Archives for May 2016

The Obama administration launched another offensive in the battle over public accommodation Friday, telling all public schools to allow students to use facilities based on their gender identity instead of their biological sex, a directive that Liberty Counsel President Mathew Staver says is blatantly unconstitutional and part of a larger Obama goal of rubbing God out of the public square.

Officials at the Justice and Education departments released a letter providing “guidance” as to how school districts should comply with the policy.  The letter also made it clear that states or schools that did not fall in line could face federal lawsuits or a denial of federal education funds.

“Under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, schools receiving federal money may not discriminate based on a student’s sex, including a student’s transgender status.  The guidance makes clear that both federal agencies treat a student’s gender identity as the student’s sex for purposes of enforcing Title IX,” stated the latter.

Staver says the idea that lawmakers considered gender identity in the context of sex discrimination 44 years ago is absurd.

“Common sense says that in 1972, no one was thinking that ‘sex’ included somebody’s fictitious mind games of thinking they are the opposite gender,” said Staver.

Not only does he believe Congress did not intend the expanded definition of sex, but Staver points out that lawmakers have repeatedly defeated attempts to make such a change to Title IX.

“(The Obama administration demand) eviscerates the statute and has nothing to do with its intent.  In fact, Congress, multiple times over the past 10-15 years, has rejected attempts to include sexual orientation or gender identity in any of the federal laws.  They’ve specifically rejected those attempts,” said Staver.

He also urges parents and all citizens to carefully watch how local officials react to the government’s demands.

“If any school buckles to this nonsense, we encourage families and communities to hold those school officials and those school boards accountable for the sexual assaults that no doubt will come in light of these policies and agendas,” said Staver.

While many conservatives fear another long court fight will result in another disappointing decision from the Supreme Court, Staver is confident the administration will lose this battle.

“It absolutely is contrary to the law.  They’re making it up as they go.  They’re going to lose this in a legal challenge,” said Staver.

Nonetheless, Staver is alarmed by the impact of the government pushing this agenda on the nation.

“It shows how radical this agenda is, to accommodate a sexual, evolutionary, anarchist kind of agenda that you can think, therefore you are something that you’re really not, over the well being and interest of students, over the well being, interest and protection of religious freedom.  They really couldn’t care less,” said Staver.

In some states, the threat of withholding federal aid is primarily a hit to programs providing meals to underprivileged students.  Staver says holding that funding as a bargaining chip is especially galling.

“It is the top priority agenda for this administration.  They don’t care whether little boys are girls have their school lunches.  ‘Fine, they’re not going to eat but we’re going to allow boys to go into the girls’ restroom, shower rooms and locker rooms.’  That’s their agenda.  It’s actually very perverted and, frankly, dangerous,” said Staver.

As troubled as he is by this policy effort, Staver says the larger goal of Obama and his allies is even more frightening.

“They want to abolish the concept of gender, so there is no male and there is no female.  It’s all a product of your mind,” said Staver.  “Whatever you want to be then you ought to be treated that way.  That’s Never Never Land.  That’s George Orwell’s ‘1984.’  This is turning reality into some kind of fiction-based living situation,” said Staver.

Ultimately, he says the left is trying to scrub God and morality from American life.

“The reason they want to abolish gender is because they also want to remove any kind of moral construct regarding human sexuality.  Ultimately they want to abolish gender so they can abolish the very notion of the creator God himself, who created you and I in His image.  Male and female, God created you and I, distinctly different yet complementary,” said Staver.

The Justice Department order says any student can identify as the opposite gender of their biological sex with consent from his or her parents and the school must comply.  In addition, the school is not allowed to seek any sort of verification.

“A school may not require transgender students to have a medical diagnosis, undergo any medical treatment, or produce a birth certificate or other identification document before treating them consistent with their gender identity,” the letter reads.

Staver says the government is effectively cheering people on in their mental illness.

“Let’s just be frank.  This is not normal.  This is a mental disorder, just as much as anorexia or bulimia, or even much worse, apotemnophilia, someone who thinks that they are a disabled person inhabiting an able body.  Yes there are people who think that way.  Those are not normal,” said Staver.

He says catering to people struggling with their gender is the same as enabling those other disorders.

“It certainly doesn’t help to suggest that it’s normal.  It’s not, any more than it would be suggestive that, ‘Even though you want to regurgitate your food even though you’re not overweight, that’s okay.  We’re going to do something that protects that.’  That just doesn’t help the individual,” said Staver.

 

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review cheer a federal court ruling that the Obama administration acted unconstitutionally in funding additional assistance for people enrolling in Obamacare.  They also rip the Obama administration for its unconstitutional decree that all public schools must let students use bathrooms and locker rooms according to gender identity rather than biology.  And they shake their heads as Chelsea Clinton’s husband has to close a hedge fund in which he convinced investors to bet on a big Greek economic recovery.

Donald Trump’s meeting with House Speaker Paul Ryan was the talk of Washington Thursday, but a former top Republican official says party unity will only come when Trump reaches out to skeptical Republicans, those same Republicans give him a fair evaluation and party leaders are comfortable with his tone.

The build-up to Thursday’s meeting began days ago, when Ryan told CNN’s Jake Tapper, “I’m not there yet,” when it comes to endorsing Trump.

Following Thursday’s encounter, both Trump and Ryan called the encounter a positive step.  Ryan suggested they agreed on core principles and didn’t talk much about specific issues.  He also said 45 minutes was not enough time to make him ready to formally back Trump but looked forward to future conversations.

Former Republican National Committee Chairman Frank Donatelli, who also served as political director in the Reagan White House, said party unity is a must if the GOP hopes to win in November.

“It’s very, very important.  The parties are very polarized these days and, typically, each party gets 90 percent of the party members that vote in that election.  Anything that falls off even slightly from that is a real problem as far as the nominee is concerned,” said Donatelli.

“It’s not enough for the Republican nominee to have overwhelming support.  They have to have almost unanimous support in order to have enough votes to compete for independents and win the presidential election,” said Donatelli.

Recent polls suggest Trump is improving in his efforts to consolidate GOP support, although he won Tuesday’s Nebraska primary with about 61 percent of the vote despite having no real opposition.  Donatelli says winning over Ryan, who sees himself as an heir to the sunny, free market Reagan legacy would help Trump because a lot of Republicans agree with Ryan on most issues.

Donatelli thinks Ryan approached the meeting well, both in what was discussed and in how he sees the relationship going forward.

“I think Ryan is right to talk about general principles rather than specific proposals.  At least let’s get agreement on general principles as a way of moving forward,” said Donatelli.

” It would not be credible for these men to have one meeting and say, ‘Oh look, we’ve agreed on everything.’  That is not going to satisfy anybody.  It’s the idea of baby steps here.  You have one meeting and narrow the differences.  Then there’s another meeting and maybe there’s a meeting of the minds here where eventually they can all get on board.  It’s not going to happen right away,” added Donatelli.

The greatest galvanizing force for the right is the desire to stop Hillary Clinton from winning the White House.  But Donatelli says that alone won’t bring Republicans together.

“That goes a part of the way but obviously it doesn’t go far enough with Ryan or (Arizona Sen.) Jeff Flake or Mitt Romney or a lot of other Republicans that still have doubts,” said Donatelli.

Donatelli says both sides of the GOP divide need to make overtures to the other, starting with Trump.

“I think it’s up to the nominee and the campaign to unify the party.  Hopefully, that means the candidate and his team is on the phone, calling Republicans, talking to them, encouraging them to be part of the team, not threatening them but trying to build a common set of principles that all Republicans can run on,” said Donatelli.

But he also says the Republicans currently stiff-arming Trump, also need to take action.

“Conversely, it’s up to all Republicans to take a look at the candidate, what his principles are and the tone of his campaign and make an honest judgment as to whether or not they want to be part of that effort,” said Donatelli.

But ultimately Donatelli says Republicans need to follow their conscience, and he says some Republicans are reluctant to formally back a wild card like Trump.

“I think it disturbs him and it disturbs a lot of Republicans if we have a nominee that’s constantly combative and belittling and just not speaking or acting the way a president should act, with grace and with measure and always thinking before they are saying something,” said Donatelli.

He says that issue more than any policy positions are holding back more endorsements, especially from down ballot candidates who aren’t sure how close they should get to Trump.

“On the one hand, they want to be true to the Republican Party and the nominee.  On the other hand, they have their own coalition they have to put together to win, especially in swing states and so-called purple states.  You’re going to see candidates come up with different formulations as to how they try to balance those two objectives,” said Donatelli.

The good news for all sides, according to Donatelli, is that there’s ample time to coalesce.

“We have plenty of time down the road.  The convention’s not for a couple of months.  Let’s keep talking and let’s see if we can get on the same page,” said Donatelli.

While the outcome of the convention in Cleveland is no longer in doubt, Donatelli says that week could still spawn some fierce debates.

“The fact that this is not going to be a contested convention, in the sense that we know who the nominee is going to be, that doesn’t mean there aren’t going to be a lot of controversies at the convention.  There are a lot of platform issues that need to be worked out, probably some credentials fights, some rules fights,” said Donatelli.

Another major issue is who will speak at the convention and trying to nail down what other speakers will say, particularly figures like Sen. Ted Cruz, who spent months locked in a bitter fight with Trump.

“All these issues are still to be negotiated and determined, so I think that the RNC chair and his staff’s work has just begun in this regard,” said Donatelli.

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review are happy to see a corrupt leftist president get the boot – even if it is only in Brazil.  They also practice their shocked faces as the Washington Post says it will dig into every detail of Donald Trump’s life.  And they get a kick out of the frothing media coverage of the Trump-Ryan meeting.

North Carolina Lt. Gov. Dan Forest is firing back at the Obama administration for what he says is the federal government trying to make states conform to its cultural agenda, threatening “extortion” to compel his state to abandon its new public accommodation law and comparing the debate over transgender access to the civil rights movement.

The debate expanded in two major ways this week after Gov. Pat McCrory rejected the Obama administration’s assertion that North Carolina was in violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  McCrory also announced he was asking the federal courts to define what is meant by the discrimination based on sex in the law.  The same day, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the Justice Department was bringing action against the state for denying civil rights to transgenders by requiring them to use facilities based on their sex at birth.

But Lynch didn’t stop there.  She also said the state could be losing considerable amounts of federal assistance if it did not back down.

“We retain the option of curtailing federal funding to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina as this case proceeds,” said Lynch.

Forest is appalled.

“We sued first because they came through the Justice Department and said, ‘Unless you do what we say and repeal this law, we’re going to take away four billion dollars of tax dollars from North Carolina.  We’re going to take away your education Title IX funding.  We’re going to take away your [Housing and Urban Development] funding.  We’re going to take away your transportation funding because we don’t agree with your law,’ even though it’s the same law the federal government has, along with 28 states,” said Forest.

He says he is used to strong arm tactics from the Obama administration, but this reaches a new level.

“For the federal government to tell us now that they think that should be the law of the land, this is really going too far.  Using extortion to do that is a pretty extreme measure, even from this administration,” said Forest.

Forest says schoolkids will suffer the most if Obama and Lynch make good on that promise.

“The Obama administration right now is holding North Carolina children hostage by trying to take away their education funding from the federal level to push a radical, extreme agenda of this administration,” said Forest, who wants Congress to probe assert control over the spending of the agencies the government is using to pressure North Carolina.

While the federal government, many liberal interest groups and the media are hostile toward the North Carolina law, Forest says the vast majority of the people in North Carolina agree with Gov. McCrory and the legislature.  He is also quick to point out that liberals on the Charlotte City Council started this fight, not Republicans in Raleigh.

“Nobody, prior to Charlotte’s ordinance, was worried about a transgender person going in the bathroom.  It was probably happening, people were okay with it and they probably didn’t even notce it.  Charlotte brought up the law.  (The Charlotte ordinance) is unconstitutional and very extreme, so we had to address that,” said Forest.

Most reports contend the Charlotte city ordinance allowed transgenders to use the men’s or women’s facilities based on their gender identity.  Forest says it went much further than that.

“What this Charlotte ordinance actually said is that you would have to take the male and female bathroom signs off the bathroom.  You couldn’t have male and female signs anymore.  Those would have to come down.  They’d all have to be (gender) neutral signs, not just for the government, but for all of the business community as well,” said Forest.

In addition to announcing the lawsuit against North Carolina and threatening to withhold federal funds, Lynch compared the new public accommodation law with the segregation era.

“This is not the first time we have seen discriminatory responses to historic moments of progress for our nation.  We saw it in the Jim Crow laws that followed the Emancipation Proclamation.  We saw it in the fierce and widespread resistance to Brown v. Board of Education,” said Lynch.

“It was not so very long ago that states, including North Carolina, has other signs above restrooms, water fountains and on public accommodations, keeping people out based on a distinction without a difference,” added Lynch.

Forest is disgusted by the assertion.

“Absolutely shameful is what it is,” said Forest.  “These are completely different things.  For her to bring this up as if it’s some great civil rights case in America today is really shameful.  To be painting that picture on the South or on North Carolina or anybody else just shows she doesn’t understand this issue.”

Forest contends a person’s race should never have been used to determine who could use drinking fountains, rest rooms or lunch counters or where people could sit on a bus.  He’s says that’s the opposite of what is happening in North Carolina now.

“That is absolute discrimination and never should have taken place in America,” said Forest of the civil rights era.  “But what bathroom a biological male or female uses in going into a bathroom that has a sign that has male or female on it has everything to do with biological sex.”

While the federal government contends the 1964 law meant to include sexual orientation in it’s references to sex discrimination, Forest says the courts have said North Carolina’s position in correct.

“That’s just not the case.  There are plenty of lawsuits out there in the federal courts that say that is not the case.  The Supreme Court has decided not to rule on that because they don’t believe that’s the case either.  That’s why it’s going to the federal courts now for a decision,” said Forest.

Forest says blurring the lines between the sexes not only infringes on the expectation of privacy, but gives a green light to sexual predators who will use looser standards to their advantage.

“There’s a bunch of nefarious characters out there.  We have 24,000 registered sex offenders in North Carolina.  Don’t give them a loophole.  Don’t give them an opening to walk into a bathroom or a shower or anything like that.  You don’t want to do that.  It defies logic.  It defies common sense,” said Forest.

If North Carolina were to capitulate to the Obama administration or the courts ultimately rule against his state, Forest says there will be far more discrimination then than there is now when it comes to public accommodation in the Tar Heel State.

“What we don’t talk about is who is really being discriminated against.  That’s women and children, who haven’t had a voice in this, the 99 percent of the population of women and children who don’t want a biological male walking into a place where they should have the most security and privacy of all, and that’s in a bathroom, a shower or a changing facility,” said Forest.

 

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review enjoy watching Hillary Clinton continue to lose states to Bernie Sanders.  They also groan as Ted Cruz tells Glen Beck he’d jump back in the race if a path to victory re-emerged.  And they shake their heads as Donald Trump decides that he doesn’t need a data operation to turn out his voters in November and will rely on rallies instead.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch is not only suing the state of North Carolina to force accommodation for transgenders to use the restrooms and locker rooms according to their gender identity, the nation’s top law enforcement officer suggested the debate is reminiscent of the segregation battles of the 1960’s, a contention firmly rejected by one of the nation’s most prominent black ministers.

On Monday, Lynch made numerous direct comparisons between the North Carolina bathroom debate and laws that discriminated against black people just over a half century ago.

“It was not so very long ago that states, including North Carolina, has other signs above restrooms, water fountains and on public accommodations, keeping people out based on a distinction without a difference,” said Lynch.

But one of those most familiar with the civil rights movement, says the analogy is deeply flawed,

“I am outraged at a certain level because I think people are trying to hijack the civil rights movement if you will.  It is not apples to apples.  It’s something else,” said Bishop Harry Jackson.

Jackson is senior pastor at Hope Christian Church and the founder and chairman of of the High Impact Leadership Coalition.  He was a vocal opponent of same-sex marriage when those debates came to Maryland and Washington, D.C.

He says the differences between the two movements are obvious.

“There was a lack of access to education, lack of access to accommodations – the use of restrooms from the perspective of race, not crossing any kind of gender boundaries, public accommodations, hotel rooms,” said Jackson, who also pointed out Jim Crow laws forbid blacks from living in certain areas and made the opportunity for good jobs almost impossible.

The North Carolina law was drafted after the Charlotte City Council required all public buildings and all private businesses to make all restrooms gender neutral.  Lynch says the state law is a solution in search of a problem.  Jackson says there is already evidence that gender identity is a bad measuring stick for assigning restrooms.

“There have been men recently going into women’s bathrooms, exposing themselves.  There is a danger that is already beginning to manifest itself in certain communities,” said Jackson.

He warns Americans that this issue will soon impact everyone.

“The church cannot afford to be asleep.  She’s got to stand up.  She’s got to engage and believing Christians have got to understand this problem is coming to a bathroom near you.  Your kids and grandkids and great-grandkids are going to be effected if we sleep on our watch this time around,” said Jackson.

Jackson believes Lynch is trying to spin this issue away from common sense.

“She’s simplistically thinking, ‘You’re a bigot if you don’t let me invade this particular space,'” said Jackson.

Jackson also wonders how often Lynch and the Obama administration think it’s appropriate for people dealing with gender identity issues to vacillate from one identity to the other.

“How fluid can your gender identity be and the rest of us challenged to comply with the changes or nuances of your behavior.  We’ve got to have people being held accountable to some reasonable conformity,” said Jackson.

In the bigger picture, Jackson says this is less about the specific issue of transgenders than it is about people demanding approval from society for their choices.

“‘I want to do something and therefore it’s okay.  Anything I want to do must be sanctioned by the rest of the culture,'” said Jackson, summing up what he sees as the arguments on the other side of the debate.

“It makes no sense.  It will have terrible fruit in the generations to come and it’s a wrong path for us to go down,” said Jackson.

Despite that bleak assessment, Jackson believes ultimately conservatives will win this battle in the culture war.

“I actually think that common sense will win on this one,” said Jackson.  “We need to fight them step by step by step, based on the fact that there are common sense boundaries and real practical danger.”

Ultimately, he says the fate of this and other debates may well come down to this year’s elections.

“I think we can beat this, especially if we get a conservative president,” said Jackson.

Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are fully on board with the LGBT movement.  Donald Trump has said he believes North Carolina made a mistake in passing the legislation and is fine with people using facilities based on their gender identity.  Jackson nonetheless believes there is still more hope with Trump than with Clinton on the issue.

Jackson also believes that this and many other critical issues will be decided by the Supreme Court and that fact makes this election pivotal as well.

“The Supreme Court justices that are chosen in these next few years will determine whether the Loretta Lynches of the world have the last say or not,” said Jackson.

“Our votes count in this cycle.  Our preaching counts in this cycle.  Our home training counts in this cycle,” he said.

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review are pleased to see a Qunnipiac University poll showing Donald Trump very competitive with Hillary Clinton in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania because a tight race means Democrats have fewer resources to attack conservatives elsewhere on the ballot.  They also discuss the complete economic collapse of Venezuela under socialism as people are killing and eating stray animals and trash off the streets.  And they react to a campaign in Seattle to replace human burial and cremation with human composting.

One of the leading pro-life organizations is fighting back against the Obama administration’s approval for expanded use of the controversial abortion drug combination known as RU-486, calling the government’s decision harmful for women and babies and nothing put a political “thank you” from Obama to his allies in the abortion industry.

The Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, which recently clamped down on e-cigarettes and some tobacco products in order to protect the health of children, is allowing women seeking abortions to take the RU-486 regimen until the tenth week of pregnancy.  Previously, the limit was seven weeks.

RU-486 is a two-drug regimen.  The first starves the unborn baby of nutrients, leading the child to die. Live Action Founder and President Lila Rose says at 10 weeks, that baby is further developed than many realize.

“The heart is beating.  The brain is forming, leg and arm buds.  By the end of the first trimester, the child has all his internal organs and body parts.  He just needs time and nourishment to grow.  You’re talking about a fairly developed pre-born child,” said Rose.

The second drug is even more powerful.

“The second drug induces labor,” said Rose.  “It makes a woman bleed out her entire pregnancy as well as the pre-born child.  That process can take up to two days,” said Rose.

In addition to the FDA giving its approval for RU-486 for an additional three weeks, Rose says it also allows abortion providers to provide less medical supervision.  She says that is a recipe for disaster.

“A teen girl could get these drugs, self-administer the pills and without any parent’s knowledge or consent in many states, be bleeding out her pregnancy in a forced miscarriage without a doctor involved,” said Rose.

According to Rose, the later the drugs are taken in a pregnancy the less likely the second drug is to actually trigger a miscarriage.  In that situation, the patient is then forced to seek a surgical abortion in order to remove the dead child.

Rose says this has nothing to do with health care.  She alleges it’s the Obama administration helping abortion providers line their pockets.

“They were elected in part by Planned Parenthood dollars.  The abortion industry has interests on Capitol Hill.  They have friends at the FDA and they stand to profit.  The later term they can do medical abortion, the less supervision is necessary,” said Rose.

“They can profit more by having fewer nurses, fewer doctors and just hand out pills and then maybe profit again on the other side because if the procedure fails, the women comes back for a second abortion.  All in all, this is a good moneymaker for the abortion industry,” said Rose.

Unsurprisingly, there is fierce debate over safety of RU-486.  When the FDA policy was announced, the American Council of Obstetricians and Gynecologists stated it was “pleased that the updated F.D.A.-approved regimen for mifepristone reflects the current available scientific evidence and best practices.”

Rose points out there is great debate within the council, also known as ACOG, and that the group does not speak speak for OB/GYN’s en masse.

“Many doctors disagree.  That’s why many doctors won’t perform abortions.  A lot of doctors don’t like that FDA is loosening up standards,” said Rose.  “There’s a lot of disagreement in the medical community but unfortunately the pro-abortion interests have a powerful grip over at ACOG,” said Rose.

Members of Congress, particularly Republicans investigation Planned Parenthood and the sale of aborted baby body parts, are demanding more paperwork explaining how the FDA came to this conclusion, but Rose says Congress can’t turn this tide by itself.

“I think a lot hinges on the 2016 election this year,” said Rose, referring to the power government regulators have outside of Congress.  “Ultimately, we really need to look at the presidency and the White House.  We need to get someone in there who cares for women and children and who are not in the pocket of Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry,” said Rose.