New 'Conservative Gay' Group - Same Old Objective

From OneNewsNow
By Jim Brown


A conservative activist warns that a new group is pushing a "stealth gay agenda" within the Republican Party.

A new 527 group called GOProud, formed by former members of the Log Cabin Republicans, says it will represent "gay conservatives and their allies," and unlike Log Cabin will focus entirely on federal issues and elections.

Jimmy LaSalvia, the executive director of GOProud, says the organization will support legislation traditionally pushed by homosexual activists, but also speak out on how the Obama administration's tax policy negatively affects homosexual couples.

Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, says although it will go by a different name, GOProud will be carrying out the same mission of the Log Cabin Republicans.

"This is all about promoting the acceptance of homosexuality within the GOP under the guise of so-called 'conservatism,'" says LaBarbera. "The fact is [that] homosexuality is not a conservative issue, it's not a family issue -- and this is all about changing the pro-family platform of the GOP."

LaBarbera says if homosexuals are conservative on economic issues, they can vote Republican, but if the party wants to remain pro-life and pro-family, it cannot be promoting homosexuality and abortion.

Homosexual Republican Group Calls Pro-Family Activists "Domestic Terrorists"

From LifeSiteNews.com
By Kathleen Gilbert

A homosexualist Republican group is lobbying GOP chairman Michael Steele to turn a deaf ear to pro-family activists, who the group leader labeled in a letter "Anti-American" and "domestic terrorists." James Ensley, President of the Georgia Log Cabin Republicans (LCR), made the comments after the pro-family group, Americans for Truth, petitioned Steele to work to return the GOP to its conservative roots and protect true marriage.

"I want to urge you not to allow small biggoted [sic], anti-American and anti-Christian fringe groups such as Americans for Truth to influence you," wrote Ensley in a letter addressed to Steele.

"Groups like Americans for Truth simply want to divide Americans, and truthfully their group would be more welcome as a mainstream Nazi Germany organization, than an organization which provides any value at all in 21st Century America," Ensley continued.

Ensley said he hoped Steele would support the LCR, a radically homosexualist group, "and not listen to the radical Christian extremist domestic terrorist groups such as Americans for Truth."

Log Cabin had praised Steele's election as chairman of the GOP last month, saying the former Maryland lieutenant governor "believes in a big tent GOP" and "is an inclusive leader who will bring a new energy and a new vision to the GOP at a critical time." Following Log Cabin's endorsement of Steele, Americans for Truth of Homosexuality (AFTAH) petitioned Steele to strengthen the GOP's conservative roots by protecting marriage as between one man and one woman.

WorldNetDaily (WND) reports that the Georgia Republican Party responded to Ensley's inflammatory rhetoric, stating, "While a healthy debate on the issues can help strengthen us as a party, to use the word 'terrorist' to describe those that disagree with you is not appropriate." Georgia GOP spokesman Doug Reineke emphasized that the Log Cabin Republicans were an independent group not officially associated with the Georgia Republican Party.

Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) "really have an anti-Christian animus, an anti-Christian bigotry about them, which would actually stoop to calling us ... terrorists," AFTAH President LaBarbera told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN).

"We see the same trend: this Log Cabin group is seated as if it's a hugely important constituency to the GOP, and what I'm trying to tell people is: 'Look, these guys have 20,000 members nationwide - 20,000,'" La Barbera said. "It's a tiny organization that's not worth losing millions and millions of conservatives, pro-life, pro-family Republicans over."

After Californians voted into law Proposition 8, adding to the state constitution the true definition of marriage, LCR sent an amicus brief to the California Supreme Court arguing that the voter-approved amendment should be overturned because it denies a "fundamental right" to same-sex "marriage."

"If you're crusading to overturn the popular will of California voters on defending marriage between a man and a woman - to me, don't call yourself a Republican," LaBarbera told LSN. "That's a radical thing to do - even some gays don't say we should overturn that vote. There's really nothing distinguishing them - when it comes to the hardcore homosexual activism - they're just like the Democratic gay activists. That's what they value most highly. "

Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute also condemned Ensley's words, stating: "It appears that James Ensley just came out of his bigot closet, hurling pernicious charges - with no evidence - at not only Mr. LaBarbera but also at countless others who share the view that homosexual behavior is immoral behavior." (See: http://www.illinoisfamily.org/news/contentview.asp?c=34271)

Both AFTAH and the Illinois Family Institute are encouraging followers to urge Steele to oppose the homosexualist agenda.

To contact GOP Chairman Steele:
Email: chairman@gop.com

Is GOP Heading Down the Wrong Path?

From OneNewsNow
By Jim Brown

The Family Research Council is expressing frustration that some of the new leaders of the Republican Party want social issues like abortion and same-sex marriage to take a back seat to an agenda of smaller government and lower taxes.

New National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions of Texas recently spoke at a fundraising dinner for the Dallas Log Cabin Republicans, a homosexual group that supports same-sex marriage. Sessions reportedly said the GOP can no longer run on just "guns, God, gays [and] taxes." David Nammo, executive director of Family Research Council Action, believes Sessions is heading down the wrong path.

"People are trying to rebrand the GOP; they're trying to find a course for the future. They want to get back in power, and many of the voices that the GOP is listening to is [sic] telling them we need to be moderate, we need to jettison the social conservative issues, we need to not talk about life or marriage," he contends. "And if that is what the direction of the GOP is going to be, I think they're going to find themselves in the minority party for many years to come."

Nammo contends FRC is even more concerned about the strategy of rising Republican stars such as former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele and South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford. Steele, who may be in line to chair the Republican National Committee, recently told NPR that the GOP needs to be more inclusive of groups like the Log Cabin Republicans. Sanford, a potential 2012 presidential candidate, said recently at the Republican Governors Association meeting in Florida that the GOP has alienated younger voters with its intolerance on homosexual issues.

My 'mild' Opposition to Condi Rice for VP

Secretary Rice administered the oath of office for the global AIDS coordinator, homosexual activist Mark Dybul, while Dybul's domestic partner held the Bible.

From WorldNetDaily

By Janet Folger

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is making the rounds vying for vice president. Last week, she paid a visit to Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform coalition meeting. I quit going to that meeting about a decade ago when Ann Stone of "Republican's for Choice" sat three seats away from me straining to hear our pro-life activities so she could try and stop them. Some tents are just too big.

By the way, Norquist, who often describes his position as "guns good, taxes bad" (something upon which most conservatives agree), after speaking for the Dallas Log Cabin Republicans, might want to update his introduction: "Homosexuality good, Marriage bad," since his event was the biggest fundraiser of the year for the group that fought against marriage while it was on the Texas ballot in 2005. I like to strategize with people who want the same things – the very reason I don't attend meetings at Obama headquarters. But I can certainly understand why Condoleezza stopped by.

I am a Republican because of the principles in the party spelled out in the platform. I will remain one until the Republican Party ceases to stand for my beliefs, including the basic principles of life, marriage, less government and a strong defense. And when candidates violate these basic principles, I simply will not vote for them – even for vice president.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described herself as "mildly pro-choice." Let me first say, there is nothing "mild" about having your arms and legs ripped off your body in that "choice" we call abortion. Use any rhetoric you'd like, if you favor abortion, you still have a dead kid – 4,000 of them a day, actually, killed in the most non-mild ways imaginable.

Nothing particularly "mild" about Stephen Douglas being "pro-choice" when it came to slavery, either. No, the Republican Party was the one to stand against slavery even when candidates tried to hide behind the "pro-choice" (for the slave-owner) rhetoric.

Washington Times White House correspondent Bill Sammon pressed Rice, "But it sounds like you do not wish to change the laws that now allow (abortion). ..."

Rice responded, "Well, I don't spend my entire life thinking about these issues. … What I do think is that we should not have the federal government in a position where it is forcing its views on one side or the other."

If Lincoln held that position on slavery, we'd probably still have slave states today. We certainly wouldn't have an African-American secretary of state, that's for sure.

Beyond being wrong on the prerequisite issue of life, you won't believe what else she's wrong on. Austin Ruse, president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, summarized Rice's activities as head of the State Department with a Dec. 28, 2006, letter protesting the U.S. vote to give three radical homosexual groups official U.N. status.

Among the homosexual groups who were granted official "NGO (non-governmental organization) U.N. status was the Danish National Association for Gays and Lesbians, which supports homosexual "marriage," forced homosexual adoption and laws that would force churches to "bless" homosexual unions. Under Rice's direction, the U.S. also voted to recognize the International Lesbian and Gay Federation, which was linked to the North American Man/Boy Love Association and has refused to condemn adult-child sex.

Nothing "mild" about pedophilia, either. Forget going after child molesters; let's give them official status at the U.N.! Good one, Condi.

Then, on Oct. 10, 2006, Secretary Rice administered the oath of office for the global AIDS coordinator, homosexual activist Mark Dybul, while Dybul's domestic partner held the Bible. Ironic, isn't it? Too bad they never opened it. Dybul will oversee how $15 billion of our hard-earned tax dollars gets spent. Think of how you could further your agenda if your budget was $15 billion. I'd include the link to the homosexual publication that documents this, but it's laden with porn. What a shock.

Rice then introduced first lady Laura Bush to Dybul's domestic partner's mother as Dybul's "mother in law." This is only "mildly" at odds with the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (which even President Clinton signed) declaring that the federal government shall not recognize "marriage" between two men. Obviously, Secretary Rice doesn't "spend her entire life thinking about federal law" on that issue, either – "mildly speaking."

Seems Rice is so anxious to recognize homosexual "marriages" that she can't even wait for her radical homosexual U.N. efforts to take effect. Maybe she'd do better at Obama headquarters.

Not to mention her "road map for peace," which has "mildly" negative consequences for the survival of Israel, forcing the Jewish state to give up even more strategically significant land for promises of "peace" from "mild-mannered" terrorists and their mildly fanatical pursuit of world domination and the eradication of Israel from existence.

On my radio program yesterday, I was questioned about exposing the secretary of state's position without first going to her directly. Oh, I've already done that. I asked her to re-examine her radical abortion-on-demand position when I saw her at the inaugural ball back in 2001. I didn't have time to get to the rest.

Let me just summarize it for you: I am categorically, vehemently, emphatically and intensely opposed to Condoleezza Rice for vice president … to put it "mildly."