Dr. James Dobson Condemns Evil House Inequality Act

Dr. James Dobson:

“In the history of our nation, there have been times when evil was so apparent—and so heinous—that they stand in infamy decades later. They include the Dred Scott Decision on slavery in 1857, and the Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion in 1973. Now, we are faced with another such tragic moment in American history.

A few days ago, May 17th, Democrats in the House of Representatives passed what they call The Equality Act of 2019, which is breathtaking in its scope. If it survives a vote in the Senate, this legislation will represent one of the most egregious assaults on religious liberty ever foisted on the people of this great nation. It therein imposes a thinly veiled death sentence to the First Amendment of the Constitution, and takes away the protections against tyranny handed down to us by our founding fathers. It was this unyielding commitment to religious liberty that led to the American Revolution in 1776. The pastors and the patriots of that day died to free themselves from British imperialism. Thank God for the men who stood courageously against the most powerful military in the world, because freedom meant more to them than their own lives.

Let me speak candidly and passionately to people of faith throughout these United States of America. We must not remain silent as our historic liberties are gutted by Democrats and their friends in the LGBT movement. They will enslave us if they prevail! We must let our voices be heard, first in the U.S. Senate, and then to the world.

Viva liberty! Viva the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Viva biblical values and beliefs. And woe to those who would take them from us.”

In Defense of Liberty

By Victor Riches, The Goldwater Institute
April 18, 2019

Way too many of today’s college students have an alarmingly deficient understanding of the U.S. Constitution. This is particularly true of the First Amendment. Rather than appreciate the inherent beauty and value of free speech, including speech they find disagreeable, many students think they should be perennially shielded from dissenting opinions. Some go so far as to shout down speakers and even resort to violence in order to avoid being subjected to new ideas, much like a baby being weaned off its bottle. However, all is not lost. A recent incident at the University of Arizona shows that there is still hope in the effort to defend the First Amendment.

Until this week, the storyline has largely been the same. Right-leaning speaker is invited to college campus. Student protestors shout the speaker down, depriving him or her of their freedom of speech. University administrators cower. Student protestors face no consequences. Ideas are not heard, public debate is squelched, and the First Amendment is weakened.

One of the most egregious examples occurred in March 2017 at Vermont’s Middlebury College. Charles Murray, a well-known political scientist, was invited by a conservative student group to speak on campus. Rather than listen to his lecture before forming an opinion, more than 100 students instead opted to shout down Murray, pulled fire alarms to stop his speech and violently pushed Murray and his faculty interviewer, causing her to suffer a concussion. The consequences for this violent silencing of speech? A slap on the wrist for 67 students. At the University of Michigan, a debate on Black Lives Matter was effectively shut down when 100 protesters forced their way into the already-at-capacity room, shouting obscenity-laced tirades. And on the other side of the country, UC Berkeley canceled a talkby political provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos following riots by “150 masked agitators,” giving in to the anti-speech activists.

Kowtowing to the mob and denying free speech is never the appropriate course of action. After all, universities exist in large part to prepare young adults for the “real world” – a world of work, bills, responsibilities and, of course, disagreements. When university administrators and faculty cater to the juvenile desire to not have to hear words with which one disagrees, they are doing a monumental disservice to the students themselves as well as the taxpayers who will soon be employing those very same students.

Fortunately, common sense can still prevail on campus. For example, University of Arizona students recently invited two border-patrol agents to speak at a Career Day presentation about their careers in law enforcement. A group of students who claimed to be offended by the agents’ presence set out to disrupt the event and began yelling low-brow insults such as “murderers,” the “murder patrol,” and an “extension of the KKK.” Several protesters even followed the agents to their cars, continuing the chant of “murder patrol” and “We won’t stop until you get off our campus.” The protestors succeeded in thwarting speech. (Stanley Kurtz details the event at National Review Online here.)

What happened next, however, just might be a turning point in today’s campus free speech crisis, as Kurtz explains. “Instead of rolling over, UA campus police filed criminal misdemeanor charges of ‘interference with the peaceful conduct of an educational institution’ against three of the students, while a third was also charged with “threats and intimidation.” UA President Robert Robbins also took a strong stand for the First Amendment by saying, “Student protest is protected by our support for free speech but disruption is not.”

The U of A followed campus free speech legislation developed by the Goldwater Institute and passed into law last year. Our measure is simple: it ensures free expression at public universities and establishes consequences for those individuals who forcibly inhibit the free speech rights of others. Just like in the real world.

It is this defense of free speech by the U of A that could help turn the tide back in favor of the preservation of First Amendment freedoms on college campuses. But if not, if other universities continue to cave to the whims of anti-free speech zealots, the value of our universities as institutions of higher learning will surely die a slow death. And the constitutional rights we all hold so dear will diminish with them.

Victor Riches is President and CEO of the Goldwater Institute.

Declaring Sage Grouse Endangered Species Raises Concerns in Arizona

Big Government calling again. Now it wants to list sage grouse as an endangered species, restricting access to 167 million acres of land. Arizonans are rightly concerned because it could have a huge, detrimental impact on our state. Some of them visited our congressional delegation in Washington, D.C. Here’s the story in the Mogollon Rim News, by Cindy Sietz-Krug; it’s a worthy read.

 

Mrs. Bill Clinton: ‘We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good’

Now that Mrs. Bill Clinton has wrapped up the Democrat Party nomination for the presidential election, it’s time to examine her past and who she really is:

As U.S. Senator from New York, Mrs. Bill Clinton’s chief accomplishment was winning a debate against her Republican election opponent.

As secretary of state, she intentionally lied when she insisted America’s consulate in Benghazi was attacked because of a Youtube video that was critical of Islam.

Mrs. Clinton is currently under investigation for using a private server to store classified government documents.

Also, Clinton is a member of the “National Organization for Women Who Approve of Elected Male Officials Who Have Abused Women but Support Abortion Rights.”

Clinton supports Planned Parenthood, which is on defense in several courts for refusing to protect under-age girls from rapists, under investigation for defrauding the government of millions of dollars and under investigation for illegally selling baby body parts. She says abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

She said the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in favor of Hobby Lobby’s religious freedom is a slippery slope for women – even though the nation has no history of forcing employers to violate their consciences and provide abortion drugs.

Fought in 1993 for the U.S. to fast-track government approval of RU-486, a dangerous drug which has killed several women and girls and caused complications for many more.

She supported the grisly, barbaric practice of partial-birth infanticide.

She supposedly supports women’s rights, but paid her women staffers at the Department of State less than men.

She is a big fan of the late Saul Alinsky and practices his Rules for Radicals – the book he dedicated to Lucifer — in all of her political activities. He invited her to work for him as a community agitator. Clinton says she believes in tactics over principles.

As First Lady, Mrs. Clinton attempted – in secret meetings — to force socialism and government medical insurance on the nation, but failed.

She made up lies to try to justify the firing of White House Travel Bureau employees, allegations which were proven false.

She said the unborn have no rights.

Mrs. Clinton enabled her husband’s rampant womanizing by trashing the women who were used and abused by himd – rather than sympathizing with them and acknowledging  a very serious problem.

Clinton wanted the U.S. to apologize for slavery.

She supported the Defense of Marriage Act, then said she “evolved” on same-sex marriage.

Also, she supports “hate” crimes laws. Even though all crimes are commited with contempt for the victim.

She wrote an op-ed claiming Common Core was recycled Clinton policy from the 1980s and 1990s. She opposes school vouchers.

Clinton believes in so-called manmade “global warming” and supports the Kyoto Treaty and cap and trade policy.

Plagiarized the title of the book “It Takes a Village.” Author Jonah Goldberg said of the book: “No more thorough explication of the liberal fascist agenda can be found than in Hillary Clinton’s best-selling book, “It Takes a Village.” All the hallmarks of the fascist enterprise reside within its pages.” Clinton learned from Marian Wright Edelman how to use children as propaganda tools for her ideological agenda: childhood is a crisis, and the government must come to the rescue. “I cannot say enough in support of home visits,” Clinton said.

Big government advocate.

Clinton said Wall Street donates to me because I rebuilt them after 9/11.

She voted against voter ID, though the Democrats require photo ID to attend their national conventions.

Clinton wants tough gun control and says gun manufacturers should be subject to lawsuits (for individuals’ behavior).

She says that because she is a woman she is a political outsider.

If elected president, Mrs. Clinton says Bill Clinton will advise her and represent the U.S. abroad.

She considers herself a member of the “Christian Left.” It’s a religion whose “god” is government.

She voted against the confirmation of John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

Clinton is proud of the controversial nuclear agreement with Iran in which the U.S. got taken for a ride.

As a U.S. Senator, Mrs. Clinton delivered a half-billion dollars in earmarks to 59 corporations. Then 64 percent of those corporations donated to her campaign.

She said she flew into Bosnia in 1996 and ran through sniper fire on the ground. Video showed a calm, peaceful deplaning, and Clinton later called the lie a “minor blip.”

The Clinton Foundation has accepted millions of dollars in exchange for political favors by Hillary and Bill Clinton, and it is still happening today. The Clintons have accepted illegal campaign cash from convicted criminals like Mauricio Celis, of Mexico, and Norman Hsu, of Hong Kong. They pardoned Mark Rich after his wife gave them a huge donation

In his book, “Liberal Fascism,” Jonah Goldberg wrote: Clinton “is a representative figure, the leading member of a generational cohort of elite liberals who brought fascist themes into mainstream liberalism. … What follows, then, is a group portrait of Hillary and her friends – the leading proponents and exemplars of liberal fascism in our time.”

She was offered an internship in the Berkeley office of attorney Robert Truehaft, a communist who fought for the Stalinist faction the California labor movement.

As an attorney in Arkansas, Mrs. Clinton wrote articles in favor of children’s “rights” to divorce their parents. Goldberg wrote: “Hillary Clinton’s writings on children show a clear, unapologetic, and principled desire to insert the state deep into family life – a goal that is in perfect accord with similar efforts by totalitarians of the past. … She condones the state’s assumption of parental responsibilities … because she is opposed to the principle of parental authority in any form.” She believes families hold children back and the state sets them free. “Hillary Clinton’s ideas are, in general, fascist.”

Hillary’s guru was Rabbi Michael Lerner, who authored The New Socialist Revolution. He wrote of the coming socialist take-over.

One of Hillary Clinton’s most outrageous statements: “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

 

Sen. McCain in Lockstep with Obama on Drafting Women for Combat

By Tony Perkins, President
Family Research Council

After the last seven and a half years, it’s safe to say that the greatest threat to our military is the administration in charge of it. The legacy of the Obama administration will not be advancing the war against global jihad, but rather advancing the culture war — which started with the toppling of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and continued on to the latest phase of the military’s sexual revolution: open transgenderism and opening the draft to women. In this administration, gender isn’t just being redefined in bathrooms, but on battlefields, where this president seems all too content to assign America’s wives and daughters to the most dangerous ground combat units in the world.

And unfortunately, he’s had plenty of help. In the Senate, where members are debating the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Navy veteran John McCain (R-Ariz.) gave the effort a helping hand by including an amendment into the bill from three female Republicans, Senators Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Joni Ernst (Iowa), and Deb Fischer (Nebr.), that would require women to register for selective service — a decision that even his primary challenger couldn’t believe. Dr. Kelli Ward, who’s trying to unseat the longtime senator, is already making McCain’s position a campaign issue. Like most parents, she can’t imagine a nation ordering her child to war. “I have a 20-year-old daughter, Katie, and when I think of her being forced to go into combat, especially in the Middle East against the barbarians who are there. Who are basically salivating at the prospect of getting their hands on our young women… I have no qualms about women who want to volunteer and who want to go and do whatever they want to do in our military — but to force them to a draft is unacceptable in my opinion.”

As a father of three girls, I couldn’t agree more. I will support my daughters if they decide to serve in the military, but I will not stand by if the government tries to draft them in the military. What does it say about a nation that sends its mothers and daughters to fight its battles?

In part, this is all the unfortunate byproduct of opening infantry and other front line positions to women, which Defense Secretary Ash Carter approved earlier this year over the objections of military leaders. When the DOD removes the barriers to women serving in all positions, it removes most barriers to drafting them as well. And while some senators seem either oblivious to the risks or too frightened to fight the political correctness, plenty of conservatives are standing up to the members of both parties who want to use our military as the laboratory for social change.

“I cannot in good conscience vote to draft our daughters into the military, sending them off to war, and forcing them into combat,” Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) argued. Together with Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah), Cruz is doing everything he can to strip the language out of the high chamber’s NDAA. He’ll have the support of more than six dozen conservative leaders, veterans, and activists — including FRC’s Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin (U.S. Army-Ret.). In a letter representing hundreds of thousands of American families, the group urged every member of the Senate to join Mike Lee in pushing back on the real war on women.

“We strongly support the heroic, capable, and honorable women who choose and will serve our country in the military…” the group writes. “There are exceptional women who are capable of meeting or exceeding the combat standards put forth by each branch. We support them as we do all individuals willing to put their lives on the line for the greatest nation in the history of the world. However, the female draft discussion should revolve around combat readiness, efficiency, and national security, and weeding through applicants that are overwhelmingly biologically unable to meet combat standards would be a logistical nightmare and would force the lowering of combat standards. The capabilities of these rare women should not mean all appropriately aged women are involuntarily eligible for combat.”

Not to mention, they write, “Women are not clamoring for this ‘opportunity.’ Only 15 percent of our active-duty military forces are women. We find it demeaning to suggest that women who have instead chosen to serve our nation in other civilian roles — such as manufacturing, commerce, medicine or even caring for their children — are not contributing to our nation. They are indeed!” At the very least, this issue deserves to be a standalone bill, debated out in the open after a thorough and transparent review. Congress needs to decide: Is the military’s goal to be the great societal equalizer — or the most lethal fighting force in the world? Contact Republican Senators Kelly Ayotte (202-224-3324), Joni Ernst (202-224-3254), and Deb Fischer (202-224-6551), and let them know that it’s one thing for our daughters to choose to fight and quite another to force them to.

Arizona Joins in Federal Lawsuit against Obama’s Mandate Putting Children at Risk

Attorney General Mark Brnovich and Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Diane Douglas today announced that they have joined nine other states in a federal lawsuit to challenge President Obama’s mandate requiring all public K-12 schools to open up boys’ and girls’ locker rooms and restrooms to students of the opposite sex, based on student perceptions of their “gender identity.”

Since the president has threatened to deny federal funding to all schools that object to this outrageous decree,  Arizona has joined Texas, Alabama, Louisiana, Maine, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin in a lawsuit filed in the United States Court for the Northern District of Texas. The lawsuit is focused on who should set these sensitive policies – the federal government via executive order or states and local school districts. The challenge seeks declaratory relief against a number of federal agencies in order to block the implementation of the administration’s unconstitutional interpretation of the law. The Heber-Overgaard Unified School District has also joined the state’s lawsuit as a plaintiff.

“President Obama has no business setting locker room and restroom policies for our schools,” said Attorney General Brnovich. “Deciding how to protect our children and preserve their privacy, while balancing these complicated issues, is best done locally and not by some knee-jerk decree from Washington.”

“When Arizona students attend school, they deserve a safe environment that is free from bullying and discrimination, regardless of their gender identity,” said Superintendent Douglas. “I know that our districts and schools have policies in place to ensure that is the case. The fact that the federal government has yet again decided that it knows what is best for every one of our local communities is insulting and, quite frankly, intolerable.”

On May 13th, the president issued so-called “significant guidance” to K-12 schools nationwide detailing how transgender students should be granted access to Title IX facilities including restrooms, locker rooms, and showers. The guidance came with the threat of withholding federal funding if schools are found by the U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice to be out of compliance.

Our First Arizona Congressional Endorsement Goes to …

There’s a crowd running for the Congressional seat of the retiring U.S. Representative Matt Salmon. A large crowd.

Among those listed on the Politics1 website are:

Andy Biggs (R) – State Senate President, Ex-State Rep. & Attorney
Alex Finter (R) – Mesa City Councilman, Ex-Mesa Mayor, Businessman & Retired Firefighter

Christine Jones (R) – Attorney, Ex-Internet Executive & ’14 Gov. Candidate
Bryan Martyn (R) – Ex-State Parks Dir., Ex-Pinal County Supervisor & Iraq/Afghan War Veteran
Justin Olsen (R) – State Rep., Tax Analyst & Ex-Congressional Aide

Russell Pearce (R) – Ex-State Senate President, Ex-State Rep., Retired Police Officer & National Guard Veteran
Bob Robson (R) – State Rep., Ex-Chandler City Councilman & Insurance Agent
Scott Smith (R) – Ex-Mesa Mayor, Businessman & ’14 Gov. Candidate

Don Stapley (R) – Ex-Maricopa County Supervisor & Marketing Consultant

Jay Tibshraeny (R) – Chandler Mayor, Ex-State Sen. & Ex-Chandler City Councilman
Kelly Townsend (R) – State Rep., Businesswoman & Navy Veteran
Stephen Viramontes (R) – Businessman
Bob Worsley (R) – State Sen. & Ex-SkyMall CEO

At this early point, we must endorse State Senate President. He’s a fine man and will represent everyone in the district well. There are other deserving candidates, but we can only endorse one.

Voting for Cruz

I just voted for the leader of America’s conservative movement.

I just voted for the man who will not compromise with the Republican establishment to gain favor.

I just voted for the man who will stand up to those who don’t have your best interests at heart — no matter their party affiliation.

I just voted for the man who refuses to go along to get along.

I just voted for the man who’s immune to “Potomac Fever.”

I just voted for the man who’s policies will benefit leftists, conservatives and people in the mushy middle.

I voted for a man who will restore America’s greatness and strengthen our resolve and our national defense.

I voted for the best man out there: U.S. Senator Ted Cruz. I urge you to do the same. Your vote will be well spent.

 

GOP’s Future Riding on Defeating Obama’s Supreme Court Nomination

I have been a registered Republican since I turned 18, a long, long time ago.

That will change if Senate Republicans do not defeat President Obama’s nomination to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died over the weekend.

If the Republicans do not defeat his nominee, I will be a registered “Independent” before the sun goes down.

President Obama is not willing or capable of nominating anyone remotely close to being a centrist or a strict constructionist. He is a hardcore leftist and will make every effort to strong-arm his kind of radical justice to tip the balance of the Court.

Furthermore, you can place a bet on this: before this year is over (perhaps soon), Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will retire. And then President Obama will nominate a much younger person, who could be a fixture on the court for 30 or 40 years, to replace her. He will not leave it to chance for a potential Republican successor to the White House to nominate someone who isn’t cut out of the same ACLU mold as Justice Ginsburg.

And if you do the right thing, GOP Senators, and defeat Obama’s nomination, then do it again and defeat his subsequent nominee(s).

GOP, you are fighting for your life here. Do the right thing. I doubt that I am the only longtime Republican who will throw in the towel on you if you do not take a strong stand and defeat the wrong kind of nominees to the Supreme Court.

Freedom in America in the Balance

America has lost one of its greatest defenders of freedom. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has tragically died at age 79 — leaving leftists salivating for a complete capture of the Supreme Court.

And if the Supreme Court swings to the Left, your freedom will go with it.

A district judge in Texas said he thinks there will be no action on a nominee to replace Scalia, but that is naïve thinking.

Of course President Obama and his fellow travelers will do everything they can to seize this opportunity to put judicial activists in complete control of America’s judicial system, from the very top on down.

Our only hope is to convince U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham and other Senate Republicans to vote down any nominee Obama presents. These people have let us down before and confirmed two nominees. They should not make it a third.

There is absolutely no doubt that Obama will try to strong-arm a radical nominee through the confirmation process. He will try to intimidate squishy Republicans into doing his bidding. Obama will not nominate anyone close to moderate. He detests the U.S. Constitution, and he sees a clear path to re-writing it now.

We citizens must arise and make our voices heard to every Republican in the U.S. Senate to assure the first nominee is defeated. And then the second, and any others, as well.