Fighting the Right

What Is Ted Cruz's Position On Personhood?

The anti-choice movement has, in recent years, been feuding over “personhood” laws, which ban all abortions by declaring zygotes and fetuses to be legal “persons” protected by the Constitution. Efforts to pass state-level “personhood” amendments have failed miserably, in part because opponents have pointed out that they could also threaten legal birth control and in-vitro fertilization, and a federal personhood bill sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul hasn’t gotten off the ground in Congress.

Meanwhile, Sen. Ted Cruz, who has claimed the mantle of the Religious Right in his run for the presidency, seems to be attempting to sidestep the “personhood” debate by taking both sides at once.

Back in 2012, when Cruz was running for a U.S. senate seat in Texas, the anti-choice group National Pro-Life Alliance reported that Cruz had told its members that he would cosponsor Paul’s “personhood” bill, the Life at Conception Act.

Cruz never did cosponsor that legislation, but last year, as he was starting his campaign for the presidency, he signed a pledge written by the pro-personhood group Georgia Right to Life to “support a personhood amendment to the U.S. Constitution,” thus earning the group’s endorsement.

Then, later last year, Cruz was asked by social conservative leader Robert George about the basic theory behind Paul’s “personhood” bill — that if fetuses are declared to be “persons” under the law, Roe v. Wade will fall and abortion will be banned without the need for a constitutional amendment — Cruz said that he “absolutely” agreed.

Then, just this month, as he scrambled to woo social conservative voters ahead of the South Carolina Republican primary, Cruz recorded a video message extolling a resolution that state Republicans had passed in support of a state “personhood” amendment.

Throughout this time, Cruz has insisted that his extreme anti-choice position won’t have any effect on the legality and availability of contraception.

Now, a video is making the rounds among abortion-rights advocates that shows Cruz at a campaign stop in Iowa in January explicitly saying that he has “not supported personhood legislation” because “it focuses on issues that are unrelated to protecting unborn children” — an apparent reference to contraception and IVF.

“I believe we should protect every human life from the moment of conception to the moment of death,” Cruz says. “I have not supported personhood legislation because I think — and the pro-life community is divided on this — but I think personhood legislation can be counterproductive because it focuses on issues that are unrelated to protecting unborn children, and I think our focus should be valuing and cherishing every human life.”

When asked about his views on birth control, the senator adds: “I believe that birth control should be legal and unencumbered. And there are a lot of folks in politics that try to paint a false picture, they try to scare people to suggest that there are politicians trying to go after their birth control. It’s not true.”

Today, the pro-personhood group American Right to Life announced in a press release that it “disavows” Cruz because of his comments backtracking on its signature issue:

A mere 6 months after signing the Georgia Right To Life personhood pledge, Ted Cruz reversed himself last month stating, "I have not supported personhood legislation..." His flip-flop on this position that would make all abortions illegal from the moment of fertilization with no exceptions has resulted in Cruz being eliminated from consideration of being endorsed by American Right to Life.

"It's tragic that Ted Cruz has taken contradictory positions on abortion," said ARTL president Leslie Hanks, "and it's sobering to realize that his effort to get votes from the Republican base could explain his behavior. What America needs is a statesman who will never hesitate to use the bully pulpit to proclaim the God-given, inalienable right to life, at every stage of biological development. No exceptions."

Keep in mind that the video that offended American Right to Life was recorded well before Cruz praised a potential “personhood” amendment in South Carolina. Which leaves us to wonder: What exactly is his position on this?

Donald Trump Vows To Change Libel Laws To Sue Journalists

At a rally today in Texas, Donald Trump said that if elected president, he would push to significantly change libel laws so he and others can sue journalists who write stories he finds “dishonest,” apparently not concerned with the Constitution’s First Amendment protections of free speech and the freedom of the press.

Trump told his supporters, who have become notorious for threatening journalists and demonstrators, that he intends to “open up the libel laws” in order to file lawsuits against reporters — particularly from the Washington Post and the New York Times — and “win money.”

“One of the things I’m going to do if I win, and I hope I do and we’re certainly leading, is I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposefully negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money,” Trump said. “We’re going to open up those libel laws.”

“With me, they’re not protected,” he said of media companies. “We’re going to have people sue you like you’ve never got sued before.”

Watch via Right Side Broadcasting:

Rafael Cruz: 'We Will Lose All Our Religious Freedom' If Supreme Court Gains A Liberal Justice

Yesterday on American Family Radio’s “Today’s Issues,” Rafael Cruz chatted with Ed Vitagliano about the need to elect his son, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, president of the United States and prevent the appointment of a “liberal justice” to the Supreme Court.

“With the passing of Justice Scalia, the Supreme Court is in a precarious balance,” he said. “One more liberal justice and we lose the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, we lose the right to life and abortion on demand to the point of delivery will become the law of the land, we will lose all our religious freedom.”

Vitagliano agreed, warning that “one more liberal, vote-in-lock-step Supreme Court justice could doom many of the freedoms that we enjoy, First Amendment, Second Amendment, possession of firearms, the right to bear arms.”

Cruz lamented that “pastors have gone AWOL” from the political sphere even though the “Pilgrims came to America seeking the freedom to worship Almighty God and this country was founded on the Word of God and religious freedom,” adding that his son’s presidential bid is motivating conservative Christian pastors to get involved in politics. He told pastors to “open the eyes of people who are in darkness.”

“Vote for a candidate that stands on the purity and the integrity of the Word of God and on the integrity of the Constitution,” he said. “That is the foundation of America. If we do that, we can restore America to that shining city on the hill to the glory of God. I encourage you, if the Body of Christ coalesces around Ted Cruz, a true man that believes in the Constitution and the rule of law, we will see him as the next president of the United States.”

Pat Robertson: Leave 'The Homosexual Lifestyle' To Find 'Real Love'

Today “The 700 Club” profiled a man named Robert who renounced homosexuality and married a woman, news welcomed by host Pat Robertson.

“Robert chose the homosexual lifestyle because he craved attention from men,” Robertson said.

“We have all these myths about homosexuality and he was just being used by people, they just wanted to take advantage and he didn’t know any better,” he said. “He thought that what they were showing him was love when actually it was one form of lust. When he came free, he wasn’t ‘homosexual,’ he was a person looking for love, he wanted the real thing and he got it, God gave him real love.”

Walid Shoebat Continues To Attack Anti-Gay Activists Who Criticized His Son's Extremist Anti-Gay Views

Earlier this week, we noted that radical father-and-son duo Walid and Theodore Shoebat are locked in a battle with a few fellow anti-gay activists who denounced Theodore's recent declaration that Jesus would personally beat gays to death.

The attacks on his son promoted the elder Shoebat to fire off a furious screed in which he attacked Theodore's detractors as nothing but quisling appeasers who refuse to acknowledge that "Jesus killed the sodomites." And the battle, it seems, continues to rage as Walid has now penned yet another lengthy attack on his son's primary critic, Michael Brown, calling Brown an agent of Satan who is carrying out a "spiritual water-boarding" against him in an attempt to brand him with the "mark of the beast": 

"I will publicly mark him and warn others that he is now living in a fantasy world” the warning said as Theodore perused his twitter messages. Theodore received a threat regarding his father (me) that he will be receiving some dreaded mark. Alarmed at this, Theodore showed me.

It was none other than Dr. Michael Brown from the “Ask Dr. Brown” show who can answer the toughest theological questions one can muster up and now he came to give Theodore an ultimatum, that his father will receive some sort of public mark of shame unless we all repent and gain acceptance throughout his community. According to Dr. Brown, we needed him to lift up a curse (made by him) and receive his anointing to be cleansed. But as it turns out, such anointing is akin to the mark of the beast, where I would have to denounce not only my own son, but my convictions, where at some point in time he was even trying to pit us against each other. From February 16th to February 21, six days of hell, we had to endure his attempted exorcism as if we were possessed by demons when the whole time the exorcist was behaving like one.

So many threatening messages we got from this ‘Bible answer man’ saying that unless I take down an article I wrote in response to him, regardless that it was he who drew first blood and we simply responded.

Now I “will be marked” by him for the whole Evangelical elites to cast me out as a “blasphemer” even though he showed no evidence of any blasphemy.

...

This was not just the typical American style arm-twisting tactic I am well familiar with where you apply pressure then let go until the subject submits. It was a spiritual water-boarding which the only way out is to either submit to the will of a wolf acting on behalf of God, or for me to sprinkle more holy water and cast out the demon.

I decided to entertain the whole fiasco with his relentless attempts. The experience was more like we both were doing an exorcism on each other. It reminded me so much when Christ was taken to a high mountain and tested. The communiqué was littered with mixed messages with the same repetitions “I will mark  you” while at the same time he says “I will pray for you” and that he is “reaching out” to us “in love”. They always use such phrases, just as Judas betrayed Christ with a kiss.

But when all failed, all the love vanished. This charismatic gestapo transferred to my son thinking he was pursuing the weaker vessel.

Donald Trump Finds The Latest Victim Of Anti-Christian Persecution: Donald Trump

Following last night’s debate, “big league” Christian Donald Trump floated a possible reason why he is facing an audit: because he’s a Christian.

Trump, who cited an ongoing audit as the reason why he won’t make his tax returns public, said he is being targeted by the IRS “maybe because of the fact that I’m a strong Christian.”

Trump’s claim of facing religious bias and mistreatment from the IRS may play well among conservatives who believe that the Obama administration is using the tax agency and other government institutions to persecute and intimidate conservative Christians.

This claim, along with allegations that conservative Christians are facing discrimination from the American government, is nothing but a myth that has been repeatedly debunked, but is nonetheless frequently spread by Republican politicians and even mainstream media personalities.

Conservative activists have repeatedly pushed the conspiracy theory: Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski of the Family Research Council alleged that Obama used the IRS to “eliminate his enemies”; Janet Porter of Faith 2 Action alleged that the IRS made it so that conservative groups “weren’t allowed to exist,” swinging the 2012 election to Obama; televangelist James Robison said “Satan himself” was behind “the gross abuse of power by the IRS”; and Glenn Beck said the non-scandal proved that America has surpassed Nazi Germany in its evil and could round up conservatives just as Adolf Hitler hounded Jews.

And now, it seems that the billionaire mogul is also under attack by this anti-Christian tax agency.

Glenn Beck Attacks Trump Supporters With The Worst Insult Imaginable: They're As Bad As Obama Supporters

After campaigning for Ted Cruz in Nevada earlier this week, Glenn Beck warned that the Donald Trump campaign is "grooming Brownshirts," likening Trump's supporters to the paramilitary wing of the Nazi Party.

It turns out that calling Trump supporters "Brownshirts" is not even the most insulting comparison Beck could come up with because, on his television program last night, he took things even further when he compared them to the worst people imaginable: Obama supporters! 

After revealing that he is getting word that "stations want to cancel the show because they believe that Donald Trump is going to be the next president," Beck vowed that he was not going to stop attacking Trump because the GOP presidential front runner is simply too dangerous, something he learned when he encountered Trump supporters at the Nevada caucuses.

"The Trump supporters, they're Brownshirts," Beck said. "I've never witnessed anything like I saw today, it was just, it was grotesque and sad that Americans ... It's like these people are treating people like Obama supporters treated us, just the worst of the worst Obama supporters. It was like walking into Ferguson or walking into Baltimore. There's no reason, there's no common decency, there's nothing. It's just bizarre."

Ted Cruz Blocks Emergency Relief To Flint But Demanded Aid For Texas

According to a report in Politico, Sen. Ted Cruz is standing in the way of a bipartisan relief package for the city of Flint, Michigan, where residents suffered lead poisoning as a result of a catastrophic budget-saving move from the governor’s office.

The Texas Republican placed a hold on the aid bill even after Senate Democrats agreed to concessions in spending, stopping the bill from coming to a vote by the full Senate.

Before blocking the measure, Cruz responded to the Flint water crisis by distributing bottled water to anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers in the city.

This is far from Cruz’s first go-around in holding up emergency aid bills: He also opposed aid for victims of Hurricane Sandy.

However, the presidential candidate is more than happy to request federal dollars for relief projects in his home state.

Cruz pushed for such aid last year following deadly floods in Texas, and in 2013 he demanded aid after an explosion at a Texas fertilizer plant.

Just another example of Cruz reflecting “God’s love.”

Jan Morgan Expects Rubio To Soon Announce Endorsements From Hamas And ISIS

During a Republican presidential forum yesterday, Marco Rubio condemned an Oklahoma gun range for refusing to allow an Army reservist to use the range because he is a Muslim, saying that such discrimination is "wrong" and "immoral."

Today, Bryan Fischer brought Second Amendment zealot Jan Morgan onto his radio show to get her reaction to Rubio's comments and she was predictably unimpressed.

Morgan, who has also infamously banned Muslims from her gun range, told Fischer that "Marco Rubio sounds like a mouthpiece for the Muslim Brotherhood front organization CAIR."

"Marco Rubio has made a grave mistake," she declared, "which is why Donald Trump is slaughtering him in his own home state of Florida ... If Marco Rubio thinks that training and putting guns in the hands of people who align themselves with a theocracy that commands them to kill innocent people, if that's his definition of immoral, then he needs to be running on another ticket and I expect, any day now, to hear him announcing endorsements from the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, Hamas and ISIS."

Another Phony Supreme Court 'Precedent'

A couple of days after Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, Heritage Foundation fellow Hans von Spakovsky declared that the Supreme Court still had an “obligation” to count the votes Scalia had cast in preliminary conferences on pending cases, even though those votes aren’t always final.

He was particularly interested in Friedrichs, an important labor case that some observers believe will, without Scalia’s vote, end up in a tie that will preserve a lower court decision favorable to unions.

It turns out that von Spakovsky mentioned this idea again in a National Review article last week, even presenting evidence of a “precedent” for counting the votes of deceased justices:

One final note on the terrible tragedy of Justice Scalia’s untimely death: what to do about the pending cases in which the Supreme Court justices already had cast their internal vote on how they would rule on the case. Everyone is assuming that Justice Scalia’s votes have to be discarded because the decisions have not yet been publicly released. But there is precedent for Chief Justice John Roberts to give effect to those votes.

In D. A. Schulte, Inc. v. Gangi (1946), the dissenting opinion by Justice Felix Frankfurter, and joined by Justice Harold Burton, specifically says that the “late Chief Justice [Harlan Stone] participated in the hearing and disposition of this case and had joined in this dissent.” Stone died on April 22, 1946; the date of the Gangi decision is April 29, 1946. Likewise, Justice Joseph Story noted the agreement of the late Chief Justice John Marshall in his dissent in New York v. Miln (1837), writing, “I have the consolation to know that I had the entire concurrence, upon the same grounds, of that great constitutional jurist, the late Mr. Chief Justice Marshall.”

Von Spakovsky’s “precedent” for counting the preliminary vote of a deceased justice is two cases in which the authors of dissents mentioned that a late colleague had been on their side of an issue. In the first, the dissenters mention the views of the late Chief Justice Harlan Stone, but do not appear to count him as an official joiner of the dissent. In the second, the dissenters cite the views of Chief Justice John Marshall, who had died more than a year before the opinion was issued and had already been replaced by Chief Justice Roger Taney — again, apparently citing his approval to make a point rather than as an official vote in the case.

In neither case was the vote of the deceased justice being counted. And in neither case would the vote of the deceased have changed the outcome of the case, as von Spakovsky seems to hope Scalia’s vote would in the Friedrichs case.

It’s almost as if conservatives are pulling Supreme Court “precedents” out of thin air.

Right-Wing Pastor: Legal Abortion To Blame For Mysterious Eagle Deaths

Upon hearing the news that 13 bald eagles were found dead at a Maryland farm, pastor Ricky Scaparo took to Charisma News to discuss “the prophetic warning behind the death of 13 bald eagles.”

According to Scaparo, the number 13 signifies that God is speaking to America and is angry about abortion rights and “legalized abominations”:

When I saw this story breaking I saw so much symbolism in this for America. Let me explain. The national symbol for America is the eagle and the Thirteen Colonies, founded in the 16th and 17th centuries, declared independence in 1776 and formed the United States. The thirteen were: Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, Connecticut, Massachusetts Bay, Maryland, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Virginia, New York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Is there a prophetic picture here? If so what could it represent? We do know that the number 13 is symbolic of rebellion and lawlessness.

o Nimrod, the mighty hunter who was 'before the Lord' (meaning he tried to take the place of God – Genesis 10:9), was the 13th in Ham's line (Ham was one of Noah's three sons who survived the flood). Thirteen represents all the governments created by men, and inspired by Satan, in outright rebellion against the Eternal. America as a nation has continued to rebel against God through idolatry, legalized abominations and the list continues.

o The phrase 'valley of Hinnom' (or variation thereof) occurs in 13 places in Scripture. The valley was the scene of the evil-inspired rites of the pagan god Moloch (or Molech). Molech was an idol god worshiped Phoenicians which included child sacrifice, or "passing children through the fire." It is believed that idols of Moloch were giant metal statues of a man with a bull's head. Each idol had a hole carved out in the abdomen and possibly outstretched forearms that made a kind of ramp to the hole. A fire was lit in or around the statue. Babies were placed in the statue's arms or in the hole. Today we don't see this in America but children are aborted daily by a practice of removing the child from the belly of its mother.

This reminds us of when self-proclaimed prophet Cindy Jacobs linked the freak deaths of birds in Arkansas to the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

Sandy Rios: People Hate Ted Cruz Because He's 'Righteous'

Sen. Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign has tried to present the Texas Republican as the candidate of all true Christians, one who has, according to his father, a divine anointing to be president of the United States.

The extreme arrogance of this message echoes what many people who knew Cruz in college or worked with him on George W. Bush’s 2000 campaign or in Congress have told reporters, painting him as an egotistical and self-righteous bully.

Naturally, American Family Radio host Sandy Rios, whose endorsement of Cruz was touted by the senator’s campaign, yesterday offered a different explanation as to why so many people who know Cruz dislike him: because of his godliness.

While speaking with pastor Erwin Lutzer at the National Religious Broadcasters convention, Rios expressed dismay that many evangelicals are backing Donald Trump over Cruz, “who actually has been absolutely faithful and open about his faith and putting his money where his mouth is.”

“He has really done great things in Washington and he’s hated because of it,” she said. “The Senate, the party hates him. People don’t like, they don’t necessarily like righteous, really righteous people. I don’t know Ted personally that well, but generally speaking, is that true, you think? People sort of resent when somebody is kind of a reminder to them, kind of the bellwether of the way things should be and they don’t match up to that bellwether, there’s a resentment.”

Alex Jones: 'No Amount Of Fluoride In The Water' Can Stop Donald Trump

Yesterday, InfoWars broadcaster Alex Jones continued to sing the praises of Donald Trump, who in turn has complimented the conspiracy theory radio host.

Jones told his audience that Trump takes his cues from InfoWars, claiming that Trump molded his position on issues such as the resettlement of Syrian refugees, the Federal Reserve and the Bush administration’s handling of the September 11 terrorist attacks based on feedback from him and others.

Trump, Jones said, is “riding a wave” of anti-government anger “and no amount of armored vehicles, no amount of propaganda, no amount of fluoride in the water, no amount of the brainwashing of the children in public schools is going to reverse this sentiment that’s only going to intensify.”

“Trump is the manifestation of the human will to suck air into its lungs and to be strong and healthy, to be strong and free,” he said.

Michael Savage: Replace Gitmo With Firing Squads

On Tuesday, right-wing radio host Michael Savage reacted to President Obama’s proposal to close Guantanamo Bay “in the waning months of his mad, mad reign of terror.” Savage, claiming that Obama’s attempt to close the military detention facility is motivated by a secret, terrorist-sympathizing agenda, offered his own proposal for Gitmo: firing squads.

“People who, if found guilty and, by the way, if they’re not guilty, what are they doing in Guantanamo to begin with?” he said. “They’re put there because they’re guilty. If they’re so guilty of consorting with terrorists or plotting terrorism, why have they not been executed to begin with? Why don’t you just line them up in front of a firing squad and give [Guantanamo] back to Castro?”

Savage commended U.S. service members convicted of murder and other crimes while serving in Iraq, worrying that they will soon share prisons with former Gitmo detainees: “He wants to bring the world’s worst terrorists to America, to house them in prisons that we have here, whether it be Florence or Fort Leavenworth, now housing Marines that did their jobs too well. Leavenworth now has some of our Marines who killed too many Iraqis while fighting for their lives and the lives of Americans. If they did their jobs a little too well, they’re rotting in Fort Leavenworth.”

He then returned to his conspiracy theory that Obama may have ordered a hit to take out Justice Scalia, claiming that the president is now similarly threatening members of Congress and refusing to fight terrorism in order to “fight the American patriots” and start “killing people with impunity.”

While relieved that Obama hasn’t “figured out a way to take guns out of your cold, dying hands,” Savage said “there is a lot of time left” for the president to “take away your right to bear arms” and “have the exact power that Castro has over his people, turn them into slaves, in essence, frightened, little slaves.

'Blacks Were Not Able To Free Themselves, Whites Did': David Barton Credits Whites For Ending Slavery

Glenn Beck had right-wing pseudo-historian and Ted Cruz super PAC operative David Barton on his television program last night to honor Black History Month by uncovering the "real" history of race relations in America. Barton's coverage of this issue was, as always, laughably one-sided and misleading, as he spent a good deal of the opening segment relating tales of white slave owners who supposedly had such friendly relationships with their slaves that they didn't even consider them to be slaves, but rather members of the family.

The slaves, of course, were quite aware that they were slaves but "the whites just thought they were one of the family," as Barton put it, apparently believing that that somehow proves that race relations were not nearly as bad during the founding era as is commonly believed.

Nothing better exemplifies Barton's warped historical view than the fact that he credits white members of Congress and white voters for passing the 13th and 14th Amendments which ended slavery and granted citizenship to former slaves, respectively.

"I love the fact that in these early paintings you have, it's black and white together," Barton declared. "We didn't have what we have today where we have to break you into groups somehow. Yeah, there was bad and ugly down in the South, but my gosh, why not teach the good?"

Barton then picked up a diary owned by a former slave named Richard Allen who he paraphrased as having declared that "so much of the credit that blacks owed was for whites having gone to bat and doing things for them."

"Blacks were not able to free themselves, whites did," Barton stated. "When you get the 13th Amendment, you know, it was nothing but two-thirds of the House, whites in the House were the only ones voting, two-thirds of the whites in the house, two-thirds of the whites in the Senate and three-fourths of the whites in the states that ratified the 13th Amendment to end slavery. And then you have the 14th Amendment, it was nothing but two-thirds of the whites in the House, two-thirds of the whites in the Senate, three-fourths of the whites [in the states.] And so the notion that it's black against white is not borne out by history, but we have made it that way in the way we portray history."

Of course, "blacks were not able to free themselves" because many were slaves who had no rights. Crediting whites for eventually ending that system while pretending that whites and blacks had a congenial and equitable relationship all along is utterly absurd.

Louie Gohmert, Again: Greenland Proves Climate Change Is A Myth

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, has endorsed his fellow Texas Republican Ted Cruz’s bid for the presidency, but he had some words of admiration for Donald Trump in an interview today with “Breitbart News Daily,” saying that the GOP frontrunner has “taken on political correctness” and “even the pope, for heaven’s sakes.”

Gohmert warned that “at some point” Trump’s attacks on the pope and others will become an “Achilles’ heel,” but the congressman took the opportunity to criticize the pope for believing in climate change.

He criticized the pope for “saying that the number-one problem is climate change and that he can’t see that socialism, anywhere it’s ever been done, it’s always led to, you know, just a totalitarian government.”

“When everybody’s in heaven, socialism will be great,” he told the program’s host, Steven Bannon, “but in this world it’s never worked, it requires totalitarian government, it requires giving up your freedoms, your freedom of speech and religion and all these things. So it’s amazing to see a pope who’s saying let’s all get behind the thing that always destroys freedom of religion.”

Gohmert then brought up a talking point he’sused before, falsely claiming that somewhat higher temperatures in Greenland during the Viking age mean that climate change is a myth.

“I also noticed, Steven, that it seems like when you hear somebody say over and over again that climate change is our biggest problem, they don’t know that climate has been changing a lot worse over all the millennia of mankind,” Gohmert said. “In fact, I asked a witness, hey, is it as warm as it was back when Leif Erickson and the Norse came across to Greenland and had all those farms in Greenland? He said, it’s never gotten anywhere close to being that warm since then. Do we have any idea what kind of internal combustion engines they were using back then that was causing all this climate change?”

Jim Garlow: America Is Dead And 2016 Is Our Last Hope To Resurrect It

Before the 2012 election, right-wing pastor Jim Garlow was telling anyone who would listen that the re-election of President Obama would literally spell the end of America. After Obama's re-election, Garlow even declared that America was now "clinically dead" and the only thing that could save it was a miraculous resurrection.

Garlow, it turns out, is still hoping for such a resurrection, telling American Family Radio's "Today's Issues" program yesterday that this next election will determine whether or not America is finally lost forever.

"People say we're at a crossroads," Garlow said. "We're way past the crossroads. Our last free exit was way back on the freeway and now we're driving at a very high rate of speed through signs that are saying, 'The bridge is out, the bridge is out, the bridge is out' and we're continuing forward."

"I saw 2012," he continued, "as the day the body died and now we have a limited time for resuscitation. We went past the point in 2012 and 2016 is can these bones breath again, is there a chance that we can raise this back to life? Can we put the shocker on the heart and get things going again? Discerning people know that's where we are."

Rafael Cruz: Evangelicals Who Support Trump Aren't Real Evangelicals

There has been much hand-wringing among some of Sen. Ted Cruz’s supporters about Donald Trump’s success with evangelical voters, once thought to be a safe voting bloc for Cruz. Exit polls in South Carolina showed the thrice-married, biblically shaky Trump winning the plurality of white evangelical and born-again Republican voters, with Cruz, who has made his faith the centerpiece of his campaign, coming in second among that group.

Steve Deace, a conservative Iowa talk radio host and Cruz supporter, asked Cruz’s father, Rafael, about the development in an interview yesterday at the National Religious Broadcasters convention, which is taking place this week in Nashville.

“How in the world does Donald Trump win evangelical voters in South Carolina?” Deace asked. “What does that say about where we’re at as a church, or does it say anything about where we’re at as a church across the board?”

The Texas Republican’s father responded that the evangelicals who vote for Trump may not be real evangelicals, but have instead been influenced by a “politically correct” culture and forgotten the “word of God.”

“Well, I think that they’re defining evangelicals in a very loose manner,” he said, “If we look at the numbers, those that are people that call themselves born-again Christians that are committed to the lord, we won overwhelmingly among that group. Unfortunately — and this is a message that I have been carrying to America, as you said, for several years — there are too many people in the church that have actually become lax about the word of God, that they are being more concerned with being politically correct than being biblically correct, they have diluted the word of God in order to be palatable to everyone.”

Deace, for his part, wondered if those who identify as evangelical in South Carolina and other southern states are merely reflecting a “cultural Christianity” and are not actually faithful, practicing Christians.

“Is it possible that people, because they’re conforming to a cultural standard, think because they celebrate Christmas and Easter and ‘I love America and I believe in the Second Amendment, that makes me an evangelical’?” he wondered.

Cruz agreed that this explanation “is entirely possible.”

GOP Rep: 'I Don't Know' If Military Would Follow Orders To Close Gitmo

Late last year, Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas and a handful of his fellow Republican members of Congress sent a letter to the Joint Chiefs of Staff urging them to “seek appropriate legal advice before following any executive order to transfer Guantanamo Bay … detainees to the United States,” which Pompeo explained was a way of telling the military leaders that the members of Congress “have their back” if they choose to defy Obama administration orders to close the detention facility.

Now that Obama has sent Congress a plan for closing the Guantanamo Bay prison, Pompeo is repeating his warnings, telling Newsmax’s Steve Malzberg today that if the president were to carry out such a plan through an executive order, “I don’t know” if the military will comply with it.

If Obama were to issue such an executive order, Pompeo said, “The men and women of our military who he would ask to carry out that mission would have to look very carefully at whether the direction that they were being given was consistent with what their counsel was telling them about what was legal. I hope the president won’t put anybody in that position and won’t present risk to America, but we’ve watched the president behave in lawless ways.”

The president, he said, needs to “make sure he understands that we’re not going to let that happen.”

“Are you saying that there’s a possibility, remote as it may be, that after consultation with whomever, that the military members who would be charged with closing that facility down may not do it, may disobey the order?” Malzberg asked.

“You know, I served, Steve, in the military for quite a while,” Pompeo replied, “and if there’s one thing you understand it’s chain of command and following orders, but there’s another duty: When you take an oath to the Constitution and to defend America, your oath is different … So it would be an incredibly difficult spot that they would find themselves in, and I just literally pray that no commander in chief would ever put the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines in that kind of position.”

Malzberg pressed him again on if he was saying that the military might disobey an executive order closing the prison.

“I don’t know, Steve,” Pompeo responded, “it’s difficult to answer yes or know.”

Bryan Fischer Says That Every Abortion Is 'Like Food For Demons'

Bryan Fischer kicked off his radio show today by declaring that "when a nation sacrifices innocent children in abortion or infanticide, that is a sacrifice to demons, it's like food for demons."

"What I mean by that," he continued, "is that act of the shedding of innocent blood, the most innocent among us, it empowers satanic forces, it energizes satanic forces, it gives them the legal right to be at work in our culture, it energizes them, it empowers them, it gives them legal ground, it gives them permission to operate. So every time an abortion is performed in the United States of America, a jolt of power is given to Satan and to satanic forces."

America will never free itself "from demonic oppression," the American Family Radio host warned, "until we stop the practice of abortion."

Syndicate content