Fighting the Right

Glenn Beck: 'An Economic Collapse Of Biblical Proportions Is Coming'

As we have noted several times before, Glenn Beck believes himself to be "an oracle" who can see the future, and the way that he does this is by regularly making all sorts of vague predictions and then changing them as he goes along, all while insisting that he is terrible when it comes to knowing when any of the things he has predicted will actually happen.

Of course, this last caveat is just a convenient way to ensure that his endless stream of predictions remains open-ended and therefore can never be proven false because it is always possible that they simply haven't come true yet. It's a neat trick, especially since whenever Beck does put definite times on his predictions, he is inevitably proven wrong.

Keep all of that in mind as you watch Beck on Dana Loesch's show last night warning that "an economic collapse of biblical proportions is coming to the West."

Beck said that just as he was mocked for predicting that Europe would see a rise in nationalism, which is now being proven true, so too will the world see total economic and social chaos.

"What nobody is willing to say on television is an economic collapse of biblical proportions is coming to the West," he stated. "Of biblical proportions."

Beck then laid out some incoherent theory about how there is an effort underway to "trap money in the banks" so that governments can implement a "bail in" by confiscating "10 percent of everybody's savings."

"They've already done it in Cyprus," he warned. "It didn't go over well. They're going to do it, not only in Europe, they will do it here."

Of course, it was over three years ago when Beck first warned his audience to start hoarding cash because this sort of government confiscation was coming.

Obviously, it hasn't happened.

Or maybe it just hasn't happen ... yet.

And therein lies the key to Beck's self-proclaimed prophetic abilities.

John McCain's GOP Challenger Appears On Alex Jones' Conspiracy Theory Show

After kicking off his show last night by declaring that he is living under the nonexistent North American Union, InfoWars broadcaster Alex Jones greeted Arizona Republican state Sen. Kelli Ward, who is challenging U.S. Sen. John McCain in the Republican primary.

It isn’t a huge surprise that Ward would appear on Jones’ conspiracy theory program, as the GOP lawmaker has promoted fears about “chemtrails” and rallied behind anti-government icon Cliven Bundy during his standoff with law enforcement.

As we mentioned when Donald Trump appeared on Jones’ radio program last year, it “is really difficult to know where to begin when cataloging all of the truly insane statements and conspiracy theories levied by radio host Alex Jones, who has talked about everything from how 9/11 and Oklahoma City were false flag operations to how juice turns kids gay and space lizards are running the world."

Bryan Fischer Rewrites History In Order To Criticize Obama

On his radio program yesterday, Bryan Fischer predictably criticized President Obama for attending a baseball game in Cuba following the terrorist attacks in Brussels because ... well, who knows? Fischer didn't explain what he thought that Obama should have done and, frankly, he would have criticized the president regardless of how he responded because it would have inevitably been, in Fischer's view, the wrong response.

Laughably, Fischer actually compared Obama's response to a terrorist attack that took place nearly 4,000 miles away to President George W. Bush's response on 9/11, saying that Bush was lambasted for simply spending "15 or 20 seconds" reading a book to schoolchildren before he "politely excused himself" after he was informed of the terrorist attacks that were under way:

We have no idea what Fischer is talking about since Bush, of course, infamously spent several minutes sitting idly in a Florida classroom after being informed that the nation was under attack:

Leading White Nationalists Credit Trump With Empowering The 'Pro-White' Movement

It’s no secret that Donald Trump has become the candidate of choice of white nationalists, including Jared Taylor, a leading figure in the white nationalist movement, who recorded a robocall in favor of Trump before the Iowa caucuses.

That image was only reinforced earlier this month when Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., appeared on the notorious white nationalist radio program “The Political Cesspool.”

On Saturday, Taylor joined “Political Cesspool” host James Edwards on his program, where the two expressed optimism about the future of what Edwards called the “pro-white” movement, something that they attributed in part to Trump’s candidacy.

Edwards gushed about an “awakening happening within the spirit of our people” that was beyond his “wildest dreams” when he started his program.

Taylor said that he too was “hugely encouraged” by the growth of the movement, particularly among “young people” who have “grown up with it.” He described it as “a real sea change.”

“The most visible manifestation of this is the support for Donald Trump,” Taylor added. “Donald Trump is an opportunity for ordinary Americans to say they are fed up. And one of the big things they’re fed up about is the racial changes going on in the United States and they think Donald Trump might actually do something about it.”

“Even if he’s dog whistling about some of our issues,” Edwards responded, “he gives the people cover to come out and be more apparent in their beliefs, and I think that’s certainly a good thing.”

The Right's 3 Big Myths About The Zubik Birth Control Coverage Case

Republican politicians have seized on the Zubik v. Burwell case, which was argued today at the Supreme Court, as further “proof” that the Obama administration is pursuing a war on religious liberty.

This argument is rooted in three myths that the Right has been promoting about contraception, the Affordable Care Act and religious freedom:

Myth 1: Obamacare Forces Objectors To Pay For Contraceptives

The Zubik case deals with the Affordable Care Action’s contraception coverage requirement. If a religious nonprofit employer with religious objections wants an exemption from the requirement, they can fill out a form to notify the government, which will then shift the burden of contraceptive coverage to the government and the insurance company.

The plaintiffs in the Zubik case, which is a consolidation of several cases, are challenging this accommodation, arguing that the exemption process itself amounts to a substantial burden on their religious conscience.

“Unlike in Hobby Lobby v. Burwell, the 2014 case that asked whether secular, for-profit businesses should also have the right to pursue a religious exemption from the birth control benefit, the Roberts Court in Zubik v. Burwell will try to answer the question of whether completing the paperwork required to obtain that religious exemption is itself a substantial burden on religious liberty,” Jessica Mason Pieklo of Rewire writes. “If the plaintiffs win in Zubik, it could not only spell the end of the ACA’s birth control benefit; it could further open the door to launching wide-scale religiously based objections to civil rights protections.”

Indeed, some observers fear that employers could use a potential Zubik ruling to undermine health insurance coverage of vaccinations or HIV treatments if they claim such procedures violate their religious beliefs.

Myth 2: This Is About Abortifacients

Obamacare critics have frequently alleged that the health care law forces religious groups to subsidize “abortifacients.”

But while some conservatives like to claim that certain birth control drugs are abortifacients, that doesn’t make it so. As Jamie Manson wrote in the National Catholic Reporter:

The HHS mandate allows women free access to all FDA-approved forms of contraception. This includes the IUDs (intrauterine devices), the drug Plan B (levonorgestrel) and a new drug called Ella (ulipristal acetate), which came on the market in 2010. Church officials and others have argued that because these three contraceptives are abortifacients, the government is forcing them to participate in the distribution of devices and drugs that cause abortion.

The reality is that there is overwhelming scientific evidence that the IUD and Plan B work only as contraceptives. Since Ella is new to the market, it has not been studied as extensively. But as of now, there is no scientific proof that Ella acts as an abortifacient, either.

There is only one drug approved to induce abortion. It is called RU-486 (mifepristone) and is not on the FDA's list of approved contraception. It is available only by prescription and no employer is forced to pay for it as part of an employee health plan.
 

A similar analysis by the New York Times also showed that the contraceptives that some conservatives have decried as “abortifacients” do not in fact “meet abortion opponents’ definition of abortion-inducing drugs.”

The Zubik plaintiffs, it seems, are not only trying to challenge the established principles of religious liberty and the legal rights of their women employees, but they are also challenging mainstream science.

Myth 3: Religious Liberty Is Under Attack

Some Republican politicians are peddling the misconception that the Obama administration is trying to force nuns to pay for contraceptives. In reality, however, the Affordable Care Act offers religious objectors a way to avoid paying for services they find objectionable.

In this case, the employers are seeking to take away their employees’ access to birth control coverage through secular insurance plans.

The Zubik plaintiffs are taking issue with the accommodation found in the contraception mandate, which doesn’t apply at all to houses of worship and their auxiliary institutions, and which creates an exemption process for nonprofit religious employers that don’t wish to cover contraceptives.

Holly Hollman of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty points out that the plaintiffs may actually do great damage to laws that have created exemptions for religious institutions: “They argue the mandate’s exemption system is too narrow because these employers are not treated exactly like churches. At the same time, they argue it is too broad because if the government does not cover church employees it must not have a compelling interest in coverage. Government efforts to craft religious exemptions to protect religious liberty, while also protecting other important governmental interests, should be encouraged, not discouraged with such ‘all or nothing’ exemption claims.”

University of Virginia law professor Douglas Laycock similarly argues that a successful challenge “would do terrible damage to the larger cause of religious liberty” by targeting religious exemptions crafted into laws.

This is yet the latest example of the Right’s organized effort to redefine religious liberty.

JCN Laughably Changes Course In Attempt To Paint Merrick Garland As A 'Liberal Extremist'

Back in 2010, as President Obama was considering possible nominees to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court, Judicial Crisis Network attorney Carrie Severino mused, “Of those the president could nominate, we could do a lot worse than Merrick Garland," adding that a Garland nomination could bring down “the tension and the politics” surrounding the brewing Supreme Court battle.

It must have been somewhat awkward for Severino, then, when President Obama did nominate Garland for the Supreme Court this year and she had to pivot to claiming that Garland is actually a liberal extremist who should never be confirmed by the Senate.

Of course, the objection that groups like JCN have to Garland’s nomination has nothing to do with the nominee. Instead, conservative groups, led by JCN, were pressuring Senate Republicans to block any Obama nominee to the Supreme Court even before Garland was named.

So it’s been amusing to watch JCN as it grasps for arguments to oppose Garland, the most recent being a web ad that the group is promoting in the home states of vulnerable Republican senators that derides Democrats for calling Garland a “moderate.” Instead, JCN told USA Today, Garland is a “liberal extremist.” The ad claims that under a Supreme Court with the “liberal extremist” Garland as a member, the Second Amendment would be “gutted” and “partial-birth abortion legalized” and Garland would become the “tie-breaking vote for Obama’s big government liberalism.”

We’ve already debunked JCN and its allies’ weak attempts at portraying Garland as “hostile” to gun rights. This is just reinforced by the fact that the only news source JCN could find to cite in its ad about Garland’s supposedly “strong hostility to gun owner rights” is the NRA’s magazine.

The “partial-birth” abortion claim is even more of a puzzle since, as far as we know, Garland has never ruled on the issue. That claim seems to be based entirely on the fact that Garland was nominated by President Obama.

Some conservative groups are not even bothering to claim that Garland is an unacceptable nominee and are instead focusing on bogus procedural arguments against considering his nomination. But JCN, Severino says, has a duty to be “out there combating the spin” about the nominee. That argument would be so much more convincing if the “spin” didn’t so closely resemble what she herself said just six years ago.

Of course, what can you expect from an organization that was founded as the Judicial Confirmation Network under President George W. Bush, only to completely change its name and core mission once President Obama took office.

Glenn Beck: 'Superman And Batman Would Never Fight'

Though he has not seen the film yet, Glenn Beck is not a fan of the new "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" movie because Batman and Superman are heroes who would never fight each other.

"The reason why these morality plays [i.e, superhero movies] are winning right now at the box office is because they are morality plays," Beck said, "good winning over evil, the unity of the principles of America: truth, justice and the American way."

"When Batman starts to fight Superman and Captain America starts going against Iron Man, these things are going to fall apart," he warned. "They are taking 2016 values and superimposing them on 1940s values and it's going to destroy these franchises. They've got to stop."

People want to see movies in which good conquers evil, Beck explained, not movies in which the good guys are turned into bad guys.

"We have no heroes any more," he complained. "Why does Hollywood want to take our heroes and destroy them? They've already done all of the real heroes, they've destroyed those guys; now they're going to go and take on our Superman and our Batman. They're going to destroy it ... The people in Hollywood do not understand America at all. At all."

The reason Superman and Batman are fighting in this new film, Beck concluded, is in order to "reflect the turmoil that is happening here in our country, people fighting and the division between us."

Connecticut Republican Party Posts Fake Obama Photo To Warn He'll Ban Newspapers

Many conservatives were outraged when President Obama was photographed in Havana at a ceremony near a building with a Che Guevara mural, a disapproval they didn’t seem to possess when Republican presidents posed next to communist icon.

But in its own response to Obama’s trip to Cuba, the Connecticut Republican Party fell for a photoshopped image of Obama holding a Che t-shirt that has been making the rounds on the internet. The t-shirt Obama is holding actually features a math joke.

The state GOP party chairman cited this fake image to speculate whether the president will follow communist countries in banning the free press.

Anti-Immigration Activist: Dems Want To Bring In Immigrants to Vote Illegally

Rosemary Jenks, the director of government relations at the anti-immigration group NumbersUSA, claimed yesterday that Democrats are pressing for immigration reform because they “look at all the people around the world” as “potential Democratic voters in the United States” and hope that immigrants will cast Democratic votes even before becoming citizens.

The Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney interviewed Jenks on his “Secure Freedom Radio” program yesterday, asking her if immigration plans like Hillary Clinton’s would just serve as “a magnet” for “more immigration of an illegal kind.”

“There’s absolutely no question about that,” Jenks replied, “and we’ve seen that for the past eight years. This current administration, the Obama administration, is absolutely unwilling to stop anyone from entering the country illegally or to remove them once they do enter the country illegally. So we have this situation where essentially Democrats look at all the people around the world, the billions of them, as potential Democratic voters in the United States. So if they can get here, the Democrats will do whatever they can to make sure they can stay and eventually become citizens and vote — you know, well, whether or not they're citizens.”

“Yeah, maybe as soon as they can, not when they become citizens,” Gaffney replied.

“And it’s a huge problem with a general viewpoint,” Jenks continued, “if you look at folks from outside the country as Democratic voters, then your answer is ‘bring them all in,’ and that cannot be the answer for the survival of our country.”

Contrary to Jenks’ claims, undocumented immigrant population has actually dropped in recent years; likewise, immigrants’ rights advocates might object to her claim that Obama is “absolutely unwilling” to deport undocumented immigrants.

Jenks formerly worked at the Center for Immigration Studies, another anti-immigration group founded by activist John Tanton.

Jim Bakker: Government Will 'Mow Down' Christians For Praying

Televangelist Jim Bakker yesterday equated the supposed persecution of Christians in America to the violent persecution of Mideast Christians by ISIS terrorists, telling his audience that the U.S. government may soon “mow down” Christians who pray in public spaces.

Bakker said that he himself is a victim of anti-Christian oppression and that people should prepare for massive starvation and beheadings.

“We can’t preach the Bible anymore,” Bakker said, warning that violence against Christians is imminent due to “political correctness.”

Bakker said that such anti-Christian brutality is seen in the War on Christmas, praising Donald Trump for his pledge to save Christmas as president. “It’s almost illegal to say ‘Merry Christmas,’” he said.

After guest Rick Wiles, the host of the End Times radio program “Trunews,” urged people to commit civil disobedience in cases where the courts block school-organized prayer, Bakker predicted that Christians will soon be gunned down for praying.

“So what happens if in that graduation most of the parents stand up and recite the Lord’s Prayer?” Wiles asked. “What are they going to do? Is the judge going to come over and arrest you? Let’s get an uprising going.”

Bakker replied: “They would threaten to arrest you, they would threaten to mow you down with a machine gun.”

“So what if they did? They’re going to come in and shoot 500 parents at a high school graduation for saying the Lord’s Prayer?” Wiles responded.

“Not right now,” Bakker said. “But eventually they will if we don’t stop it.”

Cruz Advisers: Trump Protesters Want Violent Revolution

Last week, the Center for Security Policy, a group led by top Ted Cruz national security adviser Frank Gaffney, published an article on its website claiming that the protesters at a recent Donald Trump presidential campaign event in Chicago consisted of “a ‘Red-Green Axis’ of groups that include the Muslim Brotherhood in America, the Black Lives Matter movement, and a collection of communists, leftists, progressives and socialists whose sole unifying objective is to bring down the U.S. government.”

Gaffney then discussed the article on his radio program, repeating the claim that the protests in Chicago — which ended up with clashes between protesters and Trump supporters — were led by “Islamic supremacists” along with “Black Lives Matter and Occupy movements and sort of anarchists and other assorted radicals on the left,” all bent on starting a violent revolution.

The topic came up yet again on Gaffney’s “Secure Freedom Radio” program yesterday, when Gaffney interviewed fellow Center for Security Policy staffer and Cruz adviser Clare Lopez, who repeated the warning that the Chicago protests represented the union of the Muslim Brotherhood, Black Lives Matter and a “conglomeration of anarchists, communists, socialists, progressivists, leftists of all sorts, Occupy, Bill Ayers types.”

This “witch’s brew” of an alliance, she said, isn’t focused only on Trump but is aiming “at the American political system, the American system.”

Warning that some American mosques have become “command and control centers for jihad,” Lopez said that Muslim groups are “calling for revolution in the streets.”

She also warned of “a coordinated effort to involve Muslims into the electoral process,” which she said would normally be fine, “but when it’s being encouraged and directed and organized and directed by the Muslim Brotherhood, a jihadist organization, then there’s cause for concern.”

“And this is what’s happening,” she said, “a very concerted attempt to bring Muslims into confrontation politically, yes, and perhaps more.”

Louie Gohmert: Impeach Obama If He Closes Guantanamo

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, said yesterday that Congress should move to impeach President Obama if he uses executive authority to close the prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, saying that such a move could risk “the destruction of the American public and our way of life.” He also accused Obama and European leaders of playing Tiddlywinks — which he called “Twiddlywinks” — with radical Islamists.

“He’s wanting to put the wellbeing and the safety and lives of the American public at risk just so he can try to play politics and give Guantanamo back,” Gohmert told Virginia talk radio host John Fredericks. “But I’m telling you, that will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. If he ends up trying to give away Guantanamo, he cannot do that legally, it would be illegally [sic] for him to do that, and if he pulls that, we’ve got to get a new president before the end of the year.”

When Fredericks asked Gohmert if this means he’d “start impeachment hearings” against the president, Gohmert said it did, adding that Guantanamo is “one of the better prisons I’ve ever seen.”

“I don’t know what else we can do,” he said. “He is putting the lives and safety of the American public at risk, at dramatic risk, by trying to shut down a facility where there’s never been a single waterboarding incident, there has never been any type of torture whatsoever — I’ve toured a lot of prisons, it’s one of the better prisons I’ve ever seen — and I don’t know what else we can do if he’s that willing to put the destruction of the American public and our way of life at that kind of risk. What else do you do, John? I don’t know.”

Early in the interview, Gohmert claimed that Obama’s Middle East strategy was to “punish” Egypt and the Kurds and “refuse to recognize that the Muslim Brotherhood is our enemy” and instead “get advice from the Muslim Brotherhood on how to fight radical Islam.”

“Some of us understand what we’re up against,” he said, “but, unfortunately, the leadership in this administration and the leadership in places like Germany and France still want to play Twiddlywinks [sic] with radical Islam and do wink and a nod and say, ‘We’re so much smarter than everybody else, we understand that if we just are really sweet to people that want to kill us and take our countries away, then everything will work out fine.”

Rafael Cruz, Dinesh D'Souza And Selectively Flexible 'Moral Absolutes' On Marriage

Last Saturday, right-wing pundit and propagandist filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza was married in a ceremony that was reportedly to include “prominent players in conservative politics.” Among them was the celebrant, presidential candidate Ted Cruz’s father and campaign surrogate Rafael Cruz, whose fiery rhetoric on the campaign trail has given him folk-hero status among the Religious Right.

D’Souza has spent time on the moral values high horse. In his absurd and reprehensible 2007 book “The Enemy At Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11,” D’Souza lumped divorce and homosexuality together as “liberal family values” that offend the Muslim world. He declared that acceptance of divorce is one of the changes in America that “reflect the triumph of liberal morality, the morality of the inner self.’”

In his book, “A Time for Action: Empowering the Faithful to Reclaim America,” Rafael Cruz called the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling “one of the biggest signs of our country’s moral degradation” and decried “secular humanists” for rejecting the idea of moral absolutes:

Everyone, then, feels entitled to establish his or her own standards by which to live. This has given rise to the attitude “if it feels good, do it,” the pursuit of hedonism, immoral or chaotic behavior, greed, and even a life of crime.

On the campaign trail for his son, Rafael Cruz insists that there are moral absolutes that run in opposition to the values of “tolerance”:

“So we’re supposed to prostitute our principles on behalf of tolerance,” Rev. Cruz said.

“Well, I’ll tell you what. There are absolutes. There are absolutes,” he emphasized. “Start being biblically correct instead of politically correct.”

Many conservative evangelical and Catholic leaders teach that divorce is not, except in particular circumstances, “biblically correct.” According to the biblical book of Matthew, Jesus said divorce was unacceptable except in the case of a spouse’s sexual immorality; in the books of Mark and Luke, Jesus is quoted saying that someone who divorces and remarries is committing adultery.

D’Souza is a questionable icon for so-called traditional values. He resigned as president of King’s College in 2012 after a scandal over his traveling with, and calling himself engaged to, a woman while he was still married to his first wife. When called out on his behavior by a conservative reporter, D’Souza apparently lied about having filed for divorce, said he had “done nothing wrong” and proclaimed that he was sure that the woman with whom he was having an affair was “the one for me.”  D’Souza pleaded guilty in 2014 to criminal campaign finance law violations in which he reportedly used both his then-wife and then-mistress as straw donors to a friend’s political campaign. Since then he has consistently portrayed himself as the victim of a political vendetta.

The twice-divorced Rafael Cruz officiating at D’Souza’s wedding — the second marriage for both bride and groom — is one more example of how flexible the Religious Right’s “moral absolutes” about marriage can be when they hit close to home, or when they involve a political ally such as Newt Gingrich or Rush Limbaugh.

And that makes it easy to understand why fewer and fewer Americans are buying the Religious Right’s argument that its conveniently flexible “moral absolutes” justify overriding the constitutional principle of equality under the law and denying loving same-sex couples and their families the ability to protect their commitments through marriage.

Bachmann: Maybe God Uses Terrorist Attacks To Humiliate Obama

Michele Bachmann, the former congresswoman turned End Times prophet, took to WorldNetDaily today to blast President Obama for his approach to fighting the terrorist group ISIS.

As Bachmann sees it, ISIS strikes whenever the president tries to downplay the group’s threat or change the subject to issues like U.S. relations with Cuba. This may be God’s way, she said, of humiliating Obama.

Or maybe our president’s humiliation comes in a manner so devastating it makes one wonder whether the Creator of humankind isn’t reminding this world of the inferiority of foolishness in the face of wisdom.

The president once again mocked his nemesis, the Jewish people and the nation of Israel, by cleverly turning the international press corps toward his brilliant work in Cuba, instead of covering ongoing Islamic attacks against the Jewish state as outlined that very same day at the annual pro-Israel AIPAC meeting in Washington, D.C.

History changed less than 24 hours later in the blink of an eye, and the rug was pulled out from under his well-laid plans.

The Tea Party icon also declared that ISIS is a perfect representative of Islam, warning that the religion intends to conquer Europe and is a demonic death cult bent on exterminating Christians and Jews:

History changed less than 24 hours later in the blink of an eye, and the rug was pulled out from under his well-laid plans.

Bits and pieces of flesh and blood, some Americans, all innocents, were scattered – scattered to further the act of conquest by Islam against the continent once enlightened by the beliefs and values of Western Christendom.

Three men committed to a false God and a doctrine of demons chose death to advance Western civilization’s defeat.

This week, some 2,000 years ago, a Jewish Savior named Jesus willingly gave His life as a substitutionary sacrifice to pay for the sins of all humankind, to reconnect us with the God who made us.

This compare-and-contrast of competing worldviews was soberingly and glaringly revealed.

One religious worldview brought peace and life, another glorified death and the cult of suicide.

For 14 centuries, world history records the facts, not beliefs, that Islam sought to annihilate first Jews, then Christians, then Muslims and non-believers who did not agree with Muhammad’s commands.

Read the Quran. Read the Hadith –the sayings of Muhammad – which provokes the reader to kill infidels in order to appease their god, Allah.

It was reported the Islamic murderers in Brussels shouted in Arabic as they blew themselves and others away.

Cruz Gun Adviser: Obama Nominated Garland To 'Ruin The Second Amendment And Destroy This Country'

A top gun-rights adviser to Sen. Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign claimed this weekend that President Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court is “his last-ditch effort” to “ruin the Second Amendment and destroy this country.”

Tim Macy, the chairman of the radical gun group Gun Owners of America and co-chair of Cruz’s “Second Amendment Coalition,” discussed the Supreme Court nomination in an interview Sunday with Mark Walters on “Armed America Radio.”

Macy said that Obama has “run up against the wall every time he’s tried” to “destroy the country” with gun restrictions, but that the Supreme Court vacancy is “his last-ditch effort before he leaves office to ruin the Second Amendment and destroy this country with Merrick Garland as his pick.”

Macy falsely claimed that Garland “supported the D.C. gun ban” — in fact, Garland, a federal appeals court judge in Washington, D.C., voted to rehear a case involving Washington’s handgun ban, which does not indicate at all where he stood on the merits of the case. In fact, Garland voted the same way as other judges on the court including Judge A. Raymond Randolph, whom Linda Greenhouse of the New York Times once called “one of the most outspoken and agenda-driven conservatives on the entire federal bench.”

“Clearly, if Garland got back on the court, the whole Heller decision, individual right to bear arms, would be put in severe jeopardy,” Macy claimed, “and you would have to imagine it would be gotten rid of as quick as the court could get another case up before them, they’d be looking for the case to bring up.”

Macy also brought up another case that gun groups have been using to attack Garland, in which Garland joined in a ruling that held that the FBI could temporarily store background check information from gun sales for audit purposes. Macy absurdly claimed that this shows that Garland “supports the ability of a president to illegally use executive power to advance liberal causes like taking guns away from honest citizens.”

These, he said, were all reasons to pressure Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell so that he “keeps that nomination on hold until the president’s gone and we have a new president.”

Alan Keyes: Obama Has Been Facilitating Terrorism Against America

Alan Keyes was unimpressed by President Obama's remarks condemning the terrorist attacks in Brussels, telling Steve Malzberg on Newsmax yesterday that Obama has actually been facilitating terrorism against America by bringing in refugees "so that they'll be poised" to carry out terrorist attacks in this country. 

"The war he's been concentrating on, sadly, I think is the war against the Constitution and the people of the United States, against our sovereignty," Keyes said. "A war that actually has him facilitating the business of terror, both in his foreign policy and in the policy of importing illegal immigrants into this country as part of his sort of refugee program to help terrorists come to the United States and establish themselves so that they'll be poised to do us the kind of harm they are already doing as refugees in Europe."

Donald Trump Hopes He's Rewarded For Calling Brussels A 'Hellhole'

Donald Trump spoke today with right-wing conspiracy theorist Michael Savage about the Brussels terrorist attacks and, naturally, the GOP presidential frontrunner managed to smear Muslims and urged voters to reward him for his “vision.”

Savage said that the attacks proved that Trump was “100 percent right” when he proposed banning the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims from the U.S., and asked him if he would consider closing “radical mosques.”

“We have to have tremendous surveillance and that includes the mosques,” Trump said. “We have to be intelligent people.”

Trump claimed that the attacks were sparked by the arrest of Salah Abdeslam, the ISIS-linked terrorist behind the Paris attacks, and that people in Abdeslam’s neighborhood “were protecting him” because “they want to practice Sharia law.” He added: “We have to do something and we have to do it rapidly because the whole world is collapsing.”

After Savage said that “all terrorism is coming from the [Islamic] holy book,” Trump defended his proposal for a “temporary ban” on Muslims from entering the country.

“These people aren’t coming from Sweden or Norway or Denmark or, frankly, from China, they’re not coming from — they’re coming from a certain part of the world and we have to be smart and we cannot be politically correct,” Trump said.  This reminded Trump to attack President Obama’s “humiliating” news conference in Cuba. 

When Savage asked, “Would profiling be part of a Trump plan to combat terror?,” Trump said, “I would say yes.”

Trump hailed the city of New York’s Muslim spying program, calling it “the finest there is in the world and many people talked about it” and insisting that “it caught things before it was going to happen.” In reality, according to the AP, the unit he referred to “never generated a lead or triggered a terrorism investigation.”

He urged law enforcement officers to get tough on their targets, praising the use of waterboarding, and warning that Syrian refugees “could be fighters” and “the ultimate Trojan horse.” But the upside to these events, according to Trump, is that security concerns have increased his poll numbers. “I think it’s one of the reasons, and I wish it weren’t for this reason, that my poll numbers are so high,” he said.

Indeed, Trump touted his own wisdom, claiming that in Brussels he “saw a population that has hate, that has tremendous hate, I saw something that other people didn’t see and I hope that I’m going to be rewarded for having vision.”

“Now it’s a hellhole,” Trump said of Brussels. “I’m getting a lot of credit for having vision and for having foresight.”

Phyllis Schlafly: No SCOTUS Nominee 'Until We Have A Republican Who Will Appoint Somebody In The Nature of Scalia'

Phyllis Schlafly, the anti-feminist icon and enthusiastic Donald Trump endorser, characteristically abandoned all pretense of nonpartisanship when discussing the Supreme Court vacancy in a recent interview with “Armed America Radio,” saying that Republicans should hold firm in blocking a nominee until a Republican is in the White House.

“We need the Republicans to stand firm and say, ‘We’ve got a big election coming up and that should change the complexion of the Supreme Court and we don’t want any new nominee on the court until we have a Republican who will appoint somebody of the nature of Scalia,’” Schlafly told host Mark Walters on March 20. (She did not specify whether she was simply hoping that the next president will be a Republican or if she was suggesting that the GOP block all Democratic Supreme Court picks in the future.)

This prompted Walters to ask her about the prospect of a Hillary Clinton presidency, which Schlafly said made her “scared to death.”

The solution, she said, was for Republicans to unite around Trump because “your gun rights and all kinds of other rights” are on the line.

“We have a two-party system in this country and if you want a third party I invite you to move to Europe, where they have lots of useless third parties,” she said.

In an op-ed yesterday, Schlafly invoked the late First Lady Nancy Reagan’s anti-drug campaign in urging the GOP to obstruct Obama’s Supreme Court nominee:

The U.S. Senate should follow the famous advice of the late First Lady Nancy Reagan and “just say no” to Obama’s nominee.

'God Help Us All': Glenn Beck Says America Is Doomed And Obama Is A Communist Puppet

Glenn Beck was fired up today over the terrorist attack in Brussels, ranting on his radio program that if America elects Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, this nation will be doomed.

"I can't believe this is my country," Beck said. "History will record, they will record us exactly the way every other civilization has gone and our great-grandchildren and our grandchildren will look back on this time — I hope I'm dead before my grandchildren say, 'What were you thinking? What were you doing? What did you do?'"

"They will erase us from history in the next few generations because they will be too ashamed of us," he continued. "Our children and our grandchildren are going to learn about the Constitution, they are going to learn about what freedom really is because they will have lost it. And when they learn what life was really like in America and we threw it away, God help us all. God help us all."

Eventually, Beck began ranting about an awkward exchange between President Obama and Raúl Castro in Cuba yesterday, which Beck insisted was Castro's way of signaling to the world that Obama is a communist puppet whom he can control.

"It was the emasculation of the president," Beck stated. "It was showing, 'I have control of him' ... He was showing, 'I control this man.'"

During the exchange, Beck said, Obama's "mask came off" and revealed that he is a Marxist and "a puppet of a communist dictator."

Cruz Adviser: Chicago Clashes Portend Violent Revolution By Islamists, Occupy Wall Street & Black Lives Matter

Frank Gaffney, the notorious anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist who recently became one of Sen. Ted Cruz’s top national security advisers, warned on his radio program last week that the violent clashes around a recent Donald Trump rally in Chicago are the harbinger of a violent revolution led by an alliance of Islamists, Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter protesters, anarchists and “other assorted radicals on the left.”

In an interview with fellow conservative commentator Diana West on his “ Secure Freedom Radio” program on March 16, Gaffney asked West about a new count from the anti-immigration Center for Immigration Studies showing that there are 61 million “immigrants and their American born children” currently living in the U.S. (That CIS counts “American-born children” — who are not immigrants — in its number is a classic sleight of hand from the group.)

Gaffney asked West what that “stunning” report “means for the national identity.”

“Identity as any kind of a nation is not possible when there is no nation to identify with,” West lamented, saying that the population of immigrants and their families amounts to “population replacement.”

She then linked the Mexican-born population of Chicago with the clashes outside the Trump rally.

“I think Chicago becomes a very important example,” she said. “I had no idea until I started looking at the Chicago shutdown of the Trump rally last week that Chicago itself is almost as Hispanic as it is black, around 30 percent for both groups. However, one in five residents of Chicago is Mexican-born. I mean, this is a staggering kind of demographic change. And, you know, when you have a politician who is discussing controlling that, building a wall with Mexico and so on, you see where we end up with these kinds of flashpoints. It’s not politics as usual because this is not our country as usual. I mean, we are in a state of flux, of crisis, of change that people have not been made aware of until this particular moment.”

Gaffney too saw a dire warning in the Chicago incident, saying that it represents a “coming together” of Islamists and social justice activists and “portends a very violent prospect, in fact a revolutionary one”:

But let’s talk about, specifically, the prospects — and I think the case in point at the moment, but not the only example, unfortunately, is that Chicago rally — of a coming together of, on the one hand, Islamists — Islamic supremacists if you will, the Muslim Brotherhood — and Black Lives Matter and Occupy movements and sort of anarchists and other assorted radicals on the left. And it seems as though … this coming together, this joining of forces, portends truly a very violent prospect, in fact a revolutionary one. Do you see it that way?

“Yes, it’s very possible, it’s very possible,” West responded. “You could look at Chicago as a dress rehearsal.”

Syndicate content