Pat Buchanan is the latest right-wing figure to jump to the defense of Jason Richwine, the advocate of racist pseudo-science who was booted from the Heritage Foundation last week.

In his latest syndicated column, Buchanan argues that Hispanic Americans exhibit “underclass behavior” and warns of the dangers of “racially mixed communities.”

“With the immigration bill granting amnesty to 12 million illegals, an open door to their dependents and a million new immigrants each year, almost all from the Third World, America in 2040 is going to look like Los Angeles today,” he writes.

Buchanan also attempts to back up Richwine’s theories about racial differences in IQ, pointing to global rankings among “Hispanic nations” in math, reading and science. He is forced to undercut his own theory, however, but leaving the most prosperous Spanish-speaking nation, Spain, out of his bogus statistics.

The 2009 Programme for International Student Assessment, PISA, which measures the academic ability of 15-year-olds worldwide, found the USA falling to 17th in reading, 23rd in science, 31st in math.

Yet, Spain aside, not one Hispanic nation, from which a plurality of our immigrants come, was among the top 40 in reading, science or math.

But these folks are going to come here and make us No. 1 again?

Is there greater “underclass behavior” among Hispanics?

The crime rate among Hispanics is about three times that of white Americans, while the Asian crime rate is about a third that of whites.

Among white folks, the recent illegitimacy rate was 28 percent; among Hispanics, 53 percent. According to one study a few years back, Hispanics were 19 times as likely as whites to join gangs.

What about Richwine’s point regarding “social trust”?

Six years ago, in “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the 21st Century,” Robert Putnam, author of “Bowling Alone,” wrote that after 30,000 interviews he found that ethnic and racial diversity can be devastating to communities and destructive of community values.

In racially mixed communities, Putnam wrote, not only do people not trust strangers, they do not even trust their own kind.

“People living in ethnically diverse settings appear to ‘hunker down,’ that is, to pull in like a turtle … (to) withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more but have less faith they can actually make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in front of the television.”

With the immigration bill granting amnesty to 12 million illegals, an open door to their dependents and a million new immigrants each year, almost all from the Third World, America in 2040 is going to look like Los Angeles today. Yet, it was in L.A. that Putnam found social capital at its most depleted and exhausted.

If Richwine is right, America in 2040 will be a country with whites and Asians dominating the professions, and 100 million Hispanics concentrated in semiskilled work and manual labor.

The issues Richwine raises go to the question of whether we shall survive as one nation and one people.

In his daily email yesterday, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins attacked a bill that would prohibit adoption programs that receive federal funding from discriminating against same-sex couples. This bill, he says, “would intentionally deprive children of a mother” and expose children to “the serious risks [of] being raised in a homosexual home.”

Perkins’ evidence for these “serious risks” is, of course, the thoroughly debunked Regnerus Study.

Now, some in Congress want to get in on the act with a bill that would intentionally deprive children of a mother. Under this legislation, the government would punish any adoption agency that gives priority to married, heterosexual couples. The bill, co-sponsored by Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), would cut off the federal funding of any agency -- including faith-based charities -- that seek the safest and most nurturing home for kids. If it passes, the official policy of the U.S. government would be to penalize organizations who take the well-being of children into account in adoption placement.

This is how backwards we've become as a society! As we've seen in the Boy Scouts membership debate, America's focus is no longer the well-being of children but on the "well-being" of a small but politically powerful minority. There's an abundance of social science data supporting the common-sense belief that children do best when raised by a married mother and father. Because of that, there's every rational basis for agencies to prefer such households over those headed by same-sex couples in adoption.

In the largest peer-review study ever done on same-sex parenting, Dr. Mark Regnerus found that the emotional, financial, academic, and physical outcomes of kids raised in homosexual homes rated "suboptimal" or "negative" in almost every category. "There's nothing worse than being brought up by two gay dads," said homosexual actor Rupert Everett. And Dr. Regnerus proves it. In outcome after outcome, he shows the serious risks to being raised in a homosexual home -- not the least of which are poverty, depression, and abuse.
 

On today's "Faith and Freedom" radio program, Matt Barber reacted to recent concerns voiced by the CDC about the emergence of a new drug-resistant strain of gonorrhea and he knew exactly what was to blame: liberals.

"Sexually transmitted disease running rampant with kids younger and younger and younger," Barber lamented. "Teenage pregnancy through the roof. Thanks a lot, Left. Comprehensive sex education. You're to blame. Progressives and leftists are to blame for these children suffering the consequences of their lifestyle. They are reaping what they sow and in large part the Left is to blame":

• Hemant Mehta @ Friendly Atheist: North Miami Mayoral Candidate Says She is Endorsed by Jesus Christ.
• Maddow Blog: A look at the Republican Benghazi talking points as they've been laid out so far.
• David @ Crooks & Liars: Allen West: IRS Targeting of Tea Party Is Part of Auto Bailout Conspiracy.
• Matthew Yglesias @ Slate: Marco Rubio Calls on Nonexistent IRS Commissioner to Resign.
• Jeremy Hooper: IFI's Higgins: Homosexuality is 'destructive foolishness,' should be rejected (*kind of like child sacrifice).
• Terry Krepel @ Media Matters: Todd Starnes' 5 Fake "Culture Wars."

• In case you need them, here are "25 Reasons To Dislike Liberals."
• For some reason, it is "Erik Rush Week" on America's Web Radio.com
• Rand Paul is working closely with Religious Right organizer David Lane to connect with evangelicals as he contemplates making a run for president in 2016.
• The Common Core conspiracy theorists win another round.
• Presumably there is some point to Gary Bauer's latest video, but we have no idea what it is supposed to be.
• Finally, Larry Klayman argues that if President Clinton had been removed from office, then Benghazi never would have happened.

A jury today found Philadelphia doctor Kermit Gosnell guilty in the deaths a woman and three infants in a squalid, nightmarish abortion clinic. Anti-choice groups have been closely following the trial, attempting to link Gosnell’s crimes to the very existence of legal abortion. They have exploited the Gosnell trial to push for state-level “TRAP” laws meant to close abortion clinics with unnecessary regulations. Now, anti-choice groups are targeting legal abortion in Washington, DC.

Reacting to the Gosnell verdict, the Family Research Council and the Susan B. Anthony List both singled out a bill, sponsored by Republican Rep. Trent Franks of Arizona, that would ban abortions in the District of Columbia after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Sen. Mike Lee of Utah also plugged the bill in an interview with Janet Mefferd about Gosnell. The bill, similar to several that have been considered in state legislatures, is based on the disputed claim that 20 weeks is the point at which a fetus can feel pain. Such procedures are rare, accounting for just 1.5 percent of abortions.

DC has long been a convenient target for Republican lawmakers looking to expand school vouchers, eliminate needle exchange programs, stop gun control measures…and, of course, infringe on abortion rights. Thanks to a 2011 budget deal, for instance, the District is currently barred from using its own local tax dollars to help low-income women access abortions – a policy that has been in effect off and on for 25 years.

Of course, Franks’ DC bill is completely unrelated to the Gosnell trial. In reality, abortion performed in proper conditions are one of the safest medical procedures provided in the United States. Gosnell’s clinic, which was the last refuge for many low-income women, illustrated the horrors of the unsafe, back-alley abortions that are all too common in parts of the world where abortion is illegal.

Last year, when Franks introduced a similar bill, he refused to let D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton testify against it in committee.

Just like last year, the Florida Family Association is getting ready to fly banners condemning “Gay Day” at Disney World this June.

In a press release, the group notes that “the State of Florida does NOT prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation,” urging Disney to exercise its “right to prohibit people from entering the park with tee shirts that promote LGBT behavior.”

FFA head David Caton told the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow the organization has two planes flying banners in English and Spanish telling people to avoid Disney World out of fear that there will be people “promoting their various alternative lifestyles.”

The AFA’s One Million Moms is also upset about Gay Day, urging members to contact Disney and tell them that they are acting in an “irresponsible” way by not forbidding the event which “is planned with the intent to expose and desensitize children to this lifestyle by same-sex couples holding hands, hugging and kissing.”

Gay Day at the Magic Kingdom in Disney World on Saturday, June 1, 2013 will expose thousands of children to lifestyle. Please send your email to officials.

How would you feel if you entered the Magic Kingdom anticipating a normal day of fun with your family only to witness thousands of same-sex couples holding hands, hugging, kissing and wearing tee-shirts that promoted their lifestyle?

…

Disney’s official email response to critics of Gay Day erroneously pretends that they have nothing to do with Gay Day and have no control over who enters their park. Disney’s email response is posted below. The following facts clearly contradict Disney’s position.

• Disney has prohibited drag queens from entering the Magic Kingdom following Gay Day 1991 when even the mainstream media reported in a negative light the estimated 1,800 cross dressers in the park with children. Yet, Disney continues to allow thousands of people to wear shirts promoting homosexuality.

• Dozens of gang members visiting Disneyland in California have been evicted after entering the park wearing gang colors according to Kenneth Green, Director of Corporate Communications. He said the company was concerned the groups might intimidate or invoke fear in the hearts of regular patrons.

So, Disney can see where a dozen people wearing gang colors might be offensive to regular families but not thousands of same-sex revelers wearing shirts that flaunt and promote homosexual, lesbian and transgender behavior.

• Disney provided special group discount tickets with a pink Mickey logo for Gay Day Patrons.

• Disney paid personnel to hand out special pamphlets to Gay Day patrons informing them of organized activities.

• Disney paid personnel to greet Gay Day patrons at the front gate.

• Disney recruited employees to be guides for special groups of Gay Day patrons.

• Disney gave free Disney tee shirts to people who complained that they did not know that the red shirt they innocently wore meant they supported Gay Day.

• The State of Florida does NOT prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Disney has clearly played a role in helping to sponsor this event for years and allows activities they could otherwise prevent. Disney has the right to prohibit people from entering the park with tee shirts that promote LGBT behavior but deliberately chooses to allow this to occur in the midst of thousands of children.

Star Parker is out with a new column congratulating Mark Sanford for winning his race for Congress, calling him a “consistent, principled, and courageous conservative” who has “pulled in two streams of conservatives – the economic conservatives and the social conservatives” throughout his political career.

The ringing endorsement of a politician who used taxpayer dollars to pursue an extramarital affair which led to divorce and censure by the legislature is particularly rich because Parker has made a career railing against the left for supposedly promoting promiscuity and weakening the institution of marriage.

At last year’s Values Voter Summit she derided Sandra Fluke as a “national icon for sexual promiscuity” who needs to learn from her own “sexual rampage,” and she told James Dobson in an interview that “sexual promiscuity” along with “sexual irresponsibility and immorality” are responsible for the country’s economic crisis.

Parker’s salute to Sanford as a “seasoned, principled, and exciting conservative politician and leader” even includes a dig at Jason Collins: “Perhaps if Sanford's adultery were a gay affair liberal's would be more understanding.”

Put me down as happy to see former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford coming back to Washington. Earlier this week he handily defeated Elizabeth Colbert Busch in a special election for a House seat he himself once held.

…

He has always been a consistent, principled, and courageous conservative. And he has always done it with showmanship and clarity that gets the points across to voters.

He unfurled this showmanship in this campaign of redemption, in which he was combatting not just his opponent, but also his deeply tarnished image as result of serious ethical transgressions during his second term as governor.

The story is well known. While governor, Sanford conducted an adulterous affair, disappeared to visit the woman in Argentina, lied about his whereabouts, and misused state funds in making the trip.

Sinful stuff.

He survived to serve out his second term as Governor, but departed as what seemed to be permanently damaged political goods.

…

Those personal transgressions have, of course, been raw meat for those on the left.

According to Alexandria Lapp, executive director the House Majority Pac, which poured some $450,000 into ads and mail against Sanford, "The House Republican Caucus has added yet another ethically challenged embarrassment who will be an albatross around the neck of every Republican forced to answer for Sanford's embarrassing and reckless behavior."

The irony does not drip but pours forth like a tsunami when liberals start talking about morality and ethics.

A few weeks ago Washington Wizards basketball player Jason Collins announced that he is gay. This was an event of such apparent import that he received a congratulatory phone call from the leader of the Democrat Party, President Obama, and an official tweet from first lady Michelle. Both expressed their pride and joy about Collins' courageous coming out.

The plight of Carolyn Moos, the woman with whom Collins was living for eight years, and to whom he at one point was engaged, was apparently of no interest to the Obamas, despite the President's supposed great concern for women's affairs, nor was the deceptive life that Collins lived with her.

Moos, 34, expressed distress at eight wasted prime years with Collins, who she said she never had a hint was gay and living a double life, and with whom she actually believed marriage and children were in the cards.

Perhaps if Sanford's adultery were a gay affair liberal's would be more understanding.

When the National Republican Congressional Committee pulled their support from Sanford's race following the news that he trespassed in the home of his former wife (to watch the Super Bowl with his son), support came in from both FreedomWorks PAC and the National Right to Life PAC.

Sanford's persona pulled in two streams of conservatives – the economic conservatives and the social conservatives – that many see at odds with each other.

A seasoned, principled, and exciting conservative politician and leader is exactly what Republicans need today.

Welcome back to Washington, Mark Sanford.

On his radio broadcast this morning, Glenn Beck called for the appointment of a Special Counsel to explore the possibility of impeachment against President Obama over reports that the IRS improperly targeted conservative groups for excess scrutiny (or, at least we think that was the reason; it is hard to know since Beck seems to think that the IRS, Benghazi, and the Boston Bombing are all connected.)

Arguing that he is not a conspiracy nut because he never bought into the Birther claims or allegations that Obama is really a Muslim, Beck called not only for the appointment of a Special Counsel but also the creation of a civilian oversight board to which the Special Counsel would report since nobody in the government can be trusted because "the big government stooges will cover for themselves":

It apparently doesn’t matter that a Texas student athlete who had claimed he and his team were disqualified from a race over a religious gesture recanted his allegations and admitted that he made it all up, as it appears that Religious Right groups intend to pursue the story anyway.

The debunked accusation, promoted by Fox News and even Gov. Rick Perry, was featured as the top story on Liberty Counsel’s radio show Faith & Freedom even after the student and his father both acknowledged that the disqualification had nothing to do with religious expression.

Today, Truth In Action Ministries today is promoting the fabricated case as well, with Newcombe citing the fictitious account to warn of the imminent threats to the freedoms of religion and speech.

Virtually every week there is some outrageous story of an alleged violation of the separation of church and state. They’re becoming so frequent that they are often met with a collective yawn.

The crazy thing about all this is how removed this is from the clear intent of the founders themselves---as seen in their documents, in their actions, in their words, etc.

One recent incident that blows me away is that involving a high school junior sprinter in a competition in Texas. His team, the Columbus High School Mighty Cardinals, had a chance to compete at the state level, until he did something egregious.

What did he do? What was his crime? After a successful run, as one of four runners (100 meters each in a relay), he pointed his finger to the sky---in a gesture of thanksgiving to God.

This one gesture now disqualifies his team because it was supposedly an “excessive celebration”---which is not allowed.

His father was dumbfounded, according to Alexander Marlow of Breitbart News (May 3, 2103): "It was a reaction," said the father, "You're brought up your whole life that God gives you good things, you're blessed."

It dawned on me that if that young man had given an obscene gesture to his team’s opponents, and he were likewise punished, the ACLU would have been at that young man’s defense faster than he had run the 100-meters.

Let me ask a question in this case: Where’s the church? Where’s the state?

Why is it that any sort of Christian expression in the public arena is not allowed, but virtually every other expression is allowed?