Massachusetts

FRC Again Asks MA Residents to Contact "Senator Kirk"

Does anyone at the Family Research Council actually know who the two US Senators are who represent Massachusetts? 

They are Sen. John Kerry and Sen. Scott Brown.

And the reason I ask is because for the second time in a month, FRC is asking Massachusetts residents to contact "Sen. Kirk" ... this time to "take a firm and principled stand against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act":

Does FRC really not know that Paul Kirk was just the interim Senator tapped to fill the late Ted Kennedy's seat and that he was replaced by Scott Brown earlier this year?  You'd think they would considering that they hailed Brown's election as "the culmination of thousands of townhalls, tea parties, and angry voters" a mere six months ago.

Dobson Memo Announces Plans to Launch Political Arm For His New Organization

You know who we haven't mentioned here in a while?  James Dobson. 

Ever since he left Focus on the Family, he has sort of fallen off the radar, but rest assured that he is still hard at work advancing his Religious Right agenda, only on a much smaller scale with his new effort "Family Talk With James Dobson."

For instance, earlier this month he hosted a two-day discussion with Tony Perkins and Gary Bauer about how President Obama is on a mission to systematically destroy the Christian faith and another two-day discussion with Chuck Colson and Robert George about the same thing.

And he has also penned a new memo explaining that God told him he was not allowed to retire because "there is still too much work to be done" and to that end Family Talk will soon be launching a 501c4 political organization so that they can take a more active role in the fight: 

I have never been more concerned about this great nation and its families than I am right now. Every day, it seems, another tenant of traditional morality goes down in flames. When I left Childrens Hospital of Los Angeles and USC School of Medicine, the institution of the family was already showing signs of cracking. I’m not claiming to be a prophet, but I foresaw three decades ago what we are experiencing as a nation today. The Judeo-Christian system of values was despised even then in some circles. The only thing that has changed is that the assault on the family and cultural morality has become much more vicious.

The institution of marriage is undergoing a complete overhaul. For example, despite the fact that 30 out of 30 states have voted to define marriage as being exclusively between one man and one woman, various courts have begun chipping away at that foundation. One of them, a district court in Massachusetts, struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, on July 8th, which was passed by the votes of 427 members in Congress, and signed by President Bill Clinton. It has been the law of the land since 1996. A single, arrogant, imperious judge has decided to declare the law null and void. The Obama Administration might not choose to appeal the ruling, which causes me anguish.

On another front, the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court is considering the constitutionality of Proposition 8, by which the exclusivity of traditional marriage between one man and one woman was affirmed by the people of California. The Ninth Court is the most liberal appellate court in the land, yet the future of marriage rests in its hands, at least for now. A decision is expected any day.

The attack on America’s institutions continues in full swing. The National Day of Prayer has been declared unconstitutional, and Congress is about to end the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy for the military, which will make open homosexuality legal in all branches of our Armed Forces.

The country is being systematically bankrupt, and beginning January 1, 2011, every family is going to be hit with draconian new taxes. Even the marriage penalty tax is scheduled to be reinstated. We MUST fight this attempt to undermine the financial integrity of the family!

Judge Elena Kagan, President Obama’s selection for the open seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, may be confirmed by the time you get this letter. She has encountered little opposition from Republicans to this point. Kagan is a supporter of partial birth abortion and holds numerous other leftist positions.

And on it goes. This is a time for Christian people to be in fervent prayer for our country.

Family Talk will fight with all its resources to defend the family against those who would destroy it. We will wage war on those who would manipulate children for political purposes, or try to weaken the military. These and other institutions of our democracy need all the help they can get. We want to be counted among those who will stand firm against the forces that are trying to bring Western Civilization down.

In order to do that job more effectively, we hope to start a 501(c)(4) organization just as soon as we are able to accomplish it financially. This will be a vitally important addition to the Family Talk tool chest, helping us do even more to address the moral and cultural issues confronting the family. Our day will come, but it is not here yet.

Of course, that might have to wait a bit because elsewhere in the memo, Dobson reports that "only 25% of the required funds are coming in to support Family Talk even at current levels."

But perhaps the most interesting revelation is that Dobson admits that though he intended to eventually step away from Focus on the Family, the Board basically forced him out this year:  

There is another reason for my departure. There is wisdom in the old adage that two captains can sink a ship. Jim Daly was my choice to succeed me, and we saw many things similarly. It gradually became clear, however, that we had significant philosophical differences. Jim has expressed his views on these matters in numerous articles and interviews. I have not spoken about them until now, but my perspectives are quite different, especially when it comes to confronting those who would weaken the family and undermine our faith. When I recognized these divergent views, therefore, I knew that I would be leaving, probably on June 1st or August 27th of this year. Our board of directors agreed but asked us to complete the transition on February 26th. Thus, my tenure at Focus on the Family suddenly came to an end.

Camenker Reacts (Badly) to Tea Party Collapse Over His Anti-Gay Views

Last week we noted that a Tea Party rally scheduled for this weekend in Massachusetts collapsed after several speakers dropped out due to MassResistance's Brian Camenker scheduled participation.

Needless to say, Camenker is absolutely outraged, noting that he has been a speaker at several Tea Parties rallies before and was even invited "to an exclusive Tea Party breakfast with Sen. Scott Brown."

Camenker partially blames the Southern Poverty Law Center's designation of MassResistance as a hate group for the debacle, but reserves most of the blame for Christen Varley, a rival Tea Party leader: 

MassResistance has talked to several people and gotten first-hand accounts of what happened.

It apparently started with Christen Varley, head of the "Greater Boston Tea Party", a different Tea Party organization than the Lexington group. Varley is also an employee of Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI), a "moderate" pro-family group, through an MFI affiliate that consults with political candidates. (Some would say that is a conflict of interest.) She also has strong ties to the state Republican establishment.

This week Varley contacted the Lexington Tea Party's speakers and advised them -- in fairly strong terms -- not to appear if Camenker was included ... Unlike other Tea Party leaders around the country, Varley is well-liked by the mainstream media. She's considered sensible and moderate by the establishment press. (Not like the other Tea Party "rabble" which the media have only contempt for.) As head of the Greater Boston Tea Party she's had numerous friendly articles published about her in the Boston Globe, Boston Herald, and even the Wall Street Journal, as well as many "softball" local radio interviews.

By her own admission, Varley tries to exclude discussion of "social issues" from all of her Tea Party events. It's all about fiscal issues, she says.

Hostility to the parents' rights movement. Last year Varley invited MassResistance to speak at one of her Tea Party events, but under the condition that we did not talk about the homosexual agenda in schools. After we refused and told others about her restriction, Varley left several angry phone messages at our office, referring to parents who were battling the gay agenda in the schools as "nut jobs."

Camenker then lists the participants who dropped out by name in a "Hall of shame" before concluding that the entire thing is "an absolute disgrace, and represents the worst kind of anti-family RINO sleaziness": 

We have never seen anything like this deliberately done to a Tea Party anywhere in America. It's an absolute disgrace, and represents the worst kind of anti-family RINO sleaziness. There are hundreds of thousands (and this year possibly millions) of taxpayer dollars going directly to the radical homosexual / transgender agenda in our schools to target children in Massachusetts. The idea that this should not be challenged at Tea Parties -- and that those who do speak out should be demonized -- is beyond offensive.

MA Tea Party Rally Collapses Over Brian Camenker

Yesterday it was reported that Massachusetts Tea Party activists were going to be holding a rally on Sunday that was going to include MassResistance's Brian Camenker along with several candidates running for office.

But now the event has been canceled because one candidate withdrew due to Camenker's involvement and that set off a chain reaction

Organizers have canceled a Tea Party rally scheduled for the Lexington Battle Green on Sunday, according to event organizer Jesse Segovia, chairman of the Lexington Republican Committee.

Plans for the event began to unravel Thursday when Eric Dahlberg, a Republican candidate for state Senate from the 3rd Middlesex District, withdrew after learning that Brian Camenker, president of MassResistance, was also scheduled to speak.

“Some consider MassResistance a hate group,” Dahlberg said. “I don’t want to be within a mile of an event that gives someone like that a stage.”

Camenker called Dahlberg’s reaction “stupid.”

...

Dahlberg said he supported what he considered the main objectives of the Tea Party movement: lowering taxes, streamlining government and personal responsibility.

“As far as I can tell, MassResistance has absolutely nothing to do with any of that,” Dahlberg said. “Of course, I support freedom of speech. But I am exercising my freedom of speech by deciding not to appear."

Maybe Sen. Scott Brown should take note:

FRC Wants MA Residents to Call Upon "Senator Kirk" To Oppose Kagan

Last month is was reported that Religious Right groups were trying to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to launch campaigns against the confirmation of Elena Kagan and that the Family Research Council was planning on spending more than $100,000 on an ad campaign against her. 

Let me just say that, for their sake, I hope FRC's ad campaign is better organized than their current direct mail campaign in which they are asking activists in Massachusetts to contact Senators Kerry and Kirk and urge them to vote against Kagan's confirmation:

You'd think that FRC would know that Paul Kirk was just the interim Senator tapped to fill the late Ted Kennedy's seat and that he was replaced by Scott Brown earlier this year, especially considering that FRC hailed Brown's election as "the culmination of thousands of townhalls, tea parties, and angry voters" a mere six months ago. 

Right Wing Round-Up

May Day on the Mall: Lifting The Curse That Obama's Election Has Brought Upon America

 
On Saturday, May 1, Religious Right leaders and public officials will gather at the steps below the Lincoln Memorial to beg God to forgive America for having elected wicked leaders like President Obama. If you can’t make it to the national mall on Saturday morning, you can watch live on God TV or via webcast thanks to the American Family Association.
 
The "May Day - A Cry to God for a Nation in Distress" event is the brainchild of Janet Porter, a Religious Right activist/conspiracy theory-promoting radio host, and member of presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee’s inner circle. Porter believes America is under a curse for having “made the choice of death” by electing President Obama (even though God TV warned us not to). She announced the May Day event at last fall’s How to Take Back America conference.  
 
Since then, Porter has lined up support from a significant number of Religious Right heavy-hitters like former Focus on the Family head James Dobson, who recorded an audio message recruiting pastors to get involved, and at least five members of Congress, including  Randy “Pray Against Health Care” Forbes (Virginia), Trent “Obama is an enemy of humanity” Franks (Arizona), Louie “Hate Crimes Act is a Pedophile Protection Act” Gohmert (Texas), and Steve “Know Your Enemies” King (Iowa).  
 

MassResistance Vows to Boycott 2010 Elections

Remember just a few months ago when Scott Brown was elected to the US Senate, winning the seat held by the late Ted Kennedy and everybody was talking about how it signaled the rebirth of the conservative movement, not just in Massachusetts but nationwide? Even Brian Camenker of MassResistance was giddy about it.

Well, it looks like the dream has quickly faded, as Camenker and other Massachusetts conservatives are vowing to sit out the coming election

Social conservatives – abortion foes, gay marriage opponents, transgender rights critics – may sit out the 2010 election, a Massachusetts hard-line conservative activist said Tuesday, arguing that no statewide candidates for office have championed their views.

Brian Camenker, executive director of MassResistance, which pointedly opposes gay and transgender rights, said he hopes social conservatives punish the Republican Party by staying home in November, and he singled out Republican gubernatorial nominee Charles Baker as “tone deaf” on social issues.

“He thinks he can just be Bill Weld again and that’s going to work,” said Camenker, referring to the Republican governor elected in 1990 on a platform that largely eschewed divisive social issues. “It’s not going to be as effective as it used to be. I don’t think he gets it. I don’t think he understands the passion of people on this issue.”

Social conservatives, who typically identify more closely with Republican candidates in Massachusetts, are conflicted this year, with a gubernatorial race that features three major candidates – a Democrat, a Republican and an Independent – who agree on the validity of gay marriage and the right of pregnant women to choose whether to have an abortion.

“We’re certainly going to be telling people to sit out this race,” Camenker said. “The Republican Party needs to be taught a lesson that they can’t consciously take social conservatives for granted.”

History So Easy, A Caveman Can Do It

Yesterday, a federal judge in Wisconsin ruled that the National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional and, not surprisingly, the Right has been outraged.

But I was especially impressed with Bryan Fischer's response explaining that any idiot can see that this ruling is wrong: 

A federal judge ruled Thursday that the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional because it violates the Constitution's prohibition against the government establishment of religion.

It is so easy to refute this judge on constitutional grounds that a caveman could do it.

Shoot, you don't even need the caveman. The Geico lizard probably knows more about the Constitution than this benighted, misguided, robe-wearing tyrant.

"Establishment" had a quite technical definition at the time of the founding. It meant to grant one specific Christian denomination preference in law, make it the official church of a nation or state, and compel people to support it through their taxes.

The Founders had observed what happened in England with an established church, the Church of England. Many of them experienced the religious oppression that accompanied an official national denomination, fled to America for freedom, and determined that the fledgling nation would not repeat the mistakes of the mother country.

Now, I am not sure just who Fischer has in mind when he says "Founders," but I  tend to think of it as referring to the men involved who signed the Declaration of Independence or drafted the Constitution.

As such, I have no idea where he gets the idea that they "fled to America for freedom" after experiencing the religious oppression of the Church of England, considering that the vast majority of them were all born in America. For instance:

Ben Franklin was born in Massachusetts.

John Adams was born in Massachusetts.

John Hancock was born in Massachusetts.

George Washington was born in Virginia.

Thomas Jefferson was born in Virginia.

James Madison was born in Virginia.

In fact, of the 39 men who signed the US Constitution, only five (James McHenry, Pierce Butler, William Paterson, Robert Morris, Thomas Fitzsimons) were not born on American soil.

But according to Fischer, our Founding Fathers so chaffed under the Church of England's religious oppression that they "fled to America for freedom" ... where they were born. 

And failure to understand that makes this federal judge an idiot. 

FRC: Deranged Video Threats Part of a "Clear Pattern of Intimidation" From Gay Activists

Earlier this week, a man named Norman Leboon was arrested for posting a video threatening to kill Rep. Eric Cantor and it was soon revealed that Leboon had made some 2,000 videos that contained pseudo-religious incantations with random warnings and threats, including videos that targeted President Obama, Vice President Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid as well as threats against judges, David Duke, and even against the movie "Babe."

So it seems pretty clear to everyone that Leboon's myriad of threats were most likely driven by some sort of mental illness ... everyone, that is, except the Family Research Council which claims that Leboon's threat against Cantor is part of a "clear pattern of intimidation that comes from many homosexual activists"

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and his family were the targets of a death threat for which a Philadelphia man was arrested on Monday. While the media reported the threat against Rep. Cantor, they didn't point out that the suspect, Norman Leboon, claimed on his YouTube website that he is the "Messiah" of "gays and lesbians" and asks his homosexual "children" to leave the armed forces so that he might "smite" those remaining. This was not an insignificant omission. There is a clear pattern of intimidation that comes from many homosexual activists.

In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court will take up the issue next month in a case that springs from the Washington State ballot measure to protect marriage. As they have in Massachusetts, California and elsewhere, homosexual activists in Washington State resorted to civic terrorism to intimidate those who signed the ballot measure. The question in this case is whether or not those who sign can do so without their names being publicly released. The evidence is mounting that those who are trumpeting the call for tolerance, have little tolerance for those they disagree with.

Texas Attorney General Accepts Vision America Award

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott stopped by Nacogdoches last night to speak at Vision America's "Guardian of the Family" Gala and accept the organization's "Texas Guardian of the Family Award" ... and judging by the speech he delivered, it's easy to see why Vision America felt he deserved the honor:

Stoking patriotic sentiments among the crowd, made up of various Christian congregations and local elected officials, Abbott read off a list of politically pointed quips that parodied comedian Jeff Foxworthy's "You might be a redneck" one-liners that were popular in the 1990s.

"You might be a true American if it never occurred to you to be offended by the phrase 'one nation under God.' You might be a true American if you've never protested against a public display of the Ten Commandments," he said. "You might be a true American if at Christmas time you still say 'Merry Christmas' as opposed to 'Happy Winter Festival.'"

But on a more serious note, the state attorney general also addressed his appeal to a Texas judge's decision to grant two Dallas men who were married in Massachusetts a divorce this past October. Abbott claimed that because Texas already has a ban on same-sex marriages, allowing the divorce of the two men would retroactively recognize same-sex marriages.

"Marriage is not man-made law. It's man's decision to adopt God's law. Man cannot redefine God's law, and yet they still try," Abbott said. "This is the first time that any judge has ruled that traditional marriage laws violate the U.S. Constitution."

The ruling judge in that case argued that the courts do indeed have jurisdiction to dissolve legal marriages from other states, and just last month, another such same-sex divorce was approved by another judge in Austin. Abbott has also sought an appeal to that case involving two women, also married in Massachusetts ... Abbott then praised his own defense of a 2003 law that requires public school students to begin their school day by observing a mandatory one-minute of silence in order to pray, reflect or remain quiet. The courts upheld the constitutionality of the moment-of-silence law because it did not require that students use it exclusively for prayer.

Abbott had to duck out early because he was scheduled to make an appearance on Fox News' "The Sean Hannity Show."  But before leaving, he made sure to stress the need for Christians to mobilize politically:

"Think what the country would look like if 100 percent of the people who worship God voted their values in each election. Together they would ensure a country that is more reflective of a God that gave us our inalienable rights," he said.

The Only Thing "Very Extreme" In This Scenario is MassResistance

One of the things I tried to do regularly back when we were following the debate over the expansion of hate crimes protections to cover things like sexual orientation was to point out the fundamental incoherence of the Religious Right's claims that such an expansion would gives gays "special protections" since, in reality, it was just granting equal protections by adding "sexual orientation" to the list of things like race and religion, which had already been protected by hate crimes legislation for more than a decade.  

In essence, it was Christians who had, for years, been protected by hate crimes laws while gays received no protections ... and the effort to grant such protections to gays was met with a coordinated outcry from the Right about how it was really an attack on their faith.

In that case, the Right's bogus claims didn't prevent this effort from becoming law, but it did become the framework for any similar fights moving forward, as we pointed out last year in noting the Right doing exactly the same thing in opposing anti-bullying legislation.

And which makes this WorldNetDaily article so eerily familiar

A measure in the Massachusetts statehouse to allow jail time for criticism of homosexuality has been pulled abruptly after a conservative group publicized the move by lawmakers.

The apparent precedent of criminalizing opinions about homosexuality had been predicted by opponents of the nation's "hate crimes" law before it was adopted as an amendment to a must-pass military bill in Congress and signed by President Obama last year.

According to Mass Resistance, which monitors the state legislature, the lawmakers added to a bill addressing schools an unrelated provision providing the jail time.

The planned addition to the Massachusetts General Laws would have been: "Whoever publishes any false material whether written, printed, electronic, televised, or broadcast with intent to maliciously promote hatred of any group of persons in the commonwealth because of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, or disability shall be guilty of libel and shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both."

Mass Resistance said the move would be "very extreme."

"Similar laws have been used in Canada and other countries to snuff out critical reporting on the homosexual movement and severely prosecute offenders. Note that the word 'hatred' is not defined and is thus completely subjective. And 'false material' lays the burden of proof on the accused, under the judgment of a court or tribunal. So even the threat of a long, expensive trial is enough to silence just about everyone," the group reported.

Spokesman Brian Camenker, however, reported to WND today that less than 24 hours after the issue was publicized, lawmakers removed the provision.

The bill in question came about in response to two recent suicides, but according to MassResistance, this language is nothing but an attempt to persecute and imprison Christians:

Whoever publishes any false material whether written, printed, electronic, televised, or broadcast with intent to maliciously promote hatred of any group of persons in the commonwealth because of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, or disability shall be guilty of libel and shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.

Now compare that the existing Massachusetts lible law:

Whoever publishes any false written or printed material with intent to maliciously promote hatred of any group of persons in the commonwealth because of race, color or religion shall be guilty of libel and shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.

Obviously, it was just an expansion of existing law - which already protects people based on race, color or religion - to include, among other things, sexual orientation.

So apparently MassResistance has no problem with the possibility of fines and imprisonment for anyone who libels, say, Christians ... but expanding the law to cover gays would be "very extreme."

Ralph Reed Will Not Run for Congress

It looks like Ralph Reed has decided not to run for Congress in order to focus on growing the influence of this Faith and Freedom Coalition:

Dear Friend:

I wanted you to be among the first to know of my decision regarding running for Congress in the Seventh District of Georgia. The following statement will be released to the public shortly but I wanted you to have it first:

"After much thought and prayer, I have decided not to be a candidate for Congress in Georgia's Seventh district in 2010. I believe I can best advance conservative principles by continuing to serve as CEO of Century Strategies, LLC, and founding chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition. Century's voter contact subsidiary and grassroots team will be involved in a number of races in 2010. FFC is growing rapidly, with over 150,000 members and supporters already, currently adding one new state chapter a week and 1,000 new members a day.

In 2010 and 2012, FFC will register an estimated one million new faith-based voters and make tens of millions of voter contacts in what may be the largest conservative get-out-the-vote effort in modern political history. These nationwide efforts offer a much better prospect for changing the direction of the country than winning a Congressional race myself. In the end, I concluded I cannot run for Congress and carry out the plans I have for Century Strategies and Faith and Freedom Coalition at the same time. I had to make a choice. I believe electing 50 to 100 men and women of character and conservative beliefs to Congress and statewide office over the next two election cycles is a more efficacious way to advance the conservative agenda than seeking public office myself in 2010.

Should that door open in the future, perhaps I will arrive at a different decision, but I know this is the right decision at this time for me and the Reed family. Jo Anne and I have been deeply moved and encouraged by the expressions of support we have received from so many. We are proud to call Georgia our home and we look forward to continuing to be involved in the civic life of our state and the nation. God bless you as we work together for an historic victory in 2010."

Actually, it seemed pretty clear that Reed was going to pass on running for office after he showed up in Iowa yesterday and vowed that, with a half-million dollars, his Faith and Freedom Coalition would help conservatives completely take over the state:

Ralph Reed, the former head of the Christian Coalition and a veteran Republican strategist, told a Des Moines crowd Tuesday night that he was helping establish an Iowa-based Christian political organization, and if he could raise $500,000, Hawkeye State politics would be changed for the better.

With that money, Reed said his organization — the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition — can promise results like the nation saw in the gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey, as well as the U.S. Senate campaign in Massachusetts. Reed said the national version of his organization was highly involved in those campaigns, each of which saw Republican victories on Election Night.

“We need to raise about a half a million dollars to execute that program,” he said. “The program that I just described to you that made history in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, if you want to see it happen in Iowa we need to raise a half a million dollars.”

Reed, who was speaking at an Iowa Christian Alliance event, then instructed staff to pass buckets around for people to donate money, promising that any funds raised Tuesday night will be matched by his national organization.

“Tonight, when you give, we’re not a PAC and we’re not a candidate,” he said. “Therefore, there is no limit to what you give here tonight.”

...

“We’re not going to leave the express advocacy during an election to the radical left, MoveOn.org and labor unions anymore,” he said. “We’re going to do it, and we’re going to get people who share our values elected to office, from governor all the way down to the statehouse and school boards all across the state of Iowa.”

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Tomorrow, Ralph Reed will announce whether or not he has decided to run for Congress in Georgia.
  • Last week, Marco Rubio joined Tony Perkins, Harry Jackson, and others for a Watchmen on the Wall event in Florida entitled "iMPACT 2010: Unleashing the Voice of the Church."
  • It looks like WorldNetDaily's conference is out to bring all of the right-wing crazies together under one roof.
  • Someone is running robocalls in Iowa accusing Rick Santorum of being a "pro-life fraud."
  • Ken Hutcherson blasts Focus on the Family for supposedly forcing James Dobson out and for not hiring him to take over, even though he wouldn't have taken the job anyway.
  • Quote of the Day I from the Liberty Counsel's Steve Crampton regarding LC's fight to prevent a lesbian high school student from taking her girlfriend to the Prom: "In all candor, while we know nothing about the complaining student here, we believe this is part of a larger agenda to implement homosexual rights in the schools."
  • Quote of the Day II from Janice Crouse on gay marriage: "In actuality, homosexual unions have a very short lifespan; many of the same-sex “marriages” in Massachusetts are already being dissolved. Further, the health risks associated with homosexual practice are very real and very much in evidence in the emergency rooms of hospitals. There is no denying: Homosexual sex is dangerous and destructive to the human body. Both HIV and HPV are epidemic among homosexual men. Domestic violence is a common problem — twice as prevalent among homosexual couples as in heterosexual ones. Indeed, legally creating a union does not enable two men or two women to become “one flesh,” nor does a legal ceremony give the union sanctity. Instead, the ceremony creates a sham that will devalue all marriages."

Sen. Scott Brown Dines With MassResistance

MassResistance, which has the distinction of being one of the few organizations classified as an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, just sent out an email bragging that the organization was invited to attend a breakfast meeting with Sen. Scott Brown earlier this week which included this photo of Brown with MassResistance head Brian Camenker :

US Senator Scott Brown held an impromptu breakfast Feb. 20 in South Boston to connect with representatives of his grassroots activist supporters. It included key Republican activists, Tea Party activists, and others (even some Democrats). South Boston activists invited MassResistance to join the event as the major pro-family action group.

The Brown people seem well aware who his base is, and he genuinely wants to stay connected with them ... The meeting was at the Playwright Restaurant and Bar on West Broadway. Brown strolled in a few minutes early with just an aide.

Sen. Brown mingled and spoke individually with people for quite a while. He talked about a range of topics. And he wanted us to feel comfortable contacting his office if we needed to, and said that he would represent the average person's interests. Then everyone sat down and had breakfast. Later, he gave a short speech and left for his next appointment.

...

A meeting like this in Massachusetts is really quite astonishing. Although the liberals get this kind of meeting all the time (e.g., the current governor regularly meeting with MassEquality), the idea of a U.S. Senator (or any major politician) sitting down with real conservative activists is simply unheard of. Certainly no recent Republican governor - Bill Weld, Paul Cellucci, Jane Swift, or Mitt Romney - would have ever done this. They often met with liberal activists, but they were uncomfortable around conservatives and kept them at a distance.

But Brown's message was that he's willing to listen to us and take us seriously. And despite years of politics and sudden national fame, he hasn't become elitist or condescending -- which also makes him an oddity among politicians here.

Right Wing Groups Heading to Rhode Island

The Family Research Council announces a day long summit is being held in Rhode Island at the end of the month featuring a variety of right-wing groups:

Don't miss this valuable opportunity to learn about the cutting-edge family, life and marriage issues affecting Rhode Island and all New England! Experts from the Family Research Council, National Organization for Marriage Rhode Island, Alliance Defense Fund, and Family Policy Councils from Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine and Connecticut will discuss the latest state legislative trends affecting you and your family. Don't miss this opportunity to get informed as to how you can make a critical difference in your community!

Does Matt Barber Speak For Liberty Counsel?

I have to say that it comes as absolutely no surprise that the very first Religious Right activist to call for Judge Vaughan Walker's removal from the Proposition 8 trial is the militantly anti-gay Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel:

Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with Liberty Counsel, released the following statement today on news that the San Francisco Chronicle has “outed” 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Vaughn Walker as an active practitioner of the homosexual lifestyle.

Judge Walker has presided over California’s Proposition 8 case filed by homosexual extremists who seek to manufacture a constitutional “right” to so-called “same-sex marriage:”

“The revelation that Judge Walker apparently chooses to engage in homosexual conduct, if true, would explain much of his bizarre behavior throughout this trial,” said Barber.

...

“Any decision favoring plaintiffs in this case will be permanently marred and universally viewed as stemming from Judge Walker’s personal biases and alleged lifestyle choices.

"For these reasons, and in the interest of justice, Judge Walker should do the honorable thing and immediately recuse himself.”

I'd actually be interested to know if this is an official Liberty Counsel position or if this is just Barber's position, since the press release doesn't appear anywhere on the Liberty Counsel website and instead was posted on Catholic Online.

In fact, Barber regularly issues press releases which he attributes to Liberty Counsel via Catholic Online, like this one:

“While citing the specter of ‘equal protection,’ the Iowa Supreme Court today has unanimously joined a leftist gaggle of ideologically driven judges in California, Massachusetts and Connecticut, creating, from thin air, a phantom ‘right’ to the ridiculous, oxymoronic and postmodern ‘gay’ marriage counterfeit.

And this one:

“The good news is that even in one of the most liberal States in the Union, Maine, the people have once again rejected the ridiculous and oxymoronic notion of ‘same sex marriage.’ The momentum has again shifted – hopefully for good this time – in favor of protecting legitimate marriage.

"A counterfeit is a counterfeit. An orange is an orange no matter how much you want it to be a turnip. This isn’t about ‘marriage.’ It’s about hurting and broken people desperately seeking affirmation of an objectively deviant lifestyle. One that, even in their heart of hearts, they know to be a dead end. As for the militant ‘No on 1’ homosexual activists? I’m reminded of spoiled children dressing up and playing house, refusing to come in when mom calls for dinner".

And various others.

Are these Matt Barber's personal opinions or are they official Liberty Counsel positions?  If they are the former, then why are they always attributed to Liberty Counsel?  And if they are the latter, why are they never posted on the Liberty Counsel website? 

It's almost as if Liberty Counsel and Barber are trying to have it both ways in allowing Barber to regularly issue offensively anti-gay statements on the organization's behalf while allowing the organization to avoid taking any responsibility for his vehemently anti-gay bigotry. 

The Looming RINO-ization of Scott Brown

Last week I wrote a post noting that while Religious Right leaders were elated that a Republican had won the Massachusetts Senate seat in the recent special election, they were not necessarily enamoured with Scott Brown.

And now they have even less reason to be so, thanks to his assertion that he hasn't taken a postiion on repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell and his opposition to several of their primary goals

The man nicknamed "41" after he won a special election Jan. 19 that deprived Senate Democrats of their 60-vote supermajority said he opposes partial-birth abortion and federal funding for abortions, but does not support the repeal of the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision.

"Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, but I think we need to do more to reduce the amount of abortions," he said on ABC's "This Week."

"I feel this issue is best handled between a woman and her doctor and her family."

He also appeared to reject a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, saying, "I believe that states should have the ability to determine their own destiny and the government should not be interfering with individual states' rights on issues that they deal with on a daily basis."

Once the election euphoria wears off, it will only be a matter of time before the Right starts attacking Brown as a RINO.

Huckabee Climbs Aboard The Tea Party Bandwagon

It seems that Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts has turned Mike Huckabee into a Tea Party true believer. 

A few months back, when tea party activists were making the Doug Hoffman/Dede Scozzafava the proving ground for ideological loyalty, Huckabee was conspicuously absent until the very last minute when he jumped in over after Scozzafava had dropped out.

Similarly, in the Brown race, Huckabee basically sat on the sidelines, but in the wake of his win, Huckabee is suddenly climbing aboard the tea party bandwagon, first claiming that members of Congress "should be tarred and feathered as the original tea partiers would have done" and now declaring that "The Tea Party Movement is Changing America" and that he is thrilled to be a part of it:

The 21st century Tea Party movement is changing America. That’s not an overstatement, it is a fact.

The original Tea Party happened on December 16, 1773, when 5,000 patriots gathered at the Old South Meeting House, a site used for both worship and politics. Our Tea Party ancestors tossed the tea overboard to protest “taxation without representation” because they weren’t permitted to elect a member to the British parliament.

Today we have seen our government turn a deaf ear to the people, pushing through bailouts and stimulus spending without representation. For months they’ve tried their best to push through a health care bill that few wanted, only to be stopped again this time by the Massachusetts Tea Party and the election of Scott Brown on January 19.

But mark my words: Congressional Democrats and President Obama haven’t given up.
Now we are hearing rumors that the Senate may try to use reconciliation to get around the filibuster. Just another procedural maneuver to thwart the will of the people. Every member of Congress knows in their heart that the American people don’t want the health care bill that Congress has before it and yet they continue to push for it out of arrogance.

The Tea Party movement was started by Americans insisting on fiscal responsibility in government, limited government based on the Constitution, and the free market system. They played a large role in the town hall meetings in August, at which lawmakers got an earful, they helped propel Republicans to victory in Virginia and New Jersey in November and again this month in Massachusetts. Now it’s time for the Tea Party patriots to step up again and help raise the pressure on Congress to bury Obama-care once and for all. I know they will. And I will step up with them.

Scott Brown's Victory Becomes All Things To All People

The most amazing thing about Scott Brown's Senate campaign is that his victory last week has seemingly become all things to all people and giving right-wing pundits an opportunity to portray their own narrow agenda as central to his win. 

For some, Brown's win was a sign that voters don't like President Obama or Nancy Pelosi, for others it was proof that people oppose health care reform, or abortion, or immigration. 

But Phyllis Schlafly offers a different take, claiming that what voters were really doing in this election was rejecting Martha Coakley because of her feminism

Democratic Party leadership has shown that it cannot or will not stand up to the incoherent, man-hating attitude of feminists like Coakley. For example, after they had a tantrum and demanded that the majority of jobs created by Obama's stimulus be given to women (instead of to shovel-ready jobs), even though most of those who lost jobs in this recession are men, President Obama dutifully acquiesced.

It's no wonder that non-college-educated men voted overwhelmingly for Brown against Coakley by a massive 27-point margin. The Democrats are lucky enough to elect some feminists, but feminists are just too unappealing when running against a masculine man such as Brown.

Brown's driving a 2005 GMC pickup truck (which Obama sneered at) symbolized the elitism of Coakley, who drives a foreign car. While Coakley was sipping wine with drug and insurance company PAC representatives, Brown was shaking hands with the voters.

Commentary about Brown's appeal to women is diversionary -- it was male voters who overwhelmingly pulled the lever for him. Men are fed up with the feminist mindset and delivered a clear message in the Massachusetts election: give us a candidate who stands up to the feminists, and we will cross over from Democrat and independent to elect a Republican.

Syndicate content

Massachusetts Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Friday 02/25/2011, 11:14am
After the Obama administration announced that it will no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) because the law is unconstitutional, groups opposed to marriage equality immediately sprung into action. The Family Research Center, Concerned Women For America, and Focus on the Family’s political arm CitizenLink swiftly demanded that Congress pass a resolution to takeover the legal defense of DOMA. “Marriage advocates are ready to defend God’s design,” said Jennifer Mesko of CitizenLink, “They are calling on Congress to intervene and defend DOMA.”... MORE
Brian Tashman, Tuesday 02/15/2011, 10:29am
Michele Bachmann New Hampshire: Announces intention to visit New Hampshire at CPAC (Minnesota Independent, 2/14). CPAC: Uses faulty tax math at her CPAC speech (WaPo, 2/11). Health Care: Says that repealing reform law is “the driving motivation of my life” (RWW, 2/10). Haley Barbour Immigration: Lobbied for Mexico to support the extension of an “amnesty” program (Salon, 2/14). Lobbying: Politico looks into conflicts of interest as Governor after lobbying for tobacco industry (Politico, 2/14). Iowa: Plans to address a Republican fundraiser in Iowa on March 15 (The... MORE
Brian Tashman, Tuesday 02/15/2011, 10:29am
Michele Bachmann New Hampshire: Announces intention to visit New Hampshire at CPAC (Minnesota Independent, 2/14). CPAC: Uses faulty tax math at her CPAC speech (WaPo, 2/11). Health Care: Says that repealing reform law is “the driving motivation of my life” (RWW, 2/10). Haley Barbour Immigration: Lobbied for Mexico to support the extension of an “amnesty” program (Salon, 2/14). Lobbying: Politico looks into conflicts of interest as Governor after lobbying for tobacco industry (Politico, 2/14). Iowa: Plans to address a Republican fundraiser in Iowa on March 15 (The... MORE
Brian Tashman, Friday 02/11/2011, 7:23pm
If there is one message to take away from CPAC’s panel on immigration, it’s that White America is in serious jeopardy and may soon succumb to immigration, multiculturalism, and socialism. The panel “Will Immigration Kill the GOP?” featured former congressmen Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and Virgil Goode (R-VA), Bay Buchanan of Team America PAC, and special guest Rep. Lou Barletta (R-PA). The group Youth for Western Civilization sponsored the panel, and its head Kevin DeAnna was also a panelist. Youth for Western Civilization is a far-right group that regularly criticizes... MORE
Brian Tashman, Friday 02/11/2011, 7:23pm
If there is one message to take away from CPAC’s panel on immigration, it’s that White America is in serious jeopardy and may soon succumb to immigration, multiculturalism, and socialism. The panel “Will Immigration Kill the GOP?” featured former congressmen Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and Virgil Goode (R-VA), Bay Buchanan of Team America PAC, and special guest Rep. Lou Barletta (R-PA). The group Youth for Western Civilization sponsored the panel, and its head Kevin DeAnna was also a panelist. Youth for Western Civilization is a far-right group that regularly criticizes... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Wednesday 02/09/2011, 4:40pm
Maryland State Senator James Brochin found the testimony from anti-gay activists during yesterday's hearing so "troubling" that he may now support legislation granting marriage equality after previously opposing it: "The demonization of gay families really bothered me," Brochin said. "Are these families going to continue to be treated by the law as second class citizens?" I am guessing that it is no coincidence that the vehemently anti-gay activists at MassResistance have sent out an email bragging about the key role they played in prepping the anti-gay forces... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Wednesday 02/09/2011, 4:40pm
Maryland State Senator James Brochin found the testimony from anti-gay activists during yesterday's hearing so "troubling" that he may now support legislation granting marriage equality after previously opposing it: "The demonization of gay families really bothered me," Brochin said. "Are these families going to continue to be treated by the law as second class citizens?" I am guessing that it is no coincidence that the vehemently anti-gay activists at MassResistance have sent out an email bragging about the key role they played in prepping the anti-gay forces... MORE