Hate Crimes

Will Cass Call For Violence to Protest Hate Crimes Protections?

Last week, when President Obama signed the legislation expanding hate crimes protections, various fringe activists vowed to challenge it by engaging in some pointless grandstanding.  And, by gum, that is exactly what they are going to do:

A rally is being planned in Washington to raise the alarm over the nation's new "hate crimes" law and to force Attorney General Eric Holder to confront the unconstitutionality of the measure's "thought" penalties, according to a Christian leader working on the event.

Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission told WND there are a series of approaches being considered to challenge the restrictions on expression of religion and speech contained in the law signed last week by President Obama.

At the rally, set for 1:30 p.m. on Nov. 16, ministers will preach from the Bible on the prohibition against homosexuality, then will present a letter to Holder demanding that the religious liberty of all Americans be respected.

Specific legal challenges to the restrictions of the "hate crimes" plan also may be announced then, Cass said.

The "Rally for Religious Freedom" in front of the Department of Justice in Washington is intended to force Holder either to address the issues or be put in a position of ignoring those who say they are violating the provisions of the federal law, Cass said.

"We're basically going to defy the law, and challenge it," Cass told WND. "We're going to declare the whole counsel of God, including those parts that some may consider 'inciting a hate crime' to see if the attorney general is going to come down and arrest a group of peaceful clergy exercising their First Amendment rights."

Of course, as we pointed out last time, the legislation contained explicit free speech and religious liberty protections, so they run no risk of prosecution and they know it.  Unless, that is, they intend to "plan or prepare for an act of physical violence" or "incite an imminent act of physical violence against another."

So is that was Cass and company are planning to do?  "Defy" the hate crimes law by calling for acts of physical violence against gays? 

Right Wing Leftovers

  • CNS News: The U.S. Catholic bishops have told the pastors of all the Catholic churches in America to insert a flyer in their church bulletin and read a statement at every Mass, informing their congregations that the health care bills now before Congress allow abortion-funding and must be opposed unless amended to specifically prohibit such funding
  • You know, for a guy who just moved to Washington, DC a few months ago simply so that he could lead the fight against marriage equality, Harry Jackson sure does use the word "we" alot when talking about the District.
  • Ray Comfort and Eugenie Scott are debating evolution over at God and Country.
  • Needless to day, Rick Scarborough is not happy about hate crimes legislation.
  • The Right is going all-in in NY-23.
  • The Christian Defense Coalition continues with its I Am 71 protests.
  • Finally, why can't the Right just enjoy Halloween like everyone else?

Everything You Need To Know About The Right's Ignorance About Hate Crimes Laws

This video and post by David Neiwert of Pat Robertson blasting the inclusion of protections for "sexual orientation" in federal hate crimes legislation tells you pretty much everything you need to know about the Religious Right's fundamental ignorance about the issue:

Then, of course, there's the Religious Right, which is holding its collective breath and pouting over the event. Case in point: Pat Robertson at The 700 Club, ripping into the new law both yesterday and today on his show.

His basis for opposing the law, however, is completely detached from reality. For instance, Robertson argues:

Robertson: You know, there’s a law – what about a law that says it’s a federal crime to attack somebody because of his religious beliefs? Not a chance!

Robertson seems completely unaware that in fact religious bias is one of the categories of bias crime covered by hate-crime laws -- and it has been from the very start, since these laws were first enacted on the state level in the early 1980s!

I had made this point time and time and time and time and time again and just assumed that the Religious Right leaders and activists were simply lying about this basic point ... but apparently they are genuinely ignorant of the fact that there already is a law "that says it’s a federal crime to attack somebody because of his religious beliefs." 

And yet people still continue to take the Right's claims seriously.  Amazing.

Randall Terry's Priorities

Randall Terry is up to his old tricks, carrying out absurd protests in an effort to generate media attention for himself - and it's working:

Anti-abortion activist Randall Terry is calling on people to burn effigies of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid this Halloween, as part of a "Burn in Hell" video contest to protest the health care legislation in Congress.

Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, said Tuesday that the contest serves as a political and spiritual statement that "gives people a chance to peacefully vent their rage."

"If Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid force us to pay for child killing and they die unrepentant, they will burn in hell for this," Terry said in a telephone interview.

OneNewsNow also interviewed Terry and asked him if he was concerned that his contest "could be seen as a promotion of violence against elected leaders or pro abortionists" ... and Terry doesn't appear concerned about it one bit:

"I don't want to be a wussy on the sidelines saying, 'Oh, we're just here to educate people and we want to all get along and we want to all respect each other's [opinions],'" he replies. The activist describes that approach using a derogatory phrase, and further concludes saying, "I don't respect the opinions of child killers. It's a damnable, disgusting act of murder."


With the recent murder of Kansas abortionist George Tiller and the pending passage of hate crimes legislation, OneNewsNow asked Terry if there was a less controversial way to get the point across -- a way that would not be construed as promoting physical violence. "I'm way more concerned about the pro-lifer who was assassinated outside of a school in Michigan -- Jim Pouillon," was his reply to the suggestion.

Tiller was murdered in church by an anti-choice fanatic who has since become a hero to radical anti-abortion activists, while Pouillon was killed back in September by a man who went on a killing spree and was initially determined to be mentally incompetent to stand trial and now plans an insanity defense in his upcoming murder trial.

But Terry is "way more concerned" about random acts of violence that happen to anti-choice activists than he is about the targeted assassination of reproductive health providers or Democratic members of Congress.

Hate Crimes: Get Ready For Pointless Grandstanding

President Obama hasn't even signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act yet, but right-wing activists are already "challenging" it ... or at least their warped version of it.

Here is the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission vowing to defy the legislation:

"The fact the hate bill had to be passed in such an unscrupulous and cynical manner (attaching it to the Defense Authorization Act) reveals the depth of President Obama's commitment to a radical, anti-Christian agenda. He will stop at nothing to undermine the will of the majority of Americans to pay back militant homosexual activists who raised millions of dollars for his campaign and worked to get him elected."

"To sign the bill in the Rose Garden is another slap in the face and shows the level of contempt President Obama has for the majority of Americans who oppose the "homosexualization" of marriage and public education."

"The Christian Anti-Defamation Commission will soon be announcing its plans, along with other leading pro-family groups, to defy, counter and challenge this unconstitutional attack on our religious liberty."

And here is Gordon Klingenschmitt daring Obama to prosecute him:

In other words, A) pastors may quote the Bible publicly if their "intention" is the free exercise of religion or speech, but B) pastors may not quote the Bible publicly if their "intention" is to conspire with listeners to commit an act of violence. This begs the question, if the pastor never announces whether the unspoken "intention" of his heart is A or B, how can any prosecutor, judge, or jury know whether the pastor's secret thoughts intended A) free exercise or B) conspiracy? Without revealing the secret intention of my own heart, whether A or B, I hereby publicly quote both Romans 1:32 and Leviticus 20:13:

Romans 1:32 -- "Men with men working that which is unseemly...who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death."

Leviticus 20:13 -- "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

I further invite President Barack Obama, as the chief law enforcement official of America, to discern the secret thoughts and intentions of my heart, and to prosecute me for conspiracy or inciting the violent crimes of others who might read my words and act upon them, if he dares to think he knows or can prove my motives were not pursuant to the free exercise of religion or speech.

Of course, neither CADC or Klingenschmitt nor anybody else is going to be prosecuted for speaking out or "defying" this and they know it.  After all, the legislation expressly protects free speech and religious freedom:

(4) FREE EXPRESSION- Nothing in this division shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual's expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs or solely upon an individual's membership in a group advocating or espousing such beliefs.

(5) FIRST AMENDMENT- Nothing in this division, or an amendment made by this division, shall be construed to diminish any rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(6) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS- Nothing in this division shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), including the exercise of religion protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and peaceful picketing or demonstration. The Constitution of the United States does not protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence.

But just because the legislation poses no threat to their religious freedom or right to free speech, amazingly that is not going to stop some on the Right from trying to use the legislation to turn paint themselves as martyrs.

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Focus on the Family: Hate crimes legislation is the sound "of your religious liberty being flushed down the toilet."
  • Will Gov. Mark Sanford avoid impeachment?
  • The right-wing campaign against the movie "Hounddog" continues.
  • Richard Land submitted written testimony to the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics warning that "legalizing same-sex marriage is certain to counteract the positive social attributes of traditional marriage, by leading to fewer marriages and more divorces."
  • Randall Terry's latest antics have succeeded in generating press coverage once again.
  • Finally, who wants to go cruising with Ralph Reed, Grover Norquist, and Newsmax? Anyone?

The Big Con: How Matt Barber Swindled Me Out of $30

Yesterday, I wrote a post taking issue with right-wing outlets that were claiming that people were giving Matt Barber's new book, "The Right Hook: From The Ring To The Culture War," negative reviews without have read it, claiming that the book isn't even going to be released until next week.

As I noted, I already received a copy that I ordered from Amazon last week.  But now that I've started to read it, I made an interesting discovery: namely, that anybody who has read his columns doesn't need to actually read the book before they review it ... because they have literally already read it, since the book consists entirely of his republished columns! 

Nowhere on the publisher's website or the Amazon page is there any sort of disclaimer that this "book" is really just a collection of Barber's past columns.  Had that been made clear, I certainly would have saved myself the $32.00 I spent on this bound edition of his inane columns.

So, to save prevent anyone else who was thinking of buying this "book" from getting conned and ripped-off, here is the entire Barber book in links:

Right Wing Leftovers

For the Right, Equal Protection = Unequal Protection

The Religious Right's willingness to blatantly lie about hate crimes legislation never ceases to amaze - from a recent American Family Association "Action Alert":

Such laws not only punish officially disapproved speech and thought, they create two tiers of victims. Under hate crimes laws, some victims get more protections than others, which violates the fundamental American principle of equality under the law.

In fact, such laws actively discriminate against heterosexual Christians who are victims of crime, since they will get less legal protection than homosexual victims.

So giving the same protection to gays as already exists for religion somehow lessens legal protections for Christians?

Sadly, now that the legislation is on its way to the President, this sort of hyperbolic lying will probably only increase.

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Joseph Farah says the Conservapedia Bible project is an "incredibly stupid and misguided initiative."
  • NOM has endorsed Doug Hoffman.
  • Mitt Romney says "the Iranian leadership is the greatest immediate threat to the world since the fall of the Soviet Union, and before that, Nazi Germany."
  • Peter Marshall explains that he is not calling for for the "teaching the biblical foundations of a 'Christian America,' but merely the "biblical foundations of America."
  • Finally, Rep. Michele Bachmann says that hate crimes legislation is the reason people hate Congress.

Latest Lies on Hate Crimes Legislation

Writing about Religious Right leaders lying about gay rights advocates is starting to feel like the old Saturday Night Live sketch where the Weekend Update’s top news story was “Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.” Today’s version: Tony Perkins is still lying about hate crimes.

Perkins’ latest activist alert about federal hate crimes legislation moving forward as an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill was sent under the headline, “The Senate Will Vote to Silence You!”
Here’s Perkins’ basic lie:
What "hate crimes" legislation does is lay the legal foundation and framework for investigating, prosecuting and persecuting pastors, business owners, and anyone else whose actions reflect their faith.
And here’s an example of the demagoguery it’s wrapped in:
Democratic leaders believe passing their liberal agenda takes precedence over keeping our armed services safe.
That’s sadly typical of the level of discourse coming from the far right these days.
Readers of this blog know that hate crimes legislation will not in any way “silence” FRC activists or lay any kind of foundation for “investigating, prosecuting and persecuting” anyone “whose actions reflect their faith,” unless those actions include committing violent crimes against other people.
Once more, for the record: the hate crimes legislation targets violent crimes, not sermons or speeches or books or anti-gay screeds by Tony Perkins. The law includes explicit First Amendment protections.  Tony Perkins is still lying.

Anti-Gay Hate Crime Proves Gays Don't Need Hate Crimes Protection

I had just finished watching the news report on the vicious anti-gay beating of Jack Price (complete with an defense of the beating from a man sporting a Leviticus tattoo) when I came across this piece by Concerned Women for America's Ken Ervin claiming that the beating proves that gays don't need hate crimes protection:

The New York Post is abuzz with the story of Jack Price, a 49-year-old man who was viciously beaten by two twenty-somethings last week. While in the College Point store, two boys (why call them “men”?) hurled insults at Price, waited for him to leave the store and then jumped him. According to the Post, “Price suffered a fractured jaw and ribs, and a lacerated spleen.” He remains in a medically-induced coma in serious but stable condition.

So, to recap, two adolescently-minded wanna-be-men ganged up on a man more than twice their age, beating him so severely that his jaw and ribs were broken, his spleen was damaged, and he required hospitalization. Pretty bad, yes? Horrific and absolutely unconscionable, right? Are you outraged? Do you want to see justice done? Do you want these two jerks to spend a lot of time in some dark, dank hole in the New York prison system? Good. That’s how it should be.

And yet, for some, the mere fact of broken bones and a lacerated spleen wasn’t worthy of outrage. Oh no. What was truly outrageous about this unthinkable crime, and what seems to some to be more horrific than broken bones and life-threatening injuries is that — horror upon horror!! — the assailants hurled “anti-gay slurs” at the object of their torment.

C’mon people. Can you seriously look me in the face and tell me that these hoodlums should get a harsher sentence for calling Jack Price nasty names while they beat him? If so, you’re also saying that it’s okay with you if they had kept their mouths shut while beating him and got away with a lighter sentence. Preposterous.

Homosexual or not, who really cares? These hooligans deserve prosecution to the fullest extent of the law — the regular law, not the “special” ones. We don’t need “hate crimes” laws. We need law enforcement. We need these guys to be afraid of more than a slap on the wrists. And if that isn’t happening with the regular law, then making “special” laws isn’t going to do it either.

Let me ask, for seemingly the millionth time, if the Religious Right would be making this argument that hate crimes laws are unnecessary if the victim had been attacked because of his race or religion? 

If "special" laws are so unnecessary, then why aren't they calling for the repeal of the existing hate crimes protections for race and religion, instead of merely trying to prevent gays from getting those same protections? 

Religion is an "Immutable Characteristic," Sexual Orientation is Not

For months now, I've been trying to understand the reasoning behind the Republican and right-wing opposition to adding hate crimes protections for sexual orientation, noting that while they regularly complain that certain groups of people shouldn't be getting "special rights" or receiving extra protection, they are perfectly content to allow the existing hate crimes protections for religion to remain on the books.

As it turns out, the reason I couldn't understand their reasoning is that it is apparently rooted in a belief that sexual orientation is a choice, while religion is not

Last week, House Republican Leader John Boehner objected to House passage of a bill that would expand hate crime laws and make it a federal crime to assault people on the basis of their sexual orientation.

"All violent crimes should be prosecuted vigorously, no matter what the circumstance," he said. "The Democrats' 'thought crimes' legislation, however, places a higher value on some lives than others. Republicans believe that all lives are created equal, and should be defended with equal vigilance."

Based on that statement, CBSNews.com contacted Boehner's office to find out if the minority leader opposes all hate crimes legislation. The law as it now stands offers protections based on race, color, religion and national origin.

In an email, Boehner spokesman Kevin Smith said Boehner "supports existing federal protections (based on race, religion, gender, etc) based on immutable characteristics."

It should be noted that the current law does not include gender, though the expanded legislation would cover gender as well as sexual orientation, gender identity and disability.

"He does not support adding sexual orientation to the list of protected classes," Smith continued.

Boehner's position, then, appears to be grounded in the notion that immutable characteristics should be protected under hate crimes laws. And while religion is an immutable characteristic, his office suggests, sexual orientation is not.

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Joseph Farah is not happy with Rep. Michele Bachmann's refusal to join in with the Birthers.
  • Mike Huckabee will be headlining the Viriginia Family Foundation's Annual Gala later this month.
  • The Apostolic and Prophetic Conference, featuring Rod Parsley and others, is currently underway in Miami, Florida.
  • Will the Right really sue over the passage of hate crimes legislation, as FRC suggests?
  • Speaking of FRC, its Virginia Values Voter PAC released its first ad against Creigh Deeds.

Respecting the Troops By Voting Against the Defense Appropriation

Back when George W. Bush was president, any Democrat in Congress who voted against any defense appropriation bill was immediately accused of hating our troops and endangering their lives.

But times have changed apparently:

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and House GOP Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-Ind.) are voting against the House/Senate fiscal year 2010 defense authorization bill — because it contains hate crimes provisions designed to protect gays and lesbians.

Boehner, speaking at his weekly press conference Thursday, said the inclusion of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act in the defense bill was "an abuse of power" by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that sought to punish offenders for what they thought — and not what they did.

He accused the speaker of pursuing her social agenda "on the backs" of the troops.

GOP Whip Eric Cantor is also a no, saying that the legislation constitutes classifying a new group of "thought crimes."

Not surprisingly, the Right has seized upon the idea that voting against this appropriations bill is a way to show support for the troops:

As FRC has said countless times, this provision would be devastating to free speech and religious freedom. Other laws that have passed under the guise of "hate crimes" have been the first step toward silencing pastors and Christians who speak out against homosexuality. Please join with us in asking Congress to respect our servicemen and women and vote no on "hate crimes" as part of the defense authorization bill!

Concerned Women for America makes a similar claim:

"The Defense Authorization bill should fund our national defense. Period. This 'hate crimes' provision grants special rights to certain political groups and could give cover to criminal behavior. This exploitation of a bill to fund our national defense shamelessly places homosexual groups' demands equal to or more important than our military," stated Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America.

"'Hate crime' laws unduly expand the federal government. These crimes are already fully prosecuted by the states. 'Hate crime' laws allow prosecution for the same act twice, violating the Constitutional protection against Double Jeopardy. It creates a class of 'special' preferred victims, denying equal protection to other victims. It could cover every kind of sexual behavior, granting protected status even for pedophiles. And homosexual activists admit the whole effort is a scam to raise money and political power," Wright noted.

Right Wing Round-Up

How Crazy Is Too Crazy For the GOP?

For weeks now, we have been posting on the How To Take Back America Conference and the utter insanity that has long plagued the hosts of the conference, wondering why on earth Republican leaders like Mike Huckabee or Reps. Michele Bachmann, Steve King, Tom Price, Tom McClintock and Trent Franks are inexcusably lending credibility to this event and to its organizers.

To put this upcoming conference into perspective, let us put it this way: If you thought last week's Values Voter Summit  - where speakers called for public abortions, claimed that pornography turns you gay, proclaimed that gays and liberal Christians are enemies of God who deserve to be struck down, and announced that they had been chosen by God to stand for truth and suffer the consequences - was crazy ... well, you ain't seen nothing yet.

And so we have pulled together our years of monitoring of the people and organizations behind the upcoming How To Take Back America Conference and put it all together in our latest Right Wing Watch In Focus, entitled "Why Are GOP Officials Embracing Extremists at Upcoming ‘How to Take Back America’ Conference?"

Here is an excerpt of the report, from the section focusing on the event's co-chair, Janet Porter:

It is probably impossible to overstate the extremism and lunacy of Janet Porter, whose radio program and Faith2Action.org website gives her a platform for promoting the most unhinged of conspiracy theories.

Porter is Mike Huckabee’s biggest fan. She first fell in love when she organized the 2007 Values Voter Debate to which she had personally invited a gospel choir to sing “Why Should God Bless America?” and after which Porter (then Folger) declared that Huckabee had been revealed as the answer to Christians’ prayers for a presidential candidate who shared their views, proclaiming him to be the “David among Jesse’s sons.” During the presidential primaries, she started a front group to attack Huckabee’s arch nemesis Mitt Romney and wrote columns claiming that only Huckabee could prevent Hillary Clinton from throwing all Christians into prison and save her fantasy world from this “evil queen and her dragon of slaughter.”

She has since claimed that God has cursed America for voting for Obama, that anyone who voted for him is bound for hell , and that anyone who has ever voted for a pro-choice candidate is also living under a curse. She has actively pushed the Birther conspiracies and even alleged that Obama’s presidency was the culmination of a decade-long Communist conspiracy twenty years in the making. After the election, but before the inauguration, she called on God to prevent Obama from taking office, while warning that "AN EARTH-SHATTERING CALAMITY IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN" to this nation because we deserve God's judgment.

Among other fears she has recently been stoking: the Obama administration is creating internment camps for conservatives and building mass evacuation buses to take them there, while warning that the H1N1 flu vaccine is really a nefarious plot by the government to kill millions of Americans. She helped to create and inflate the Right’s false claims that a Department of Homeland Security report was equating conservatives and veterans with terrorists; as noted above, she’s now pushing comparisons between the Obama administration and the rise of Nazism.

Porter has written a book called “The Criminalization of Christianity” and claims that hate crimes legislation will lead to Christians being thrown in jail. More recently she’s joined the chorus of extremists falsely claiming that the bill would “give heightened protection to pedophiles.” As part of her campaign against hate crimes legislation, Porter has repeatedly invited on to her radio show Ted Pike, a rabid anti-Semite who claims hate crimes laws are part of a Jewish plot for world domination.

The report also examines the equally crazy views and activities of other event co-sponsors like Phyllis Schlafly, Joseph Farah, Mat Staver, and Rick Scarborough, all in an effort to get an answer to one rather simple question: just how radical does a right-wing activist have to become before they are shunned by “respectable” Republican leaders?

Dobson and Scarborough: Things Were So Great After 9/11

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):


Rick Scarborough Hits The Big Time

Last year, when Vision America's Rick Scarborough was organizing his "Crusade to Save America" events, he scheduled in Kansas in order to rally support for Phill Kline's bid to become Attorney General.

James Dobson had endorsed Kline's bid as well and so Scarborough sought to get Dobson to come to Kansas to participate in the event, but Dobson declined.

At the time, I said it looked as if "even James Dobson has enough sense to avoid being seen in public" with the likes of Scarborough. 

After all, Scarborough is a self-described “Christocrat” who, when he’s not out palling around with Alan Keys, has a penchant for suggesting that evangelical leaders are dying off because the nation has turned its back on God, suggesting that Christians will have "the blood of martyrs on [their] hands" if they don't oppose hate crimes legislation, blaming "the church" for just standing by and allowing the election of "unrighteous leaders" in 2006, saying that opponents of the War in Iraq are committing treason, organizing conferences designed to highlight the “War on Christians and Values Voters,” warning that removing the phrase "so help me God" from the president’s oath of office would be national "suicide," telling gays they "should hang their heads in shame [because of] their sinful lifestyle," and penning books entitled “Liberalism Kills Kids” among other things.

But apparently I was wrong about Dobson having enough sense to avoid Scarborough, because he is going to be bringing him onto his radio program at the end of the week:

This is certainly a big step up for Scarborough from his regular appearances on Janet Porter's radio program.

Right Wing Round-Up

  • Steve Benen: For some reason, a recent Gallup poll showing strong "pro-life" numbers was a huge story, even though the results were dubious, whereas a new Gallup poll showing weaker "pro-life" numbers is a complete non-story.
  • Eleanor Bader at RH Reality Check examines the Right's campaign against ENDA and hate crimes legislation.
  • David Weigel reports that conservative TEA Party and town hall protesters are literally taking a page out of Saul Alinsky 1971 book “Rules for Radicals."
  • Autumn Sandeen: "I couldn't be more surprised to find out that I'm apparently now the honest to gawd, serious 'face' for the second tier religious right organizations regarding Obama Tranny-Care."
  • David Hart debunks Exodus International's new study that claims a 53% "success rate" in converting gays.
  • Good As You reports that the Family Research Council has gotten into the act of peddling Paul Cameron's bogus "research."
  • Truth Wins Out: Even though Focus on the Family is facing a $6 million budget shortfall, it doesn't mean it is necessarily hurting for money.
Syndicate content

Hate Crimes Posts Archive

Kyle Mantyla, Thursday 02/03/2011, 11:45am
One of the unintended results of running this blog is that we sometimes get mistaken for the Religious Right groups that we monitor.  If you do a Google search for "Faith 2 Action" or "Generals International," for example, you see that a link to our posts about those groups tend to show up near the top of the search results.  As such, we frequently get emails mistakenly sent to us that are intended for them ... usually, angrily demanding that they stop mailing and/or calling them seeking donations. And nine times out ten, these emails are intended for the... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Thursday 02/03/2011, 11:45am
One of the unintended results of running this blog is that we sometimes get mistaken for the Religious Right groups that we monitor.  If you do a Google search for "Faith 2 Action" or "Generals International," for example, you see that a link to our posts about those groups tend to show up near the top of the search results.  As such, we frequently get emails mistakenly sent to us that are intended for them ... usually, angrily demanding that they stop mailing and/or calling them seeking donations. And nine times out ten, these emails are intended for the... MORE
Brian Tashman, Wednesday 01/05/2011, 3:19pm
After Bob Vander Plaats succeeded in ousting three Iowa Supreme Court justices through retention votes following the Court’s unanimous decision in favor of legalizing gay marriage, he pledged to drive out the remaining four judges if they did not resign. He has now announced a bus tour throughout Iowa’s 99 counties to push for the removal of the other members of the Court over their 2009 ruling. Vander Plaats, the head of The Family Leader, has emerged as the state’s most influential Religious Right activist despite losing the 2010 Republican primary for governor. His... MORE
Brian Tashman, Monday 12/27/2010, 4:35pm
Back in January the Christian Science Monitor declared “Scott Brown: the tea party’s first electoral victory,” following his surprise win in the special election to fill the Senate seat of the late Ted Kennedy. But now the Boston Globe reports that conservatives and Tea Party activists are mulling over a primary challenge to the Massachusetts Republican. According to the Globe, Brown’s votes in favor of repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, ratifying the START Treaty, and reforming Wall Street (but only after it was watered down to win his support) made him... MORE
Brian Tashman, Friday 12/03/2010, 1:55pm
Brad O’Leary has been an emerging voice in the Religious Right thanks to books such as “The Audacity of Deceit: Barack Obama’s War on American Values,” “God and America’s Leaders,” and “America’s War on Christianity.” Today he received a platform in the Washington Examiner to spew his factually incorrect and conspiratorial views over the Southern Poverty Law Center’s latest hate group designations. He suggests that the SPLC’s descriptions of eighteen anti-gay organizations may lead to their future criminalization under... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Wednesday 12/01/2010, 12:52pm
This is audio of Rep. Michele Bachmann delivering a five minute prayer asking God to bless the Minnesota-based ministry known as You Can Run But You Cannot Hide: Lord God, we feel you here. And we invite you, Lord, to be here in our midst this afternoon at You Can Run But You Cannot Hide ... Lord, I thank you for what you have done with this ministry. I thank you for how you are going to expand this radio program, how you are going to expand their video program, their publications, how you are going to advance them from 260 schools a year, Lord, to 2,600 schools a year. Lord, we... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Monday 11/29/2010, 3:07pm
As we noted earlier, the Religious Right is uniformly livid with the Southern Poverty Law Center's updated list of anti-gay hate groups and seems to be struggling to come up with coherent response as demonstrated by this Concerned Women for America statement which basically accuses the SPLC of calling African Americans bigots: Concerned Women for America, among several other pro-family, pro-life national groups, has been named a “hate group” by The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) because of our opposition to same-sex “marriage.” The SPLC began as a civil... MORE