Czars

It looks like the good folks over the Liberty Counsel have finally had enough and are literally declaring their independence with their new "Declaration of Independence 2011" petition that they want you to sign. 

Declaring that "in America, we do not suffer tyrants!," Liberty Counsel is asking people to pledge their lives to resist  the "abusive and lawless regime in the Executive Branch and in the United States Congress":

We The People, therefore, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world, solemnly declare our full intention, by any lawful means available, to remove from office all those politicians and office holders who have been complicit in…

the trampling of our liberties,
the undermining of our religious freedoms,
the overt and intentional subversion of our Constitution,
overstepping the boundaries of their law-based authority,
the advancement and promotion of a socialist agenda,
the massive expansion of a federal government through agencies and czars whose goal is to “fundamentally transform America!”

We break the bonds between us and them.

We declare, by the Rights afforded us by our Creator, that we are Duty bound to expose and resist all unlawful decrees and policies, such as the extensive list presented above, as have been or may yet be issued by the present abusive and lawless regime in the Executive Branch and in the United States Congress.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Last year, a new Religious Right organization was formed to fight the "satanic wickedness" that was engulfing America. Calling itself the Faith and Freedom Institute, the group held a sparsely-attended press conference/prayer rally and then ... who knows ... we stopped paying attention to them.

But now they are back, picking up on the Religious Right's latest bogus crusade against President Obama for supposedly using the phrase "freedom of worship" instead of "freedom of religion." 

And just because it's entirely false, the Faith and Freedom Institute isn't about to let that stop them from sending a letter to Obama demanding that he publicly "retract" all previous uses of the phrase and cease all future one:

It is with great concern that we have watched your rhetorical shift in terminology, choosing to use the phrase “freedom of worship” rather than “freedom of religion.” We’ve noted your use of that phrase (“freedom of worship”) at the Ft. Hood memorial service in November of 2009, as well as your utilization of the same during speeches in Japan and China.

While some may deem the words “worship” and “religion” to be synonymous, and thus interchangeable, they are most definitely not! The First Amendment of the United States Constitution uses the word “religion” and states unequivocally that Congress cannot prohibit the “free exercise” of said “religion.” Your use of the word “worship” implies that we have freedom ONLY within the confines of structures set aside for religious expression (i.e. churches, synagogues, etc.). This is not only a gross departure from the original intent of the First Amendment, but is also the first step toward eliminating faith expression in the public marketplace (i.e. display of religious symbols on public land, printing of religious materials for the purpose of evangelizing, public discussion of faith, etc.).

Mr. President, we call on you to retract all past use of this incorrect and misleading phrase, “freedom of worship,” and cease all future use of the same. We also call on you to acknowledge America’s Christian heritage as is clearly evidenced in our Founding Documents and the overwhelming abundance of statements from our Founding Fathers.

But on the off chance that doesn't work, it looks like the group has a back-up plan - impeachment: 

According to Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution, the President of the United States “shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” It is the opinion of the members of The Faith and Freedom Institute that the current President of the United States of America, Barack H. Obama, has compiled a number of personal offenses that qualify him for impeachment from the office of the presidency. Among those offenses are the following:

A. The act of not providing a clear copy of his official and complete birth certificate indicating that he is a natural born citizen of the United States of America as is called for in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution where it reads, “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States…shall be eligible to the office of the President.”

B. The act governing contrary to the spirit of the Constitution by the establishing of numerous “czars” who have no accountability to Congress, but who answer to the President alone.

C. The act of subverting United States sovereignty by bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia.

D. The intrusive act of confiscating private industry, (i.e., the take over of General Motors Corporation, Chrysler, and Bank of America – even dictating employees salaries), thereby making them accountable to the President alone.

E. The incessant desire to develop a civilian militia or military style organization that would be “as well funded and organized as the United States military,” to operate exclusively at the discretion of the President.

F. The overt attempt to force national health care on businesses and individuals, who oppose such, through creating a public health care option that would place individual insurance companies in competition with the United States Government.

G. The act of disregarding the law of the United States of America by not publicly recognizing the National Day of Prayer which was signed into law in 1952 by President Harry S. Truman.

H. The act of appointing to high level positions persons of questionable integrity who display treasonous animosity toward the United States (i.e., Van Jones, former “Environmental Czar”; Kevin Jennings, “Safe School Czar”; FCC head Mark Lloyd, etc.) and whose actions violate the letter and spirit of our national philosophy.

I. The act of violating the oath of the presidency by neglecting to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

TFFI actually issued this impeachment demand in October of last year. So I guess that'll teach us to ignore them, especially now that we see that Faith and Action's Rob Schenck will be speaking at TFFI's upcoming conference in September.

The organizers of the How to Take Back America conference kicked off the event on Friday afternoon with a press conference, and they hit a lot of the highlights we can expect to revisit this weekend:  America is either following the classic model of a Marxist takeover on its way to being an eastern bloc country, or it's on the verge of a Nazi-like dictatorship, or both.  Health care reform is about rationing, euthanasia, and pushing the elderly and vets off a cliff.  The "radical homosexual activist movement" is the biggest threat to religious liberty, and ENDA is a bid to "criminalize Christianity."  Legalized abortion is "black genocide."

Following up on the post from earlier today regarding Michelle Malkin's appearance on James Dobson's radio program, it turned out that most of the discussion revolved around Obama, taxes, healthcare, czars, and every other right-wing talking point.  But there was one interesting revelation regarding Malkin's recent move to Colorado Springs, CO from the "swamp" that is Washington, DC.

Malkin revealed that the move had been made for the benefit of her family and that, as a result, she had had to give up some of her more high-profile television opportunities, at which point Dobson chimed in to note that she is still doing a lot of television appearances and that, when she does, she utilizes the studios at Focus on the Family headquarters:

Dobson: You're still on television a lot, aren't you?

Malkin: Yes.

Dobson: And you do some of that right here from this ministry.

Malkin: Yes, it is such a blessing ...

Dobson: So when you're seen now on Fox News, you're probably broadcasting uplink from one of our studios.

Malkin: That's exactly right. And you have a wonderful staff here and, it's just, I feel at home.

Last week we mentioned that Rick Scarborough was going to be a guest on James Dobson's radio program. That program aired on Friday and Dobson and Scarborough spent the half-hour lamenting everything from the current state of the nation to the passing of Dobson's generation of right-wing leaders.

It began with Scarborough and Dobson lamenting that, following 9/11, the churches were filled with Americans seeking God, but in the years since, that has fallen off and the "sense of urgency" has been lost.  Americans, but more importantly churches, need to "wake up" to the threats this country faces from President Obama's agenda. Dobson says there has never "been a time in our country where we have needed prayer more than we need it right now":

Dobson and Scarborough then voiced their worries about the sorry state of preachers in this nation, with Dobson saying that his "class" of political activists, like D. James Kennedy, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson, are passing on, and noted that he was "grateful" that there was second wave of leaders such as Scarborough whom would carry on that tradition:

Scarborough then declared that Religious Right leaders must take advantage of the outpouring of conservative outrage and hostility that gave rise to the Tea Parties and "get out in front of the movement and begin to define it":

Scarborough even related how he was using clips from Glenn Beck in his church sermons about the threat from President Obama's "czars" and the threat of the Fairness Doctrine:

Of particular concern is hate crimes legislation, which Scarborough vowed to defy and proclaimed his willingness to go to prison rather than stop preaching, saying "when it's illegal to preach that homosexuality is a sin, I will break that law" (of course, that is not going to happen, so this is just grandstanding):

• The New York Times examines the factors at work behind Sarah Palin's sudden resignation.
• Mike Huckabee says its unfair to call Palin a "quitter" while predicting that Mark Sanford's political career is over.
• The ACLU is taking a look at Sally Kern's "proclamation for morality."
• Rick Scarborough has found a new crusade: Obama's various czars, which he complains "are unelected and unaccountable [and] have too much money and power, and are remaking America in ways none of us could have imagined."
• Jesse Lee Peterson lambastes Michael Jackson's memorial service saying it was all "about unrealistically lifting up a black Michael as the 'king' in order to lift up blacks, and, in so doing, lowering the value of the hated white man."
• Personhood advocates claim their movement is gaining momentum.
• Ted Cruz, who is running for Texas Attorney General, unveils a list of endorsements and backers [PDF] that includes, Cathie Adams of the President of Texas Eagle Forum, Kelly Shackelford of the Free Market Foundation, Jay Sekulow of the ACLJ, David Barton of Wallbuilders, Tim Goeglein of Focus on the Family Action and many other right-wing figures.
• Finally, Harry Jackson, Niger Innis, Dr. William Owens, Sr, Bishop Dale Bronner and Pastor Terry Millender have penned a letter to President Obama urging him to fight the "disintegration of marriage" by saving DOMA and opposing marriage equality:

Changing the definition of marriage will have many unintended consequences, which will hurt generations to come. If one redefines marriage, then the family is redefined. If the family is redefined then the nature of parenting must also be redefined.

“We are concerned that an attempt to recognize and adjust to one group’s sense of alienation may actually confuse future generations of children about their sexuality and blur lines of responsibility in our families. The very definitions of motherhood and fatherhood may be unnecessarily challenged in years to come.

“Same-sex marriage is not a civil right. The laws enacted by Congress during a century of struggle for equal rights for African Americans were intended to eliminate discrimination on the basis of race, not on the basis of an individual’s sexual preferences or personal behavior.