The Bible As A Voting Guide

Over at Christian Post, there's an interesting opinion piece entitled Why the Bible Is the Best Voters Guide.

Here are a few of the key takeaways from the piece, along with quotes from the op-ed:

Don't Vote For The Kenyan

Civil leaders should be selected from among their own people. People must know the candidate. This is why the Constitution of the United States requires the president must be naturally born in the U.S.

Don't Vote For The Black Guy Who Supports Equal Pay, Women's Rights, And Equality

He must execute justice without respect to race, gender, and national origin, or any other categorical distinction made in society.

Don't Vote For Women

The Scriptures require that we "choose wise, understanding, and knowledgeable men." The word men used here is not the generic term for "mankind" but rather the word for "male." Everywhere the qualifications for civil leaders are mentioned in the Bible, males – not females – are identified.

Don't Vote For the Guy Who Endorsed Gay Marriage -- But The Mormon Still Makes Us Nervous

The Bible is clear that marriage is between one man and one woman, since "the two shall become one flesh"...This definition excludes multiple wives.

Never mind The Establishment Clause

So before you consult all the other voting guides, make sure you have rightly prioritized the words of Scripture above all the other voices for how you analyze the candidates.

Race 2012: Our First 'Post-Racial' Election?

This post is part of PBS's Race 2012 Blogging Project. Race 2012: A Conversation About Race and Politics in America, a PBS election special, uses the current presidential election as a lens through which to explore America’s rapidly changing racial landscape. The film premieres on PBS Thursday October, 16th at 8p.m. (Check local listings)


Post-Racial America?
When Barack Obama was elected the 44th president of the United States on November 4, 2007, many started throwing around the phrase "post-racial America." While we certainly had reached a historic milestone -- much quicker than many of us would have predicted -- we are nowhere near such a theoretical society devoid of discrimination and prejudice.

The political rhetoric of this election cycle has mostly revolved around jobs, the economy, and federal spending, but there is an undeniable anxiety about race. To be clear, most issues surrounding the 2012 election aren't really about race -- at least not on the surface -- but we can't ignore race's strong undercurrent in this so-called "post-racial" election.


Romney's 47%
By now, everyone has heard (or heard about) the audio tape of Romney discussing the "47 percent who are with [Obama], who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing."

As we have come to learn, the 47% who don't pay taxes are actually comprised of the super-wealthy, college students, senior citizens, and service members deployed in combat zones, among those who are down on their luck.

Let's not fool ourselves, however. Romney's comments were the epitome of dog whistle politics.

Imira Jones, writing for Colorlines:

Mitt Romney’s comments on “those people” uttered in a video released yesterday are the missing link in the candidates views on race and economic justice.

[His] heartfelt riff was stunningly wrong and counterfactual in almost every way. Frighteningly it was grounded in over 500 years of racial stereotypes about people of color, particularly those of African descent. The former governor didn’t use the word “black.” He didn’t have to. The nature of his economic smear did it for him.

Of course, by claiming that Romney's comments were racial is to risk being accused of playing the "race card" by the right. And so it goes.


Same-Sex Marriage
What does same-sex marriage have to do with race? Quite a bit, actually.

When Obama's stance on same-sex marriage finally evolved (or was forced to evolve by a trigger-happy Biden), many declared that this pro-equality stance would cost him the election. The loudest voices decrying Obama's pro-equality stance came from African-American clergy.

Rev. William Owens, head of the Coalition of African-American Pastors:

“He has not done a smart thing and it might cost him the election,” Owens said during a press conference Tuesday at the National Press Club in Washington. “There are more people that want marriage to be right than there are homosexuals.”...“[Obama] has ignored the black community because he thinks we are in his pocket because he’s black. We refuse to give him a pass.”

While the majority of African Americans have historically been opposed to same-sex marriage, polls taken after Obama's announcement seemed to indicate that opposition is waning.


Elizabeth Warren, Cherokee?
For those not following the story, Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown has leveled accusations that his challenger Elizabeth Warren claimed Cherokee heritage in order to benefit her Harvard law career. The accusations have prompted a series of inflammatory remarks from Republicans, pundits, and Native American organizations.

John McCain reacted to the allegations by stating, "I’m entertained. I just think it’s bizarre...I know lots and lots of Native Americans, they have a very huge presence in my state and I’ve yet to meet one of them who claims to be related to Elizabeth Warren.”

While Brown's accusations have boosted his chances against his Democrat opponent, his own camp didn't score any points when staffers were caught on video making tomahawk gestures towards a group of Warren supporters.

Voters are left deciding which is the worst offense: allegedly ginning up minority status for career advancement, or making racially charged gestures in public.


'You're Racist If you Vote For Obama Just Because He's Black'
This is not just something you might hear from your Tea Partying uncle at Thanksgiving. It's something you also hear from African Americans. Not many, but some, including Ben Kinchlow, minister/broadcaster/author and founder of the organizations Americans for Israel and the African American Political Awareness Coalition.

Kinchlow, writing in World Net Daily:

Let me state unequivocally: If you are a black person, and you are voting for Obama solely “because he is black,” then you are by default placing your imprimatur on racism. You are, albeit unknowingly, saying the Klan is right to demand a vote for a candidate solely “because he is white."...Has “the land of the free and the home of the brave” turned into a Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia) or South Africa where only race matters?

It's important to note that Kinchlow seems to have a beef with Obama regarding his stance on same-sex marriage.

Magic Johnson, on the other hand, recently stated on CNN:

One thing African-Americans are going to do: They’re either go to vote for President Obama or they’re going to stay home and vote for nobody.”

This race stuff isn't so black and white, is it?


At Least You Know Where They Stand
I grew up in North Carolina, in the shadow of Jesse Helms, a man who didn't mince words when it came to race. Jesse Helms was so blatantly racist (and homophobic) that his own staff coined a slogan that would more or less define his career: "You may not agree with Jesse, but at least you know where he stands."

The past four years have provided us with countless examples of blatant political sentiment. It doesn't take much to know exactly where these folks stand.

In California, there was the empty chair hanging from a noose, with a watermelon and a sign stating, "Go back to Kenya."

In New Jersey, a shop-owner displayed a picture of Obama in witch-doctor garb.

In Ohio, a caller left a highly offensive post-debate message on the voice mailbox of a local labor organization.

In California, a professional rodeo clown told spectators a racist joke about Michelle Obama.

Also in California, a GOP official send an email depicting Obama's parents as monkeys.

In Arizona, radio host Barbara Espinosa said of Barack Obama, "I don't believe in calling him the first black president," she said, "I voted for the white guy myself. I call him a monkey." When told this was a racist comment, Espinosa replied, "with a last name of Espinosa I'm anything but racist."

There seems to be an awful lot of that going around these days -- people unaware of their own racism who are very quick to blame the president himself of playing the race card. Many whites will will cry "reverse racism," a claim utterly disingenuous, if not laughable. Whites can hardly understand what true racism entails given their status in America over the past few hundred years.


Guilty of Being Black
One of the strangest racial phenomena of the past four years is the determination of some on the right to paint Obama as blacker than he actually portrays himself when in the limelight.

Take the 'leaked' video of then-senator Obama speaking at Hampton University in Virginia. In the video, it is purported that Obama speaks in a "racially-charged tone" -- in other words, he sounds more black.

Obama also speaks of the inequality exhibited in the government's response to Katrina. In other words, Obama is "favoring" African-Americans over the rest of America. It has been remarked that the release of this video was timed to counter Romney's "47% video."

It was baffling to hear talk show hosts remark about Obama sounding "more black" in this video, as if we were getting a glimpse of the "real Obama," an obvious tactic to associate Obama with the bogeymen of the 2008 election: Jeremiah Wright, ACORN, the Black Panthers, and Islam.

This charge is about boring as the fact that I often slip back into my Appalachian drawl when I am around my NC relatives at Thanksgiving.

And when people accuse the president of exhibiting signs of his allegiance to the interests of black people, I can't help but think about the past 40+ presidents and their laser-focus on the interests of white folks.

Birtherism, Immigration, and The Fear of Otherness
What does the Birther movement, voter ID legislation, and the draconian immigration laws of Arizona, Utah, Alabama, and South Carolina have in common? The GOP will tell you it's all about preserving the integrity of the constitution and the vision our forefathers had for America. While we can't deny that there might be a bit of truth to that, it comes down to xenophobia and otherness anxiety.

And while xenophobia can be found in all cultures, can be observed in primates, and most likely was crucial to the survival of our ancestors, as modern humans, we are (or, should be, anyway) civilized enough to suppress any unfounded anxieties associated with otherness.

This is difficult to accomplish when you have the propaganda machine working 24 hours a day to validate any anxieties one may have. Too many Americans will readily parrot AM radio talking points that paint African Americans, Latinos, and Arab Americans as threatening to the American way of life.

This xenophobia-stoking propaganda comes in the form of anecdotes, crude internet memes, forwarded emails, conservative pundits, bloggers, and talk radio hosts. They tell us that non-whites are living the dream on welfare (whites actually form the largest racial group on welfare). They tell us that blacks and hispanics are prone to violence and crime (whites commit the vast majority of crimes in America). They tell us to fear Arab Americans, who want to kill us (the fact is that America sees more Jewish acts of terrorism than Islamic terrorism).

However, we humans are not only prone to fear otherness, we are also prone to believe things that 'feel' true to us. It is often through personal experience and education that we overcome. Yet, so many never gain the experience or education necessary to do so. Propaganda, as we have seen throughout history, is designed to appeal emotion, not intellect. And so it goes.


Are We There Yet?
The fact that we have an African-American man sitting in the White House is a clear indicator that America has come a long way since the days of slavery and segregation. Something definitely happened on November 4 of 2008. We witnessed something truly wonderful that day -- a sign that we had fulfilled -- in part at least -- the elusive dream of Martin Luther King, Jr.

But like most important social causes, progress is often followed by temporary setbacks. As we have seen recently in the marriage equality fight, a step forward is often followed by a few steps back.

Those of us living today will likely never see a true 'Post-Racial' America. It is worth asking if such a thing will ever exist. 'Post-Racial' is as utopian as 'Post-Sexist,' or 'Post-Homophobic.'  The arc is bending in the right direction, but it is much longer than any of us had ever anticipated.

GOP Volunteer Tells Voter Obama Is Muslim, Socialist

Desperate times call for desperate measures.

In audio picked up by an answering machine, a volunteer for the Republican Party of Clay County can be heard calling President Barack Obama "a Muslim" and saying he wants to "get rid of your Medicare" while reaching out to voters in support of Mitt Romney's campaign.

The call was made as part of a statewide phone bank for Romney's campaign being conducted by the Clay County GOP. The volunteer, who was not identified, did not hang up before moving onto her next call.

Her pitch to the next person was picked up on the first person's answering machine.

NC Values Coalition Mailer: 'On Aug. 1st I Ate At Chick-Fil-A. On Nov. 6th I Will Vote'

Tami Fitzgerald's anti-LGBT organization, NC Values Coalition, has a new get-out-the-vote campaign.

The slogan of the campaign is "Pledge to Vote: From the Pews to the Polls." It appears that Fitzgerald & co. want to capitalize on the overwhelming support for a certain anti-gay chicken sandwich establishment.

Here's the email that was sent to NCVC's mailing list:

Fitzgerald also released a statement after it was announced that the Democratic platform would support gay marriage:

“This is historic. Marriage has been the union between one man and one woman since before North Carolina became a state and before America became a country. Marriage is a union defined by God – not national political parties. The fact that the national Democrat Party believes it can re-define marriage in a party platform is contrary to our founding principles. It is radical and extreme, and I believe the American people will not stand for it. They will not embrace leaders who embrace homosexual marriage.”

The latest NC Values Coalition email follows closely on the heels of Fitzgerald's bizarre assertion that Equality NC's most recent campaign video depicting an anti-LGBT gun owner repeatedly shooting a pro-equality yard sign was "a thinly-veiled threat against supporters of traditional marriage and can have no other purpose than to incite hatred."

Pat Robertson: Democrats Are The 'Party Of Gays, Godlessness And Whatever Else'

It's gotten to the point that it would be newsworthy if Pat Robertson didn't say something completely insane in his broadcast. He's a broken record of bigotry, senility, and illogic.

That being said, Robertson is downright outraged that the Democratic platform openly embraces marriage equality and the right to abortion.

Robertson, speaking on The 700 Club:

Back in the 1850s or 60s there was a charge that one party was the party of rum, Romanism and rebellion. I don’t know what you label the Democrats now but it’s the party of gays, godlessness and whatever else. I mean, same-sex marriage is in the platform, they want to go along with that as a right, I’m just astounded.
…
They can’t defend it and you ask yourself, you’re going to go before the American people and that’s going to be the face they’re going to present to America. You have insulted the Catholic Church with your rules, you have insulted right-to-work states, you have insulted certain union groups with your stand on the pipeline and now you’re going after God, it makes no sense but that’s what they want to do.

Watch:

Chuck Norris' Anti-Obama Video Warns of '1,000 Years of Darkness'

Via Christian Post:

American actor Chuck Norris has made an anti-Obama video with wife, Gena Norris. The couple recently released the YouTube video that invokes God and Ronald Reagan, and encourages Evangelical voters to use their power to oust President Barack Obama from his position as Commander-in-Chief in the upcoming November election. Norris begins the video by saying that "our great country and freedom are under attack," and that the U.S. may be "lost forever" if changes are not made.

"We can no longer sit quietly or stand on the sidelines and watch our country go the way of socialism, or something much worse," Norris warns.

 Norris then encourages Evangelical voters to head to the polls to have their voices heard. According to the video, 30 million Evangelicals failed to vote in the 2008 presidential election.

Gena Norris implies that this religious absence at the polls led to Obama's victory four years ago. 

Watch:

'Incredibly Ironic': Equality NC Responds To NC Values Coalition's Cries Of Victimization

This weekend, the anti-LGBT organization known as the NC Values Coalition sent a strange email alerting their donors to Equality NC's latest campaign video.

NCVC's email claims that NC Equality's video, "Payback Challenge," which features footage of an Amendment One supporter shooting holes in an anti-Amendment One yard sign, was a "thinly-veiled threat against supporters of traditional marriage and can have no other purpose than to incite hatred." (See the full email here.)

The email was clearly a classic example out of the Religious Right playbook: the victimizer playing the victim.

I reached out to NC Equality's Stuart Campbell to get his take on the claims.

"We find it incredibly ironic that the NC Values Coalition would condemn Equality NC for recounting the shooting of one of our supporter's signs when they were deafeningly silent during the Amendment One campaign with their condemnation when the actual shooting occurred," stated Campbell.

"This latest attack comes from the same organization that partnered with the anti-LGBT National Organization for Marriage and various SPLC-identified hate groups to support writing discrimination into our state's constitution--an organization that would now, speaking out of the other side of their mouth, attempt to deflect its own hate-filled agenda by calling us "out of line."

Their twisting of the truth demonstrates that the NC Values Coalition will stoop to any level to promote their own agenda of discrimination and division, and that it has never been more important to unite our supporters in our fight for equality."

To learn more about Equality NC and to help them in their fight for equality, visit their website here.

Bryan Fischer: Gays Have 'No Business' Being Republican

In an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Bryan Fishcer of the American Family Association said that gays have "no business" in the Republican Party.

"They have no business being there. Our message is to them is that your home is in the Democratic Party," said Bryan Fischer, director of issue analysis for the Tupelo, Miss.-based American Family Association, a conservative radio host and a leading anti-gay figure in the GOP.

"These groups are actively working to undermine and subvert the Republican party platform and the principles of the Republican Party," Mr. Fischer said in a telephone interview. "They are undermining the moral foundations of the Republican Party."

It's no matter to him that Log Cabin Republicans support nearly every other party platform from tax policy to gun rights.

"There is no place for the homosexual agenda," he said. "The Republican platform is very clean on the issues of marriage and family and parenting, and these are people that are actively working against the principles of the party."

"The reason they are for gay marriage is that it is an issue of liberty for people to have the freedom to do what they want ... but we oppose gay marriage because it threatens liberty," he said.

He offered two examples of businesses whose freedoms were trumped by what he calls the gay agenda. First, he said several mayors are trying to keep Chick-fil-A restaurants out of their cities because the company's devout Christian owners oppose gay marriage. In another example, he said, the New Mexico Civil Rights Commission fined Christian photographer Elaine Huguenin for refusing to photograph a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony.

"The gay agenda is a threat to religious liberty. It is a danger to the liberty that the party stands for ... and it's tyranny that's being launched against businesses," Mr. Fischer said.

He said younger members of his party don't see that "because they are young and they are immature and they are unaware of the severe dangers to liberty that is posed by the homosexual agenda."

There you have it, my LGBT friends. The Republican Party does not want you. The Democrats, on the other hand, could sure use your help voting bigots out of office.

Evangelist Claims To Have 200,000 People Who Will Write In Jesus For President

Via Christian Post:

An Internet evangelist who is advocating that Christians vote for Jesus as a write-in candidate says he has more than 200,000 people who have committed to do so. However, a political science expert believes the evangelist's demonizing rhetoric about both candidates is not Christ-like.

You may recall Bill Keller. He's the guy who launched an attack against Joel Osteen and Franklin Graham for promoting Mitt Romney and failing to expose Mormonism as a cult.

It appears that perhaps Keller is not thrilled with his choices this election cycle.

"It is literally Satan flipping a two-headed coin with his head on both sides. How can a Christian in good conscience vote for President Obama, who has proven to be the most pro-baby killing, pro-radical homosexual, pro-enemy of Israel President in our nation's history," Keller stated in a "Vote for Jesus" campaign update.

"On the other hand, how can a Christian in good conscience vote for Mitt Romney, a 5th generation member and priest of the Satanic Mormon cult," he added. "His Presidency would give his cult the mainstream acceptance they have always wanted since being founded 200 years ago by a documented con-artist, racist, pedophile, polygamist, and murderer named Joseph Smith."

Watch:

Rick Santorum's Greatest Hits

We've dedicated a lot of posts here to Rick Santorum. I had considered posting a look back at the insanity that was the Rick Santorum campaign, but I'd honestly rather pound roofing nails into my eye sockets.

Thankfully, the folks at Right Wing Watch pulled together a highlight reel for us.

Enjoy, and pour one out for Rick. Hopefully his improbable rise to possible GOP candidate for the nomination is the closest we will ever come to an American theocracy.

15 Reasons Why North Carolinians Should Vote Against Amendment 1

1. Amendment 1 is poorly written

Many who are voting for Amendment 1 do not understand this poorly written amendment's implications beyond same-sex marriage. This amendment, if passed, would affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians.

2. Amendment 1 harms children
Amendment 1 strips legal protections from children (and not just children of same-sex couples).

3. Amendment 1 harms families
Amendment 1 bans all legal relationship recognitions except for married heterosexual couples, leaving all single-parent households, unmarried couples (with or without children), and domestic partnerships without many crucial legal protections.

4. Amendment 1 will harm seniors
Widowed or single senior couples could be forced to marry to maintain their legal protections, which would result in loss of benefits such as pensions, health care, and social security.

5. Amendment 1 may invalidate domestic violence and stalking laws as they apply to non-married couples
Domestic violence laws may only apply to married heterosexual couples if Amendment 1 passes, leaving unmarried women without protection. When a similar constitutional ban passed in Ohio, domestic violence convictions were overturned as a result.

6. Amendment 1 is bad for business
The Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce has stated that "North Carolina’s proposed Amendment 1 is bad for business. It will interfere with employer’s ability to recruit talent and their right to provide competitive benefits to their employees. It also signals to employers and employees that North Carolina is not welcoming to the diverse, creative workforce that we need to compete in the global economy. We should not do anything that diminishes any corporation's interest in locating or remaining in North Carolina." Many North Carolina businesses agree, including Bank of America, House Speaker Thom Tillis (R), Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes, Replacements Ltd., and Capstrat.

7. Same-sex marriage is already illegal
The Amendment does not change the legal status of same-sex marriage in North Carolina. It will however, have cascading effects to the lives of children, families, seniors, and unmarried heterosexual couples. And do we really need to enshrine discrimination in our state constitution?

8. Same-sex marriage is inevitable
North Carolina State University House Speaker Thom Tillis (R), once a strong backer of the marriage ban, stated that he believes Amendment 1 will pass, but he believes it won’t remain long. “If it passes, I think it will be repealed within 20 years,” he stated. Desegregation was inevitable, and many fought it at the time. Do we really want to look back and be reminded that we voted to enshrine discrimination at a time when equality was becoming mainstream?

9. If your faith compels you to vote in favor of Amendment 1, you are blurring matters of church and state
If we are to write religious ideology into our constitution, where do we draw the line? Do we outlaw tattoos (Leviticus 19:28), divorce (Mark 10:9), and shellfish (Leviticus 11:10)? Do we allow Sharia Law for our muslim citizens? There is a reason why, as Americans, we don't legislate religious ideology. It's a slippery slope.

10. Faith leaders across NC are speaking out against Amendment 1
If you don't believe you can reconcile your faith with your vote against Amendment One, you may want to consider the hundreds of faith leaders from across the state who have pledged to vote against. Many have recorded video messages in which they share how their faith requires they vote against the amendment.

11. People who have devoted much of their lives to North Carolina and its citizens are speaking out against Amendment 1
Many people who have spent their entire lives working to make North Carolina great have spoken out about how Amendment 1 is bad for our state, including NC Libertarian Party Chair J.J. Summerell, Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton, Bev Purdue, Bob Etheridge, Rep. David Price, Russell and Sally Robinson (Russell is the grandson of the NC Constitution's principal drafter), Rep. Bill Faison, Sen. Eric Mansfield, Durham City Council Member Mike Woodard, and Duke Political Science Professor Michael Munger. Do you really believe that all of these proponents of our great state are part of a radical, extremist agenda to destroy the place they call home?

12. Sexuality is not a choice
Sexual orientation is determined by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences. The biological factors related to sexual orientation involve a constellation of genetic factors, as well as brain structure and early uterine environment. The following major medical and professional organizations have concluded that sexual orientation (and gender identity) is not a choice: American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, Royal College of Psychiatrists, and American Academy of Pediatrics. If you don't agree, when did you make the conscious choice to be heterosexual? Should our great state discriminate against people based on their natural traits?

13. Children do just fine in families with same-sex parents
The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychoanalytic Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the Child Welfare League of America, the North American Council on Adoptable Children, and the Canadian Psychological Association are all in agreement: Each has issued reports and resolutions in support of gay and lesbian parental rights. But let's not forget, this amendment also discriminates against single parents and unmarried heterosexual couples and their children.

14. Marriage has not always been defined as a union between a man and a woman
To characterize marriage as "the union between a man and a woman as designed by God," is, quite simply, to freeze the definition of marriage at the point in human history that suits your idea of what marriage should be -- with total disregard for how marriage came about, how it evolved, and how it will inevitably continue to evolve.

15. Less government in our lives
Regardless of political affiliation, Americans seem to agree that we would all like to see less government intrusion in our lives. This is a mantra to Libertarians. Conservatives decry what they see as the Obama Administration's desire to control our health care. Democrats largely stand united against the GOP's desire to control family planning. We all seem to agree on one thing: We need less government intrusion in our lives. Why should we allow the government to decide who we choose to love, who we choose to live with, and how we choose to raise our families? We have the chance on May 8 to send a clear message:

For more information on the harms of Amendment 1, please visit:
Protect All NC Families
Neighbors For Equality

Please donate what you can to help fund television ads to inform North Carolinians about the harms of Amendment 1.

Volunteer to help beat Amendment 1 on May 8:
Protect All NC Families
Neighbors For Equality

Most importantly, vote on May 8. (Are you registered?)

Read about why I am voting against Amendment 1:
Why A Heterosexual, Married, North Carolinian Father Of Three Cares About LGBT Equality

Hi, I'm Randall Terry And I'm Insane

Randall Terry, anti-choice activist and founder of Operation Save America (formerly Operation Rescue), is a freaking lunatic.

Randall Terry, unhinged man

You probably know the guy from his outlandish anti-choice stunts, which have included blockading the entrances to abortion clinics, his protest of Barack Obama's commencement visit to the University of Notre Dame, or his statement that abortion provider Dr. George Tiller 'reaped what he sowed' when he was assassinated in 2009.

You also may know that Randall Terry is actually running for president of the United States. Kind of. Terry's presidency has been more about getting graphic anti-choice ads on television than anything.

Regardless, Randall Terry is on the ballot in 6 Democratic primaries, and on March 6 in Oklahoma, actually managed to swipe a delegate from President Obama, a 'child-killer,' according to Terry.

Terry wasted no time gloating over his Oklahoma feat, releasing the below video, in which he taunts his adversaries (including Obama, Slate, and Jezebel).

What a lunatic, this guy.

Women Who Sing Santorum's Praises

Yesterday, I asked my female Twitter followers and Facebook friends who might support Rick Santorum to explain why they would do such a thing.

Haley & Camille Harris, Santorum girls

After all, this is the man who said he has concerns about women in front line combat because they are too emotional. This is the man who opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest (Make the best out of a bad situation, he says). This is the man who said using contraception is not okay. This is the man who said that single mothers are creating more criminals. This is the man who accuses “radical feminists” of undermining families and convincing women that they could find fulfillment in the workplace.

Rick Santorum, despite what he may say, is not looking out for women's best interest. Rick Santorum prefers a Biblical view of women, and anyone who has read the Old Testament knows women didn't fare too well in that book.

I did not receive an answer from any Santorum supporters, which probably says more about my followers than anything. I'm still waiting for a response.

My feeling is that women supporters of Rick Santorum are responding to a few things which trump any view he has on their abilities, or their autonomy. They are likely responding to his pro-life, Biblical views, which, as many believe, eclipse this business of women's rights.

Perhaps two home-schooled daughters of an Oklahoma pastor can shed some light on the appeal.

Haley, 18, and Camille Harris, 20 have penned a song for Ssantorum's campaign. The video for the "Game On!" has become a viral sensation with nearly 1 million views as of this writing.

The girls sing: "Game on, join the fight/We've finally got a man who will stand for what is right/There is hope for our nation again/Maybe the first time since we had Ronald Reagan/There will be justice for the unborn, factories back on our shores/Where the Constitution rules our land/Yes, I believe Rick Santorum is our man."

Via Today:

Daughters of a pastor in a family of eight, the girls live on four acres with 47 pecan trees. All of the Harris children have been home-schooled, much like Santorum’s kids. The girls say they are best friends, love coffee (though Haley prefers hot chocolate), have never bought a magazine and have never had cable (according to the girls, “Mom and Dad didn’t want to raise hoodlums :)”).
Camille, 20, said she has no desire to watch TV. "Even now, if I had the opportunity, I don’t choose to because they go against my value system. My dad’s like, 'You’re over 18. You can do whatever you want to do.’”

Camille had tried to write a theme song for Santorum before “Game On,” but nothing came. “I couldn’t get anything good or catchy,” she said. “But all of a sudden on Sunday night when someone said, 'Write a song for Super Tuesday,' I said 'I’m gonna write it.' We just prayed and asked God to give us the words and that song came really fast.”

So, there you have it. Perhaps the secret to Santorum's women supporters is the fact that there are way more families like the Harrises than we thought. Those home-schooling, media-avoiding, miracle-seeking, anti-contraceptive families tend to be large, and cut off from other world views. They simply don't know any better.

I realize that sounds awfully simplistic, elitist, condescending, and crass. I also realize that it is a gross generalization.

But I think there's something to it.

Take this comment from a New Yorker reader:

About women supporting Santorum: I too find this baffling, and can only attribute it to some form of Stockholm Syndrome. As someone who grew up among born-again and evangelical Christians in Appalachia, I would hypothesize that women who have accommodated themselves to living an evangelical lifestyle have nothing to gain from questioning the premises of Christian patriarchy. Their lives are more comfortable, less fraught with domestic conflict, if they simply decide to be happy and make the most of their assigned roles. Although to a feminist the trajectory of their lives seems constrained, on a day-to-day basis evangelical women feel productive and empowered by playing a dynamic role in their churches and schools, from which they derive a potent sense of community. Nor are they necessarily barred from having a job. They have avenues for self-expression such as crafts, baking, or book clubs. (If your first reaction is to disdain these, then unless you’re a professional artist you probably have too high an opinion of your own creative outlets.) In fact, when I recall the women I grew up under, they didn’t think men were superior at all; they took the patronizing attitude that men were to be indulged in their masculine delusions. It would be elitist/snobby/condescending/wrong to view such women as passive or merely subservient. How many of us want to challenge the social constructs within which we have created active lives that are reckoned as meaningful? At any rate, this is my best effort to make sense of the women’s vote, which is otherwise unfathomable and preposterous to me.

Let's hope the Harris girls don't go off to public school, or *gasp* an indoctrination mill. They might have a change of heart not unlike another young misguided blond duo.

What Santorum Really Means By Indoctrination

Rick Santorum has said some silly things about higher education over the past week.

Not only did he say that Barack Obama was a 'snob' for wanting all Americans to go to college (funny, since Rick Santorum has a BA, an MBA, and a JD), but he also stated that “62 percent of kids who enter college with some sort of faith commitment leave without it.”

Where to start, right?

Oh yeah, he also called universities "indoctrination mills."

There's a few things going on here. First, we have Santorum's notion that to want kids to be educated and to succeed is snobbery -- all coming from a guy with several degrees. Isn't that kind of like the priest telling his congregation that they're a bunch of sanctimonious pricks for wanting their children to attend church?

Since when have we become a society that values an under-educated society? I have a feeling it has been ever since Barack Obama took office. This is also about the same time that we became a society that looks down on being healthy, boos the golden rule, and cheers for executions.

And where did Rick Santorum get this statistic that 62 percent of kids who enter college with a faith commitment leave without it? The claim is totally bogus.

Via Talking Points Memo:

A slight problem: multiple studies have found that the opposite is true — including the one that Santorum has reportedly been referring to.

A study published 2007 in the journal Social Forces — which PBS reports that Santorum’s claim is based on, although his spokesman didn’t respond to TPM’s request for confirmation — finds that Americans who don’t go to college experience a steeper decline in their religiosity than those who do.

“Contrary to our own and others’ expectations, however, young adults who never enrolled in college are presently the least religious young Americans,” the journal concluded, noting that “64 percent of those currently enrolled in a traditional four-year institution have curbed their attendance habits. Yet, 76 percent of those who never enrolled in college report a decline in religious service attendance.”

Perhaps Santorum got his studies mixed up. A 2006 Harvard study found that 62 percent of college Republicans think “religion is losing its influence on American life.” Well, that's an entirely different thing, Rick. Republicans think a lot of things -- but that doesn't make them true.

The interesting thing about the Harvard study, if this is indeed where Santorum pulled his bogus figure, is that it found the opposite of Santorum's 'loss of faith' claim to be true. It found that “a quarter of students (25%) say they have become more spiritual since entering college, as opposed to only seven percent (7%) who say they have become less spiritual.”

Rick Santorum is scared of secular America. (He's not alone.) He knows that once children leave the nest, where they must think for themselves, they might actually embrace or formulate philosophies and life stances that are not in synch with their parents, or with their parents' faith.

He says he was ridiculed for his beliefs in college (quite frankly, he should've be ridiculed for some of them, such as his denial of evolution):

“I’ve gone through it,” Mr. Santorum said. “I went through it at Penn State. You talk to most kids who go to college who are conservatives, and you are singled out, you are ridiculed.”

“I can tell you personally,” he added, “I went through a process where I was docked for my conservative views.”

If Rick Santorum had his way, children would be home-schooled from kindergarten through graduate school, and would live under the same roof as their parents, and forced to attend church each and every Sunday.  We wouldn't want them to have to learn to defend their ideas about the world, would we?

Now, about those "indoctrination mills." I would ask Rick Santorum this: Is baptizing your child not a form of indoctrination? Is sending your child to vacation bible school not a form of indoctrination? If we are going to be honest with ourselves, we need to agree that there are many forms of indoctrination, and, sure, college might classify as indoctrination in some regards.

However, when we look at what indoctrination actually means, we find that indoctrination "is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned." We also see that "instruction in the scientific method, in particular, cannot properly be called indoctrination, in the sense that the fundamental principles of science call for critical self-evaluation and skeptical scrutiny of one's own ideas, a stance outside any doctrine."

What Santorum means by "indoctrination" is "critical thinking" and "skeptical scrutiny" and "critical self-evaluation" -- things that might lead a young person to question things they have been told.

What Santorum means by "indoctrination" is "discovering that the indoctrination received at home might not stand up to the skeptical scrutiny that is encouraged in a higher learning environment."

Santorum's rhetoric reeks of a man who knows his ideas don't stand up under scrutiny. His stance on evolution reveals quite a bit.

I think there are a lot of problems with the theory of evolution, and do believe that it is used to promote to a worldview that is anti-theist, that is atheist.

This is a man whose biggest problem with evolution isn't that he doesn't have enough data to formulate an opinion -- it's that acceptance of evolution might lead to questioning faith.

Rick, we are indoctrinated at every turn in our lives. Before we can even think for ourselves, we are told which sports teams to root for, which religion we believe in, which political party we align with. When we attend church as young children, we are told that, without a doubt, this particular religion will be our salvation.

If the biggest fear of higher education is that our children might stray from these beliefs once they leave the cocoon, then perhaps we should question the very beliefs we fear will be so easily unraveled.

Rick Santorum Actually Believes The Entire Cosmos Was Created For Homo Sapiens

Rick Santorum, like many humans, has a problem with perspective.

On "Face the Nation," Santorum attempted to clarify his accusations that Obama's theology is "phony":

"I accept the fact that the president is a Christian," Santorum said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "But when you have a world view that elevates the earth above man and says we can't take those resources because its going to harm the Earth, it's just all an attempt to centralize power and give more power to the government."

Santorum said that while Obama believes "man is here to serve the Earth," he believes "Earth is not the objective. Man is the objective."

Silly Rick Santorum.

Here are a few basic scientific considerations:

• The earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old.
• Anatomically modern humans evolved in Africa approximately 200,000 years ago.
• Scientists estimate that at least 99.9 percent of all species of plants and animals that ever lived are now extinct.
• Based upon evidence of past extinction rates, University of Chicago paleontologists David M. Raup and J. John Sepkoski (among others) have suggested that the average longevity of vertebrate species seems to be 2-4 million years.
• In 7.6 billion years, the earth will be swallowed up by the expanding sun.
• According to the Drake Equation, there are "at least 125 billion galaxies in the observable universe. It is estimated that at least ten percent of all sun-like stars have a system of planets, i.e. there are 6.25×1018 stars with planets orbiting them in the observable universe. Even if we assume that only one out of a billion of these stars have planets supporting life, there would be some 6.25×109 (billion) life-supporting planetary systems in the observable universe.

You do the math, Rick.

To think for a minute that man is the objective, you exhibit an embarrassing (and dangerous) level of ignorance about the vastness of time and space.

Someone who is capable of believing that homo sapiens are "the objective" is either deluded by their faith, or incredibly dense (and very likely both).

Mitt Romney Grilled By Gay Vietnam Vet During Stop At NH Eatery

Bob Garon of Ebson, N.H. is a veteran of the Vietnam War. He also happens to be gay.

Garon had an opportunity to ask Mitt Romney a question when Mitt sat down at his table during a campaign stop at a local restaurant.

Mitt had no idea what he was in for.

Watch:

Santorum, Apparently Forgetting Everything He's Ever Said, Says 'Government Control Of Your Lives' Has 'Gotta Stop'

Seriously, someone please have a discussion with Rick Santorum about self-awareness.

Speaking today at CPAC, Santorum actually said this (referring to the Obama contraception flap):

"It's not about contraception. It's about economic liberty, its about freedom of speech its about freedom of religion, its about government control of your lives and its gotta stop!"

For real. He said that.

The same Santorum who said he would invalidate all gay marriages.

The same Santorum who said that the right to privacy as it relates to having consensual sex with another adult in one's own home "doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution."

The same Santorum who said about contraception, "It's not okay. It's a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be."

The same Santorum who said he would "advocate that any doctor that performs an abortion, should be criminally charged for doing so."

The same Santorum who said this:

"They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues.

That is not how traditional conservatives view the world. There is no such society that I’m aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture."

Watch Rick's nutty remarks from CPAC:

Hi, I'm Rick Santorum, And I Have No Self-Awareness

Rick Santorum has been talking a lot about freedom since his trifecta on Tuesday.

Take a look at some of his official tweets following his big day:

"Freedom is at stake in this election. America needs a president who’ll listen to the voice of the people."

"Our freedoms are slowly being eroded by Obama Admn. I will fight to restore them."

A press release from yesterday announced Santorum was "the first and only candidate to sign the Presidential Pledge for Religious Freedom."

If you've been following Rick Santorum for any amount of time, you might be wondering if the man is completely devoid of any self-awareness.

Certainly Rick Santorum does not mean the freedom to wear a condom while having sex:

"One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. It's not okay. It's a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be."

Certainly he can't mean the freedom to have consensual sex with another adult in the privacy of your own home:

And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution."

And he can't mean the freedom for a doctor to practice his or her profession:

“I believe that any doctor that performs an abortion, I would  advocate that any doctor that performs an abortion, should be criminally charged for doing so.”

Clearly, he doesn't mean the freedom to be brown in an airport:

"Obviously, Muslims would be someone you'd look at [in airport profiling]."

The freedom to stay married to the person you legally married? Nah.

When asked if he would make same-sex couples get divorced, Santorum responded, "Well their marriage would be invalid."

The freedom to not have religion shoved down your child's throat in public schools? Nope.

"It's very interesting that you have a situation where science will only allow things in the classroom that are consistent with a non-Creator idea of how we got here, as if somehow or another that's scientific. Well maybe the science points to the fact that maybe science doesn't explain all these things. And if it does point to that, then why don't you pursue that? But you can't, because it's not science, but if science is pointing you there how can you say it's not science? It's worth the debate."

The freedom to terminate a pregnancy under the care of a licensed doctor? Of course not. Santorum pines for the good ol' days of back alley abortions:

Look at what’s happened just in our tolerance for abortion. Fifty years ago…60 years ago, people who did abortions were in the shadows, people who were considered really bad doctors. Now, abortion is something to that is just accepted. [...] This is the erosion. And it happens in the medical profession. It happened very fast.

I'm really curious about the freedoms Rick Santorum believes he represents. It sure sounds like he wants nothing more than to establish a Christian Taliban.

'Golden Rule' Booed By Jesus-Loving GOP Debate Audience

I've written in these pages about the extreme disconnect between the Christian Right and that Jesus fellow they profess to follow.

Nothing, however, could have prepared me for the following segment from the Sunday night GOP debate in South Carolina, in which The Golden Rule was booed.

Pastor Steven Andrew's 'Christian Voting Guide'

How many more props can I cram into this shot?

Pastor Steven Andrew, president of USA Christian Ministries and author of Making A Strong Christian Nation has just published his Christian Voting Guide.

Andrew is one of several evangelical pastors who have recently chastised Franklin Graham and Joel Osteen for saying that it's okay for a Christian to vote for a Mormon.

How exactly does Pastor Andrew think a good Christian should vote?

"God shows Christians who to vote for. He has four main voting requirements," states Andrew.

Every person we vote for is expected to have these Biblical qualities:

1) Rules in the fear of God - Fears God, reverent of God

2) Able - Strength, efficiency, wealth and leader of the army

3) Person of truth - Reliable, stable, faithful, true doctrine

4) Hating covetousness - Hater of unjust gain (bribes and other frauds)

If a person doesn’t have all four qualities, they don’t meet God’s standard. Would you agree that a God-fearing person obeys God’s laws found in the Holy Bible and brings others who fear God into government appointments? An unprincipled person brings the wicked who disobey God in leadership.

Andrew goes on to stress the need for a Christian theocracy:

We are to welcome God to all government, schools and courts. The first act of Congress was to read the Holy Bible and pray in Jesus’ name. We are to bring back the Holy Bible and Christian prayer in schools as the settlers, George Washington and our Founding Fathers did for 355 years (1607 – 1962). We are to have pro-life laws and we are to keep God’s marriage of one man and one woman in lifetime covenant.

He states, "The First Amendment means Christianity only, not other beliefs. This is the intent of our Christian Founding Fathers."

So, if you are a tax-paying Jew, Muslim, atheist, agnostic, Unitarian, Buddhist, Hindu, Wiccan, etc., you're not welcome here.

Obviously making a case for Michele Bachmann, Andrew states, "While God calls men to lead the USA, the Bible shows that if there isn’t a God fearing man, then a God-fearing woman can be chosen as in the book of Judges when Deborah arose, judged and led the people to victory."

Andrew had been pushing Bachmann and Santorum, but with Bachmann out of the running, is left hailing Santorum as the most God-fearing presidential candidate.

Andrew doesn't mince words when analyzing the remaining candidates:

Ron Paul

"Pray for Ron Paul to seek God first, then Christian freedom...Ron Paul is good at exposing corruption and resisting tyranny, as our Founding Fathers say to do. But Ron Paul voted to put homosexual sin in the military. Paul needs to publicly repent for erroneoulsy believing that God gives the right to sin... Prosperity and freedom are the fruit of obeying God. They don’t come by a libertarian belief that wants freedom but not God.

Newt Gingrich

"While Newt Gingrich is not as bad as a Mormon who has a different gospel (Mitt Romney) or Rick Perry who has betrayed the USA, or Barack Hussein Obama who covers Jesus’ cross and name at Georgetown and who says to leave a living baby to die who survives an abortion, Newt Gingrich is not God’s best for the USA.

1) Newt Gingrich endorsed the homosexual and abortion candidate in NY’s 23rd in 2010 instead of Hoffman, who is more God-fearing. Hoffman may have won if Gingrich did what was right before the Lord. On top of this, voter fraud was discovered and Gingrich did not defend Hoffman.

2) Newt Gingrich would not get rid of all “Government Healthcare” that harms Americans with inferior care, higher costs, “death panels” and other non-Christian things.

3) Reports to be confirmed say Newt Gingrich would help illegal aliens who then vote for anti-God and anti-USA issues, like Obama. This means American citizens are harmed.

4) Newt Gingrich filmed with Nancy Pelosi for the hoax of “Climate Change”.

5) Newt Gingrich has been married three times. What are Gingrich’s loyalty and leadership skills?"

Rick Perry
Andrew has many reasons why Perry is unworthy of the Christian vote. Among them:

"Like obama, Perry signed a hom*os*exual activists “Hate Crimes” law that mocks God and favors sinful sexual “orientations” that God and our Founding Fathers forbid." [Note Andrew's lower-case spelling of Obama, repeated elsewhere.]

"Rick Pery said that Texas can secede from the USA, but God wants the USA to unite in Christ not divide. A “president” doesn’t break up the #1 nation in the world."

"Rick Perry mandated that young girls be vaccinated with Gardasil that killed other girls. But wouldn’t obeying God in abstinence protect girls from sexual diseases?"

"Rick Perry refused to stop obama and tsa’s “sexual assault” and groping at Texas airports when a super majority in the Texas Congress wanted to stop the “sexual assualts”. Rick Perry doesn’t stand up for God’s unalienable rights of personal modesty in our Declaration of Independence."

"Rick Perry campaigned for Al Gore."

Mitt Romney

"Mitt Romney is a Mormon. Mormon’s are secretive, exclusive, do not display the cross and deny the real Jesus Christ His Gospel."

"Romney also did “Government Healthcare” like obama’s"

"Brought Massachusetts away from God, with homosexual sin."

Barack Obama
As if we needed to know Andrew's views on Obama, he provides a laundry list of reasons why Obama is not someone real Christians should support:

"According to Jesus Christ we see that Barack Hussein Obama is not a Christian by his fruit. Jesus warns of wolves in sheep’s clothing."

"Covered Jesus’ name and cross at Georgetown"

"Advocates to leave living babies to die who survive botched abortions"

"Has the blood of millions of aborted babies on his hands"

"Mocks God with sexual and homosexual sin"

"Follows Saul Alynski who dedicates books to Lucifer"

"Called Americans “enemies” in October 2010"

"Mocked God and our Founding Fathers by removing the references to God in the Declaration of Independence when quoting it"

"Lied about the USA’s national motto that it wasn’t “In God We Trust”"

"Lied that the USA is not a Christian Nation. To try to separate a nation from God is the greatest evil to a nation."

"Has broken the law: DOMA, War Powers Act, allowed Mexicans 70 miles into Arizona, “czars”, NDAA removing “due process”, no proof of Constitutional eligibility, worked against the USA constitution…"

"Works against the interest of Americans (“Government Healthcare”, “Hate Crimes”, “ENDA”, “Stimulus”…)"

Based on his writings, I believe we can conclude the following about Pastor Steven Andrew:
"Completely batshit."

"Consistently exhibits terrible grammar and a horrible understanding of constitutional law."

"Cherry-picks his scripture and his US history equally."

"Could really use a fact-checker."

"Creepy as hell."