk is gay because, frankly, Martin is a certified nut. 

If I posted on every crazy thing Martin said, this blog would consist of nothing else ... like his claims that Max Baucus is a "habitual sex offender" or that Wikipedia "is a tax-exempt protosocialist scam that seeks to harass Republicans, conservatives and Obama opponents."

But Peter LaBabera doesn't think that Martin is a loon, which is why Martin participated in the Americans for Truth fundraising banquet earlier this year:

David Smith, Executive Director of the Illinois Family Institute, accepted an award on behalf of Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman of the American Family Association (AFA) and American Family Radio. [Wildmon, who is recovering from encephalitis, was the recipient of AFTAH's first annual American Truth Teller Award; his son, AFA President Tim Wildmon, thanked Americans For Truth with a video message played at the banquet.]

Though the AFTAH banquet was not a political event, two candidates seeking statewide office were present. Dan Proft, who is running for Governor in the GOP primary and Andy Martin, who is seeking the Republican Party nomination in the U.S. Senate race, joined pro-family supporters at the AFTAH fundraiser.

So that is why it comes as no surprise that LaBarbera seems to think Martin's claims and antics are perfectly acceptable, even though he doesn't mention him by name:

Do voters have a right to know that their Congressman — especially one that bills himself as “pro-family” — is having adulterous affairs with women? Yes. Do the same voters have a right to know if their Congressman is himself a homosexual — especially since he will likely be voting on “gay”-related legislation predicated on the (false) assumption that homosexuality is a “civil rights” criterion? You bet they do.

In this post-Will & Grace age in which vulgar sodomy jokes are aired uncensored on primetime TV, it is unfair, hypocritical and simply odd to enable homosexual candidates to hide their pet sexual sin behind the “gay” “closet” — or to demand that any questions on the topic are inappropriate. I write this as one who hoped for the defeat of Republican “pro-family” politicians who were exposed as philanderers.

So our question to any candidate around which “gay” rumors are swirling is this:

Are you a homosexual — i.e., or have you practiced homosexual behavior or been in “gay” relationships?

There is no easy way to ask this awkward question, but it is as relevant as asking a candidate rumored to be a cad if he has been faithful to his wife. From a Christian perspective, sexual sin is sexual sin, and the politics of homosexuality and “outing” should not be dictated by the needs and wants of pro-homosexuality advocates or the GLBT Lobby.

The problems and ethical implications of secretly “gay” politicians are also exacerbated by the policy of homosexual activist “outers” who specialize in exposing the homosexuality on only the candidates they regard as hypocritical (read: anti-homosexual-agenda) on homosexual issues. This creates an incentive for covertly homosexual pols to vote pro-”gay” on GLBT legislation because that will lessen the likelihood of an embarrasing [sic] “outing” episode.

This is another reason why voters deserve to know if their representative or potential representative has a conflict of interest on homosexuality issues.

If you are a Republican and you think it’s unfair for homsoexual politicans [sic] to have their homosexuality revealed, here’s three words for you: Mark Foley scandal. As one who monitors the “gay” press, I knew about Foley’s homosexuality years before the page scandal happened — and had GOP leaders not swept that under the rug, perhaps the whole sordid Foley episode could have been avoided, and all its bad consequences for the Republican Party in the 2006 elections.

Any candidate hit with the “gay” question can simply answer my question above. We hope they wouldn’t lie about it, but that seems to have happened with one Republican candidate in Illinois who I sought answers from on the homosexual issue.

AFA: Religious Tests Are Perfectly Acceptable

Last week we mentioned the situation in North Carolina where conservatives are threatening to sue in an effort to keep an atheist out of office, citing the state Constitution:

When Mr. [Cecil] Bothwell was sworn into office on Monday, he used an alternate oath that does not require officials to swear on a Bible or refer to “Almighty God.”

That has riled conservative advocates, who cite a little-noticed quirk in North Carolina’s Constitution that disqualifies officeholders “who shall deny the being of Almighty God.” The provision was included when the document was drafted in 1868 and was not revised when North Carolina amended its Constitution in 1971.

One opponent, H. K. Edgerton, is threatening to file suit against the city to challenge Mr. Bothwell’s swearing in. “My father was a Baptist minister,” Mr. Edgerton said. “I’m a Christian man. I have problems with people who don’t believe in God.” Mr. Edgerton is a local civil rights leader and founder of Southern Heritage 411, an organization that promotes the interests of black Southerners.

David Morgan, the head of a conservative weekly newspaper, The Asheville Tribune, said city officials had shirked their duty to uphold the state’s laws by swearing in Mr. Bothwell.

The Supreme Court already ruled unanimously against such religious test provisions back in 1961 in a case out of Maryland:

We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person "to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs ... This Maryland religious test for public office unconstitutionally invades the appellant's freedom of belief and religion and therefore cannot be enforced against him.

But Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association, while not mentioning the Bothwell case specifically, doesn't seem to a) care or b) be aware of the Court's ruling and says that such restrictions are perfectly constitutional:

Our secular fundamentalist friends are fond of citing Article VI of our Constitution as proof that this foundational document is non-religious in nature. It reads, ""but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

It's worthy of note that this applies only to federal offices, for the prior clause makes it clear that the Founders were distinguishing between the federal government - "the United States" - and the legislatures of the individual states, which are referred to as "the several State Legislatures." Both are included in the previous phrase, "all executive Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution." (emphasis mine)

This makes it clear that while officers at both the state and federal level were required to support the Constitution, the restriction on the application of a "religious Test" was reserved for officials in the federal government. States were left to apply explicitly religious tests if they chose, and most did.

Almost all states required holders of public office to declare a belief in God, and many went beyond that to require a belief in the inspiration of both the Old and New Testaments, which in effect limited public service to self-professing Christians. This was just fine with the Founders, who wanted the states to have complete liberty in such matters.

But they were also clear that no religious test was to be applied as a condition of public service at the federal level. What the Founders meant by this, however, was this and this alone: an individual did not need to belong to a particular Christian denomination to be eligible for federal office. That's it.

Of course, we already knew that Fisher had some rather unique views regarding the First Amendment and the separation of church and state and doesn't think that Muslims should be allowed to serve in the military.

Monckton's Got Nothing On Huckabee

Last week, Media Matters ran this piece exposing the views of Lord Christopher Monckton:

Media Matters Action Network, our partner organization, has unearthed a 1987 American Spectator article in which Lord Christopher Monckton -- one of the right's favorite global warming deniers -- advocates requiring the entire population to undergo monthly HIV tests and forcibly quarantining "for life" those who test positive.

You would think that such views would have made Monckton a marginal figure. But apparently there are no views too extreme for the right-wing media.

On October 23, for instance, Glenn Beck said on his Fox News show that Monckton is "one of the world's foremost authorities on what the global warming hoax is really all about and what they are about to sign over in Copenhagen."

Monckton appeared as a guest throughout Beck's October 30 Fox show. Beck introduced Monckton by saying: "With me now, Lord Christopher Monckton, former adviser to British prime minister, Margaret Thatcher and climate change expert."

On October 19, Rush Limbaugh described Monckton as "a voice of sanity," saying, "The hysteria on the left on virtually everything is all over the place. So you got to hear a voice of sanity in this. Last Wednesday, St. Paul, Minnesota, during a presentation at Bethel University, a portion of remarks made by Lord Christopher Monckton regarding the United Nations' climate change treaty."

Allow me to just remind everyone that Mike Huckabee said more or less the same thing ... in 1992, which was five years after Monckton wrote his piece and four years after the federal government had distributed a pamphlet penned by then Surgeon General C. Everett Koop entitled “Understanding AIDS” which explained that the disease could not be contracted through everyday contact:

"It is the first time in the history of civilization in which the carriers of a genuine plague have not been isolated from the general population," he said. "This deadly disease, for which there is no cure, is being treated as a civil rights issue instead of the true health crisis it represents.

"If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague."

Huckabee is currently a leading contender for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, a highly sought-after speaker, and host of a television program on Fox News.

Considering that such views didn't turn Huckabee into a marginal figure, it shouldn't come as much of a shock to see someone like Monckton hailed as a "voice of sanity" because, as Media Matters notes, there simply are "no views too extreme for the right-wing media."

UPDATE: Over at Open Left, Nick Berning points out that Monckton is not actully a "lord," nor is he a "Nobel Laureate."

Those Delicate Republicans

Ever since Barak Obama was elected to the White House and Democrats took control of Congress, we have heard nothing from Republicans and right-wing activists but a stream of rhetoric about how they are all a bunch of Nazi-socialist-Marxist-communist-baby-killing-America-hating-anti-God radicals bent on turning this nation into a totalitarian dictatorship. 

Today, Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid likened the current Republican attempt to stop healthcare reform to past efforts to stymie progress, and the Republicans are absolutely outraged:

Reid started by mimicking Republicans whom he claims have said: "'Slow down, stop everything, let's start over."

"You think you've heard these same excuses before? You're right," he continued. "In this country there were those who dug in their heels and said, 'Slow down, it's too early. Let's wait. Things aren't bad enough' -- about slavery. When women wanted to vote [they said] 'Slow down, there will be a better day to do that -- the day isn't quite right...'"

He finished with: "When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today."

Reaction was swift. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, who is black, questioned Reid's state of mind -- and demanded an apology.

“Harry Reid is under immense pressure to pass this 2,000 page experiment on our nation’s health – an experiment that creates a new $1 trillion dollar federal entitlement program by cutting $500 billion from Medicare, all at a time when our country is in miserable debt and facing an extreme job crisis. The pressure has apparently led Senator Reid not only to make offensive and absurd statements, but also to lose his ability to reason... Having made this disgraceful statement on the floor of the United States Senate, Mr. Reid should immediately apologize on the Senate floor to his colleagues, to his constituents, and to the American people. If he is going to stand by these statements, the Democrats must immediately reconsider his fitness to lead them.”

Senate Republicans were also furious, reported POLITICO's Meredith Shiner, who went to their Q-and-A Monday.

"They are so desperate that it is unbelievable. And for Senator Reid to go out this morning and make such an outlandish statement like he made, just is another indication of the desperation that the Democrats are showing and the pressure that they're feeling," said Sen. Saxby Chambliss (GA).

Said Sen. Tom Coburn (Okla.). "I think it's beneath the dignity of the majority leader, for one. I think it's beneath the dignity of the Senate...to make any kind of outlandish claim similar to what was made on the Senate floor this morning, and I personally am insulted by the Majority Leader."

Remember when Michael Steele likened President Obama to Stalin and Kim Jong-Il? And he's demanding an apology?  Are you kidding me? 

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Are you anxiously awaiting the return of Norm Coleman?
  • Georgia's Republican House speaker resigned today after a suicide attempt and allegations by his ex-wife of an affair with a lobbyist.
  • I, for one, am shocked: "The report represents a comprehensive review of the [Civil Rights] division’s litigation activity in the Bush administration. When compared with the Clinton administration, its findings show a significant drop in the enforcement of several major antidiscrimination and voting rights laws."
  • Peter LaBarbera: Meredith Baxter Became a Lesbian, Let’s Pray She Becomes a Christian.
  • CWA is concerned what marriage equality in Washington DC will mean to "those with moral beliefs, children, and the poor."
  • Finally, enough with the Reagan worship already:

Good News: You Too Can Save America From the Looming Obama-Nazi Dictatorship

Were you disappointed that you were unable to add your name to the newest Religious Right manifesto so that you could do your part to save America from its descent into Nazi-like totalitarianism?

Well, have we got good news for you - now you can:

This Friday, November 20, 2009, at the National Press Club in Washington D.C., a seminal statement signed by over 125 Evangelical, Orthodox, and Catholic leaders will be released. Known as the Manhattan Declaration, this document addresses the necessity of defending and advancing the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty.

Click here after noon on Friday, November 20. There you can read the Declaration and sign on in support of the statement. The goal is to have one million signatures by December 1.

FRC President, Tony Perkins, is a part of the core group which formulated the Manhattan Declaration and he is encouraging every pastor and church member in our network to sign it as well. Our friend Chuck Colson declares that this historic declaration of religious conscience is "probably the most important document I've ever signed."

We trust that you and your church members will join this movement to declare our absolute commitment to the defense of life, marriage, and religious liberty. Again, visit our website to sign the Declaration and please forward this message to your friends in ministry.

So if, like the original signers of this Declaration, you think that reproductive choice has lead to things like genocide and AIDS, then be sure to add your name: 

Our concern is not confined to our own nation. Around the globe, we are witnessing cases of genocide and “ethnic cleansing,” the failure to assist those who are suffering as innocent victims of war, the neglect and abuse of children, the exploitation of vulnerable laborers, the sexual trafficking of girls and young women, the abandonment of the aged, racial oppression and discrimination, the persecution of believers of all faiths, and the failure to take steps necessary to halt the spread of preventable diseases like AIDS. We see these travesties as flowing from the same loss of the sense of the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of human life that drives the abortion industry and the movements for assisted suicide, euthanasia, and human cloning for biomedical research.

Or if, like the original signers of this Declaration, you feel you must oppose marriage equality because otherwise it'll lead to incest, polygamy, and the destruction of your religious liberty, then be sure to add your name:

We understand that many of our fellow citizens, including some Christians, believe that the historic definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is a denial of equality or civil rights. They wonder what to say in reply to the argument that asserts that no harm would be done to them or to anyone if the law of the community were to confer upon two men or two women who are living together in a sexual partnership the status of being “married.” It would not, after all, affect their own marriages, would it? On inspection, however, the argument that laws governing one kind of marriage will not affect another cannot stand. Were it to prove anything, it would prove far too much: the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships; it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships? No. The truth is that marriage is not something abstract or neutral that the law may legitimately define and re-define to please those who are powerful and influential.

And most importantly, if, like the original signers of this Declaration, you will never, ever surrender in your opposition to America's descent into Godless-immorality, then by all means be sure to add your name:

Therefore, let it be known that we will not comply with any edict that compels us or the institutions we lead to participate in or facilitate abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or any other act that violates the principle of the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every member of the human family.

Further, let it be known that we will not bend to any rule forcing us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality, marriage, and the family.

Further, let it be known that we will not be intimidated into silence or acquiescence or the violation of our consciences by any power on earth, be it cultural or political, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.

Syndicate content

Civil Rights Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Friday 03/25/2011, 3:36pm
Brian Camenker of MassResistance joined Peter LaBarbera to brag about his work in Maryland, where a marriage equality bill in the House of Delegates was pulled off the floor after it lacked the votes to pass. Camenker laughed at Christian delegates who backed the bill, and said calling marriage equality “civil rights” is “complete nonsense and idiocy.” Listen: Camenker: That’s something that really surprised, continues to surprise me Pete, is the complete nonsense and idiocy that these guys will believe. Some of these arguments from the gay marriage side were... MORE
Brian Tashman, Thursday 03/24/2011, 1:25pm
Cary Gordon of Iowa’s Cornerstone World Outreach has continued to make waves with his anti-gay diatribes. Gordon was heavily involved with the successful effort to remove three Iowa Supreme Court justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality in 2009, and just last week he told a rally hosted by Bob Vander Plaats that like Rome, “we too will be extinguished from the earth” as a result of civil rights for gays and lesbians. While Gordon’s political maneuvers through his “Project Jeremiah” drove his church into bankruptcy. After failing to pay back the... MORE
Brian Tashman, Thursday 03/17/2011, 2:01pm
The Family Leader, the anti-gay Iowa group led by Bob Vander Plaats, held a rally in Des Moines earlier this week to demand a referendum to overturn the 2009 State Supreme Court decision which established marriage equality. Roy Moore of the Foundation for Moral Law said that marriage equality was bringing about a “moral meltdown,” and another speaker claimed that supporters of gay-rights “hijacked” the civil rights movement and declared that “deviant behavior is not the same as being denied your right to vote.” Cary Gordon of Cornerstone World Outreach... MORE
Brian Tashman, Friday 03/11/2011, 1:15pm
A Republican state legislator in Texas has introduced a bill that would ban all abortion except in the cases of rape or incest. State Rep. George Lavender introduced his blatantly unconstitutional bill to eliminate legal abortion as the state legislature considers legislation that would allow residents to purchase license plates to fund anti-choice crisis pregnancy centers. Moreover, the legislature just passed a bill that would require women to look at a medically unnecessary and potential unsafe ultrasound before terminating their pregnancy. Other states are considering similar bans on... MORE
Brian Tashman, Tuesday 03/08/2011, 4:23pm
Rick Green of WallBuilders hosted Elizabeth Swanson of the Protect Kids Foundation, a virulently anti-gay group that opposes programs to protect children from bullying and harassment in schools. Like other groups such as Focus on the Family, the California Family Council, Mission America, and the Family Research Council, the so-called Protect Kids Foundation claims that gay-rights proponents “indoctrinating kids to accept and adopt LGBT lifestyles, starting in kindergarten.” David Barton, the head of WallBuilders, himself said that public school students “are getting... MORE
Brian Tashman, Thursday 02/17/2011, 12:17pm
The Texas State Board of Education’s right-wing spin on U.S. history has earned the state a “D” from a conservative education think tank. Mary Tuma of the Texas Independent notes that the Thomas B. Fordham Institute is a “national conservative group calls for a ‘radical’ overhaul of U.S. history standards at K-12 public schools nationwide,” but even the self-declared “right-of-center” group couldn’t deny the drastic manipulation of the education curriculum by the far-right SBOE. The new education standards, outlined in the Right Wing... MORE
Brian Tashman, Thursday 02/17/2011, 12:17pm
The Texas State Board of Education’s right-wing spin on U.S. history has earned the state a “D” from a conservative education think tank. Mary Tuma of the Texas Independent notes that the Thomas B. Fordham Institute is a “national conservative group calls for a ‘radical’ overhaul of U.S. history standards at K-12 public schools nationwide,” but even the self-declared “right-of-center” group couldn’t deny the drastic manipulation of the education curriculum by the far-right SBOE. The new education standards, outlined in the Right Wing... MORE