counter statistics

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Peter LaBarbara Defends Utah Anti-Gay Legislator

From the Peter's website:

Folks, I don’t know which aspect of this story is more preposterous: the notion of anti-Christian, homosexual lobby groups like Human Rights Campaign (HRC) — with their long history of demonizing people of faith as hateful bigots — setting themselves up as arbiters of responsible speech; OR … the specter of Republican Party leaders bending to pro-Democratic HRC’s pressure tactics.

My good friend Matt Barber (a Board Member of AFTAH) is correct below: if the Republican Party’s leaders think they are going to succeed in the long run by caving in to the Left’s version of “tolerance,” then we’re looking ahead at decades of Democrat Party rule in these United States. You simply cannot appease the homosexual activist movement, and groups like HRC are now engaged in a campaign of intimidation against pro-family lawmakers nationwide. Their unsubtle campaign attempts to classify any discussion of organized homosexual activism as a “threat” as beyond-the-pale hate speech leading to violence. More ominously, savvy homosexual moneymen like Tim Gill are targeting pro-family legislators for defeat using out-of-state “gay” PAC bundling, and it’s working [see this 2007 NPR story, “Wealthy Gay Donors a New Force in Politics,” featuring Americans For Truth].

Chris Buttars is hardly alone: remember Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern, who was trashed by hateful homosexuals across the country for a speech she gave identifying the “Gay” Lobby as a serious threat to our nation? (Kern easily won reelection last year despite the hate campaign.) There have been other pro-family lawmakers who have been targeted in what is becoming a new “gay” direct-action political tactic of Intimidate, Demonize and Isolate Politically. (Take note of how the Left tried to erroneously paint Buttars as a racist; here’s a link with Buttars’ response.)

We understand that Sen. Chris Buttars is somewhat of a curmudgeon who comes from a different generation of Americans less apt to use politically-correct nuances and obey the speech codes set up by hypocrites on the Homosexual Left (who are among, of course, the most intolerant activists in the nation). But for Waddoups and the Utah State Senate GOP leadership to buckle to a group like HRC (see their pressure-letter against Buttars HERE) is unconscionable and a good example of why so many cynical conservatives call the GOP the “stupid party.”

The Republicans need to follow the example of their new chairman, Michael Steele, and get a backbone, and St. Sen. Chris Buttars should be reinstated to his post on the Judiciary Committee ASAP.

Upcoming Freak Show

Upcoming Freak Show

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

CBS Blog on DADT Repeal

Read it here:

As Politico reports, political analysts warn that the issue could “galvanize social conservatives and other political opponents, strain the new president’s relations with the military, and force him to squander valuable political capital that is needed on more pressing matters, particularly his economic agenda.”

Gay activists counter that Mr. Obama has reached out to the military far more effectively than Mr. Clinton. As Politico notes, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network is pushing hard for a repeal, potentially as part of the fiscal year 2010 defense authorization bill likely sent to lawmakers in April.

The White House has said it wants a study of the impact of gays serving openly in the military, a process that could last a year, according to according to Logo's Web site 365 Gay. Sen. Ted Kennedy is reportedly working on a Senate bill to repeal the ban and seeking a Republican co-sponsor.


From Politico:


It is precisely the sort of knife fight no president wants to get into, especially in his first 100 days. But it seems that President Barack Obama is about to get dragged down the same dark alley as Bill Clinton when he was forced to confront the highly charged issue of gays in the military early in his term.

On Monday, buoyed by a stronger Democratic majority in Congress, Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Calif.) will introduce legislation to overturn the ban against homosexuals serving openly in the military, a Tauscher aide said.

Clinton’s handling of the issue was widely condemned, and the entire fiasco became a textbook example of the sort of avoid-at-all-cost political controversy that can seriously undermine a new president. For Clinton, it knocked him off message, sapped him of auathority, damaged his popularity ratings and left him with a reputation for being wishy-washy that stuck.

And it left the military with a policy that no one really likes — the “don’t ask, don’t tell” regulation that allows gays to serve in the military, as long as they don’t flout their homosexuality.

The issue is risky for Obama, too, political analysts said, threatening to galvanize social conservatives and other political opponents, strain the new president’s relations with the military, and force him to squander valuable political capital that is needed on more pressing matters, particularly his economic agenda.

“American voters may feel better about the idea of openly gay soldiers and sailors, but that doesn’t mean the process of trying to change the policy doesn’t have enormous political risks for Obama,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. He added that the president won’t be nearly as pleased about the issue coming up now as gay rights groups — or conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh — will be.

“It will give conservatives something to rally around,” he said.

But gay rights activists contend the situation will be different for Obama, primarily because the new president has reached out to the military in ways that Clinton never did. They are pushing hard for Obama to move quickly on the issue so he can play offense on the debate, rather than be forced into a defensive posture.

Vote Vets Calls for Repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Good for Ashwin Madia:


Dear VoteVets.org Supporter,

Last week, we asked for your help to overturn the ban on photos at Dover Air Force Base, and you responded! In just a couple of hours, you had sent thousands of letters to the Pentagon, demanding change. And, later in the day, the Pentagon announced that the policy would be reversed! Thanks so much for your help. Now, we need you again.

As the President sends more troops to Afghanistan, and focuses our energies on the danger in the region, we at VoteVets.org are reminded that our military is seriously hamstrung by the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. That policy discharges those in the military who are found to be gay or lesbian. I have dealt with discrimination in the military firsthand: as a judge advocate in the Marine Corps, I successfully defended a gay Marine from discharge based on discriminatory treatment.

CLICK HERE TO SEND LETTERS TO YOUR NEWSPAPER, CALLING FOR A REPEAL OF “DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL”

President Obama, during the campaign, said he would overturn the policy, and allow gays and lesbians to openly serve, as they do in a number of militaries around the world – including those who serve side by side with us in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s time that the United States started the process of allowing troops to serve openly. To begin that change, we need your help.

By clicking above, you’ll get to send a Letter to the Editor of your paper, to make the case. To help, we’ll be linking to articles and blogs that will help you learn about the current policy and how it negatively affects America’s military and security. This is just the first step in a long campaign. In the coming weeks and months, we’ll be giving you even more to do, as overturning the policy is one of VoteVets.org’s legislative priorities for this session of Congress – and why we signed on in support of a bill offered by Rep. Ellen Tauscher that would do away with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

There’s good reason to reverse this policy. First and foremost, fighting the danger that we are, we cannot afford to dismiss any qualified, honorable, and able members of our military. For instance, military intelligence is constantly short-handed when it comes to translators. And yet, hundreds of translators have been dismissed since the policy was enacted, including many who speak Arabic, Persian, Pashto, and other languages that will help our military intelligence protect our troops and America. Additionally, at a time when our military is so overextended, allowing members of the military to serve openly, without being discharged, will alleviate the strain so many of our service members feel from repeated deployments.

CLICK HERE TO LET PEOPLE KNOW, IT’S TIME TO LET PEOPLE SERVE OPENLY IN OUR ARMED FORCES

Our military is professional and mature. Changing the policy will not affect how service-members do their jobs, or cohesiveness. In fact, it only will make our military stronger. Help us make it a reality, by clicking above.
Thanks for your support.

Sincerely,
J. Ashwin Madia
Iraq War Veteran
VoteVets.org
And Jon, Brandon, Brian, Peter and the Entire VoteVets.org Team
Paid for by VoteVets.org


There is also a need for people to call Speaker Nancy Pelosi to allow this on the agenda sooner rather than later, and your own congress member to ask that they co-sponsor repeal of DADT.

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

Dennis Sanders on the Mythical Minority Social Conservative

Moderate Voice:


Every so often, I have heard conservative Republican operatives talk about how the GOP has an inroad to persons of color because in many of those communities, there is strong opposition to gay marriage.

Since there hasn’t been a flood of black people to the GOP based on their stance on gay marriage, I have always found that argument bogus if not bigoted. Being someone who is African American (and gay to boot) I’ve always believed that most African Americans are concerned with bread and butter issues instead of whether I and my partner decide to go to the justice of the peace and get hitched.

Finally, a conservative has shown this belief to be false. Zac Morgan, writing in today’s New Majority, shares that the evidence doesn’t line up with the rhetoric coming from leading conservatives:


The other part of this ofcourse is the anti-gay Democrats that are part of minority communities will vote Yes on anti-gay initiatives and will then proceed to vote a straight democratic ticket. This hurt the Republican candidate for Governor in Wisconsin in areas like Milwaukee. The amendment brought out anti-gay members in minority communities, and they then helped get Jim Doyle get elected.

This all being said, the white dominated anti-gay activist organizations such as the Minnesota Family Council are doing a better job at reaching out to minority communities than are the Gay organizations.

Monday, March 02, 2009

A Big Loop Theory

Or before the Big Bang....

This is a Sad Story

Charles Carlson drops out of the Ward 2 race.

FFRF: Faith-based Office at White House Violates State/Church Separation

FFRF: Faith-based Office at White House Violates State/Church Separation
Feb. 5, 2009

Register your dismay over the faith-based executive order:
Phone the White House Comment Line at 202/456-1111
E-mail: www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Statement by Annie Laurie Gaylor and Dan Barker Foundation Co-Presidents

With so many priorities on the presidential plate, it was discouraging to see President Barack Obama devote precious time to schmoozing with religionists today at the National Prayer Breakfast. To what purpose, other than to be seen wearing religion on his sleeve?

The nation is needing and awaiting sweeping action and reform, and we're being told to pray? (FFRF Takes National Prayer Breakfast Remarks to Task.)

Far more distressing is the fact that Mr. Obama used the occasion to copy a page off the George W. Bush script, and announced at that breakfast that he is issuing an executive order to create the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

The national treasury is bleeding and we're being told to throw more tax dollars at religion?

Scientists, medical pioneers and suffering families are still waiting for Obama to revoke Bush's embryonic stem-cell line embargo, to undo the harm of two presidential vetoes wielded expressly to kowtow to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Well over 70% of Americans support embryonic stem-cell research; even Nancy Reagan and the Mormon Orrin Hatch endorse it!

Yet there been silence on this front from the White House since Obama's inaugural promise to "restore science to its rightful place." The creation of another White House faith-based office takes precedent over freeing stem-cell research lines?

The door was slammed shut on the Foundation and on us as individual taxpayers by the Supreme Court in 2007, when we were told we did not have standing to legally challenge Bush's creation of the White House faith-based office. The Hein v. FFRF decision in effect gave the executive branch carte blanche to violate the Establishment Clause. If general appropriations are used by the White House to violate the Establishment Clause, state/church violations by the executive branch are not challengeable in today's America.

Any hope that the administration of "hope and change" would put our nation back on constitutional track was quashed by Obama's action today. His support of the program is no surprise. As a candidate, he announced his intention to rename the faith-based initiative to the faith-based council. But last July, Obama at least firmly vowed he would not let federal funds go to faith-based groups that discriminate on religion in hiring, firing or services.

Now Obama is backpedaling even on that minor reform. Obama did not rescind Bush's provision to allow faith-based groups to discriminate in their hiring practices. The new order supposedly provides a legal process for organizations to go through to ensure hiring is legal and nondiscriminatory—namely, referring such cases to the Attorney General for a determination. Imagine the mess!

In announcing the executive order, Obama said: "There is a force for good greater than government. It is an expression of faith, . . ." This pious assertion is no deviation from the Bush Administration. Obama will keep faith-based offices at all the agencies where Bush placed them.

The White House even brags that Obama's faith-based effort will be broader than Bush's. The White House faith-based office will be a "substantial programming and policy arm of the federal government," according to the White House.

Today Obama also officially named a 26-year-old Pentecostal minister to head the White's House's new faith-based office. Josh DuBois previously directed religious outreach for the Obama campaign. While it is possible BuBois' positions on social issues may deviate from those of his church, Pentecostals are generally right-wing. They are bible literalists, therefore they are almost all antigay rights and antiabortion. DuBois belongs to the same tradition that made Sarah Palin's religious views notorious. Pentecostals are the "noisy" fundamentalists who believe in the "gifts of the spirit": speaking in tongues, faith healing, prophecy, discernment of spirit (exorcism). Normally the private religious views of White House staff would be off limits. DuBois' extremist religious views have become relevant by his elevation to an office at the White House to promote faith and funding of faith-based social services.

A 25-member advisory council includes a few representatives of secular social agencies, but most are representatives of religious groups with a stake in funding religious groups, including the president of World Vision, and the president of Catholic Charities USA, etc. Before the faith-based schemes began, initially at the instigation of John Ashcroft, religious charities were granted vast sums of taxpayer monies to provide social services. All they had to do to qualify was to take their crosses down, create a secular arm and keep separate books. Obama should have returned to these simple safeguards.

Secularists, freethinkers and those of us who are the true conservatives--who wish to conserve what is greatest about our country and its godless constitution--must make a great fuss over today's blows to the Establishment Clause.

Tragic news came today--that the frail but constitutionally stalwart Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just underwent surgery for pancreatic cancer. Justice Ginsburg has been a friend to freedom and rationality on the court. If health forces Ginsburg to resign, it is essential that the last woman on the U.S. Supreme Court not only be replaced by another woman, but that Ginsburg's replacement demonstrate her same understanding and agreement of the Jeffersonian "wall of separation between church and state."

While Obama, in his National Prayer Breakfast speech, gave lip service to working with faith-based groups "without blurring the line that our founders wisely drew between church and state," it is clear he needs as much bolstering on this issue as that constitutional wall needs rebuilding.

Register your dismay over the faith-based executive order:
Phone the White House Comment Line at 202/456-1111
E-mail: www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, based in Madison, Wis., is a national association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics) that has been working since 1978 to keep church and state separate.

Sunday, March 01, 2009

Senatorial Embarrassments: Coleman and Burris

From the Hartford Courant Op Ed Page

Courant.com
Burris, Coleman: Senatorial Embarrassments
February 28, 2009

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn on Thursday once again asked recently appointed U.S. Sen. Roland Burris to step down because he can no longer effectively serve his state. Just a few days before, Illinois' senior senator, Richard Durbin, made the same request. But the stubborn Mr. Burris, appointed by Gov. Rod Blagojevich shortly before he was impeached, won't budge.

Despite understandable misgivings about the appointment by a corrupt governor, the Senate seated Mr. Burris, a Democrat, in January. We supported that decision because it appeared the appointee had a scandal-free public record. But now it appears that Mr. Burris misled the Illinois legislature's impeachment committee about his contacts with the indicted governor's political operatives before he received the appointment. He agreed to raise money for Mr. Blagojevich, which can only be seen as a quid pro quo for his ticket to Washington.

Prosecutors should investigate whether Mr. Burris perjured himself in testifying to the impeachment committee. He should resign his Senate seat. The Blagojevich-Burris sore on the body politic is slow to heal. It hurts Illinois and the nation.

In Minnesota, Sen. Norm Coleman, a Republican, appeared to have won by a couple of hundred votes when ballots were tallied after the November election. He warned challenger Al Franken not to ask for a recount because it would be too costly for taxpayers. Mr. Franken did anyway, and appears to have won the recount by some 225 votes.

Mr. Coleman, hypocritically, hired an army of lawyers and is challenging almost every ruling by election officials and the courts. He's losing on almost every challenge. The Republican incumbent says he'll keep appealing no matter what state election officials and the lower courts say.

Mr. Coleman has dragged out the vote counting, denying Minnesota full representation in the Senate for almost four months. Accept the voters' judgment, Mr. Coleman, no matter how close it may be, and send your lawyers home.

Log Cabin Republicans of Minnesota: Position on Senator Paul Koering’s comments regarding S.F. 120

They exactly nailed this. I have found the Paul Koering story to be a distraction. I understand from Phyllis Kahn, that there are not the votes in the house to pass this legislation. That means there are lots of suburban and rural DFLers who oppose the bill.

Log Cabin Republicans of Minnesota

Position on Senator Paul Koering’s comments regarding S.F. 120

25 February 2009 Minneapolis, MN

Log Cabin Republicans of Minnesota knows Sen. Paul Koering to be a respected and hard-working legislator, a strong advocate for his constituents, and a highly caring individual. That being said, we disagree with Sen. Koering’s reported position in opposition to S.F. 120, the Marriage and Family Protection Act. Full equality for gays and lesbians, including civil marriage rights, is consistent with Log Cabin’s core conservative beliefs of limited government, individual liberty and individual responsibility, and strong, stable families. We are committed to working with Republican elected officials, including Sen. Koering, to increase their understanding of the inequalities that gays and lesbians face every day in Minnesota and the legal barriers to building and sustaining strong committed relationships in their lives. We are confident that through constructive discussions we will win over the hearts and minds of these elected officials, as well as those in our communities.

We also believe that the focus on Sen. Koering’s comments is both disproportionate and highly misplaced. While we believe that a bipartisan approach is the best path towards fairness and equality, the fact of the matter is that S.F. 120 could be passed in both the Senate and the House without a single Republican vote, and a veto overridden in the Senate without Sen. Koering’s or any other Republican’s vote. In the House, a veto override would require the support of three Republicans with whom we look forward to convincing and working with to eliminate this government-sponsored discrimination. Unfortunately, DFL leadership is actively working to prevent this bill from coming to the floor for a vote. It is neither Senator Koering, nor the Republican Party, who is currently standing in the way of this legislation coming to fruition. Fair minded citizens of all political parties should hold the current majority accountable for walking the talk on civil marriage equality.

Log Cabin Republicans of Minnesota promotes legislation to provide basic fairness for gay and lesbian Americans and works to build a more inclusive GOP. It is a chapter of Log Cabin Republicans, a 30-year old organization which has state and local chapters nationwide, a full-time office in Washington, DC, a federal political action committee and state political action committees.

MFC Invites Watergate Felon to Speak at Annual Dinner

What do you call hundreds of leaders, organizations and people united to transform culture with biblical principles?

A movement -and Minnesota is leading the charge!

The Minnesota Family Council and Prison Fellowship/BreakPoint invite you to become part of that movement by sponsoring a table at our 2009 Annual Dinner with biblical worldview pioneer Chuck Colson.

"We've been working with the Minnesota Family Council and a variety of other organizations to build a movement. I'll be visiting to challenge that movement to start changing Minnesota."

This groundbreaking event will feature Chuck Colson, President of Prison Fellowship/BreakPoint Ministries. Mr. Colson believes the movement is already underway in Minnesota. We are honored that he has chosen MFC's Annual dinner as ground zero to challenge Minnesota - and the nation - to connect, engage and transform our nation with biblical principles.

CLICK HERE to register online. We expect to sell out!

CLICK HERE for more dinner details.

If you or your organization would like to receive priority seating and other special benefits as a TABLE SPONSOR, or if you have any questions contact Cheryl Peterson at 612-789-881 ext. 202 or email dinner@mfc.org for details.

Click Here to make a donation to the Minnesota Family Council /Minnesota Family Institute.