Add this to the list of lies that Mrs. Mamalogues spews out daily. She is falsely claiming that "our religious freedoms are under attack" baloney that Conservative Christians spew out.
Now various reports state that the suspect, 28 year-old Floyd Corkins II, shouted disagreements with FRC's Christian stance on same sex marriage before opening fire. He reportedly carried with him a Chick-Fil-A bag and other restaurant paraphernalia, and posed as an intern to gain access to the FRC. The AP reported that Corkins was a volunteer at a LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered) center:
David Mariner is executive director of The DC Center for the LGBT Community. He says Corkins had been volunteering at the center for about the past 6 months. Mariner describes Corkins as “kind, gentle and unassuming.”
The reports of Corkins shouting disagreement with FRC before opening fire explains why authorities felt the need to assemble a joint task force and bring in the FBI to investigate. By progressive definitions, you could argue it was a "hate crime." It's easy to brush aside this incident as one act of a crazy man until you consider the past two weeks. The Family Research Council is affiliated with Chick-Fil-A. Chick-Fil-A came under fire due to the free speech of CEO Dan Cathy by militant anti-Christian and anti-free speech activists. They further attacked Chick-Fil-A, accusing them of supporting Ugandan gay-killing via a resolution they claimed the FRC had lobbied to kill.
Their claims were wholly inaccurate and debunked here. The FRC lobbied to change the language of the resolution, they did not oppose the resolution. Anti-Christian activists, under the guise of gay rights, ignored the truth and concocted a smear claiming that FRC lobbied to support the death of gays in Uganda. (It's ironic, considering the majority of these same anti-Christian activists voted for the administration who endorsed a group, the Muslim Brotherhood, which does rule that gays are to be killed via capital punishment simply for being gay.)
Religion is under attack in the United States, but until now, it wasn't meant literally.
Excuse me, Dana!? The FRC DID support Uganda's "Kill The Gays" Bill, and you are still lying about it. And critics of the Family Research Council are not "Anti-Christian." Also, I'm sure religion is NOT "under attack" in the US, unless you're a brainwashed religious right kool-aid drinker who believes whatever their favorite hosts and preachers spout off as the gospel truth.
The real facts about Loesch's hateful deceptions about Uganda's asinine bill, from JoeMyGod.blogspot.com:
FACT CHECK: The FRC lobbied to change the language of the Uganda resolution because (according to them) denouncing the executions of homosexuals constituted "pro-homosexual promotion" because of a clause associating "human rights" with "gay rights." Those are the FRC's exact words, which are available for public viewing on their federally-filed lobbying disclosure form. They didn't have to explicitly oppose the bill because they knew that their objection to its wording would be enough to kill it thanks to FRC-friendly GOP House members who then voted to "refer it back to committee," where it has languished for the past two years. However you want to spin it, the actions of FRC lobbyists did indisputably prevent the House from condemning Uganda's still-pending "kill the gays" bill.
This past weekend, KFTK radio host, CNN "Contributor", and Big Journalism Editor-In-Chief Dana Loesch made the headlines... for negative reasons as expected. She and her husband were already in hot water for their actions, such as having Chris Loesch perform a racist rap video at CPAC Friday.
She bullied a journalist for having the audacity to ask Andrew Breitbart over the exclusion of GOProud at this year's CPAC. Dana The Devil told Liz Glover that "she wasn't being ladylike".
Glover defended herself from the charge that her questioning consisted of an “op-ed” by reminding Breitbart that “My stuff was on BreitbartTV last week!”
Breitbart paused, and asked, “How do you get your eyes to do the pinwheel thing?”
“That’s really sweet,” Glover replied, “picking on reporters.”
At this point, Dana Loesch tagged in, and told Glover to “act like a lady,” and that she needed to “up (her) game.”
Breitbart waded back in momentarily, then walked off, leaving Loesch to scold Glover for the “faulty premise” of her questions. While Breitbart’s split with GOProud is arguably justified, though, the ACU’s decision to exclude them far predated the outing of the Perry staffer.
Glover stood her ground, and turned her focus on Cynthia Yockey, who wrote, for The Advocate, that LGBT equality would “come from the right.”
Who's the bully(-ies) now? It's obviously not Glover, who asked the question to Breitbart.
Loesch also confronted the Occupy DC group for a second day in a row.
All of this happened after an LA occupier gave a good but disingenuous show of wanting discourse between the astroturfed, violent occupy movement and the tea party movement. An hour later they were screaming “f**k you!” and other obscenities at CPAC attendees. So much for discourse.
Media endorsed and encouraged the occupy movement with some of them even joining it outright. The only reason progressive media is offended by Breitbart calling out the occupiers is because it’s just as much an indictment of them as it is of Occupy.
Dear Ms. Loesch, it's the Teabagger movement that's astroturfed, not the OWS movement. And the OWS movement is largely peaceful.
At the pro-1% slanted "Tea Party vs. OWS" segment of CPAC, Loesch, Stefano, and others baselessly accused the OWS Movement of "anti-Americanism," "flag defecators," "and AstroTurfed."
Unlike their leftist counterparts in the “Occupy” movement, Tea Party activists do not need to be paid or coerced into advancing their ideas, free market activists said during one of the closing panels at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).
Dana Loesch, Editor-in-Chief of BigJournalism.com, told audience members that progressives operate from a false assumption that says Tea Party activists will not demonstrate without offered some kind of inducement. In reality, she said, they actually describing themselves. Occupy members who were demonstrating outside of the CPAC conference in D.C. acknowledged that were being paid $60 to be there.
“It always amazes me how progressives think that conservatives can’t get organized or demonstrate without getting paid,” Loesch said. “They do it for free because they believe in it.”
Amy Kremer, chair of the Tea Party express, said that the movement she was identified with has more staying power because it has the right ideas. By contrast, the “Occupy” movement has resorted to unsavory tactics and has already lost credibility with the American people.
There's a bit more there, but they somehow forgot to mention this gem from panelist and Americans for Prosperity Pennsylvania State Director Jennifer Stefano:
STEFANO: The one thing I get asked is, what is the difference between the tea party and Occupiers... but I always say one thing. If you're standing in a room and you're not sure how to separate the tea partiers from the Occupiers, do one thing. Raise an American flag. The tea party will stand and put their hands over their heart and pledge to it while the Occupiers deficate on it.
I find that really humorous since the only person I seem to remember being proud of "dropping trou" lately, was her cohort on that panel, Dana Loesch.
The better part of the panel was basically a major dose or projection with these AstroTurfers who are being funded by Republican operatives, Dick Armey, Tim Phillips, the Koch brothers among others trying to pretend that what they're doing is somehow a "grass roots" movement, but they found one guy that claimed the AFL-CIO in D.C. paid some people who are already out of work union members sixty bucks a day to show up and protest CPAC.
There is this notice up on their web site that they were calling for a day of action to protest the event -- Occupy CPAC: Mitt Romney and the 1% . Whether they paid anyone to show up, who knows. It looks like they may have, but that's hardly proof that the entire Occupy protest movement is some union funded AstroTurf movement.
And never mind that a good deal of the ones showing up at Occupy protests are Ron Paul supporters and a lot of people who hate both of our major political parties, which this bunch also conveniently ignores.
And on a side note, besides her bloviating here that this supposedly "unorganized" and "unpaid" movement of theirs is going to take back the Senate next year, apparently Loesch and her husband took some time out over the weekend to scream at some Occupy protesters as well. Seems she's working hard to keep it just as classy as her boss, Andrew Breitbart.
At her speech when she won the meaningless Reed Irvine Award from AIM, Loesch was using several of her favorite boogeymen: Media Matters, Planned Parenthood, SEIU, George Soros, Unions, "Liberal" Media, Occupy Movement.
She falsely accused Media Matters of being "a 501(c)(3) organization that is fascistic, witch-hunting, book-burning den of thieves."
She delusionally declared "Barack Obama's been defeated already. It's the media that's keeping him on life support."
At last year's CPAC, Loesch made numerous stupid claims, such as the pro-choice community supporting "feminist genocide."
=
Later this week: A look back at Dana Loesch's one year at CNN in an official contributor capacity.
This morning while on the Political Buzz panel for CNN we discussed the reported “booing” of the gay soldier who asked about DADT at last night’s debate. Considering the amount of print devoted to painting the entire crowd out to be bloodthirsty haters with zero regard for military service, it’s no wonder that it would become a question the next day.
Unfortunately for the progressives writing the spin (who forget that it was their idol Bill Clinton who enacted DADT in the first place), the entire story of the debate audience booing is a lie.
Sara Rumpf was in the debate audience and what she witnessed was vastly different than the account the outlets linked above are reporting:
I want to put this on the record now about an incident that happened at tonight’s Republican debate. It’s important that the truth is shared, because I have already seen liberal bloggers and some people on Twitter completely distorting what happened.
The debate included video questions that were submitted on YouTube, and one came from a soldier serving in Iraq who is gay and asked about the candidates’ opinions on don’t ask don’t tell. There was audible booing after his question…however, please note that it was not the crowd booing. It was only one or two people.
Frankly, I don’t care where you stand on DADT, you don’t boo a soldier in the battlefield, period. The audience at last night’s debate believe this which is why they verbally took apart the men who yelled. Conservatives police their side.
If progressives want to talk about bigotry, let’s talk about the unfiltered racist hatred they dumped on Twitter the night Troy Davis was delivered justice. Look at Michelle Malkin’s Twitter stream for that. I’m waiting for progressives to clean up their house.
Dear Dana, they DID boo the soldier, you lying moron! And no, Conservatives do NOT police their side.
SANTORUM: The fact that they’re making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we’re going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege and removing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, I think tries to inject social policy into the military and the military’s job is to do one thing — and that is to defend our country. We need to give the military, which is all volunteer, the ability to do so…and I believe this undermines that ability.
KELLY: So what would you do with soliders like Steven Hill. Now he’s out…so what would you do as president?
SANTORUM: Look, what we’re doing is playing social experimentation with our military right now and that’s tragic. I would just say that going forward, we would reinstitute that policy if Rick Santorum was president. Period. That policy would be reinstituted and as far as people in, I would not throw them out because that would be unfair to them because of the policy of this administration, but we would move forward in conformity to what was happening in the past, which is — sex is not an issue. It should not be an issue. Leave it alone. Keep it to yourself — whether your’re heterosexual or homosexual.
From the 09.22.2011 edition of FNC's Fox/Google Debate:
(Washington, D.C.) – “Tonight, Rick Santorum disrespected our brave men and women in uniform, and he owes Stephen Hill, the gay soldier who asked him the question about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal, an immediate apology.
“That brave gay soldier is doing something Rick Santorum has never done – put his life on the line to defend our freedoms and our way of life. It is telling that Rick Santorum is so blinded by his anti-gay bigotry that he couldn’t even bring himself to thank that gay soldier for his service.
Last night, Stephen Hill, who is serving in the Army in Iraq, had the courage to come out as gay to a national audience and ask the Republican presidential candidates about how they’d handle troops like him. The audience responded to his question with boos, and Rick Santorum said he’s reinstate Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (a promise he doubled down on later in the evening).
The big question today, even among conservatives, is: Why did none of the candidates stand up for the soldier? Here are some of today’s reactions to the offensive moment.
So people like Loesch, Santorum, and the GOP will lie about anything to get their homophobic agenda out.
UPDATED: On Fixed Noise's America Live w/ Megyn Kelly, Rick Santorum claims "he didn't hear any boos".
From the 09.23.2011 edition of FNC's America Live w/ Megyn Kelly:
