Posts tagged: Jr.

McLean County GOP Calls for Pat Brady’s Resignation

The McLean County Republican Central Committee met Monday, Jan 14th, at their Headquarters and voted unanimously among those present the following:

“The McLean County Republican Central Committee calls for the resignation of Pat Brady as the state Republican Party Chairman due to his promotion of issues contrary to the Republican Party platform.”

“Pat Brady has failed to lead the State Republican Party, and should step down as its leader. Brady has failed to follow the Illinois Republican Party platform along with the National Republican Party’s Platform.”

John W. Parrott, Jr., Chairman of the McLean County Republican Party, further called upon the State Central Committee (currently there are 19 members under the old map) to convene and vote to have Brady step down. Parrott favors installing an Interim Chairman (from the Current Committee) and then proceed with a search of a Candidate who embraces and will represent the Party’s Platform.

“Illinois has become a National embarrassment from the fiscal issues in the State Government to the leadership in Springfield. The Republicans are in the minority in both the Illinois House and Senate; we need new leadership, and we need it now. Pat Brady has been a failure, and I hope he leaves on his own, or the State Central Committee is successful in removing him as our Leader,” said Parrott.

“I have known Pat for a long time, and I have considered him a friend over the years. I supported him when he ran for National Committeemen and when he was asked to step in when McKenna stepped down from the Chairmanship, I was very supportive. ”

“When he assumed the Chairmanship, I discussed with Pat that this was time for strong leadership within the Party, but sadly have not seen any evidence of positive change. Pat, it’s time to go.”

President Obama, More Religious Apostate than Religious Pioneer

Written by Dr. Michael Brown

According to CNN writer John Blake, President Barack Obama is “a religious pioneer” who, in the opinion of some scholars and pastors, is “also expanding the definition of who can be a Christian by challenging the religious right’s domination of the national stage.”

To be candid, and with due respect to the office of the president, Obama should be viewed as a religious apostate more than a religious pioneer. He has shown an extraordinary disregard for society’s most innocent and vulnerable members (babies in the womb), he has misused the Bible to defend the radical redefinition of marriage, and he has trashed religious freedoms with his health care mandates to the point that groups as disparate as Hobby Lobby and Catholic hospitals are suing the government. This is hardly the legacy of a religious pioneer.

Blake claimed in his article “Is Obama the ‘wrong’ kind of Christian?” that, “When Obama invoked Jesus to support same-sex marriage, framed health care as a moral imperative to care for ‘the least of these,’ and once urged people to read their Bible but just not literally, he was invoking another Christian tradition that once dominated American public life so much that it gave the nation its first megachurches, historians say.”

Blake is referring to the “social gospel” version of Christianity that was more prominent in the early to mid-20th century than it is today. As explained by Jim Wallis (head of the Sojourners, a leftwing, marginally evangelical organization), Obama’s faith “is not the faith of the religious right. It’s about things that they don’t talk about. It’s about how the Bible is full of God’s clear instruction to care for the poor.”

Putting aside the fact that “the religious right” is used as a term of disparagement in contrast with what Blake calls “progressive Christianity,” the truth is that conservative Christians lead the way in worldwide humanitarian relief efforts, they continue to build hospitals and orphanages and schools in many nations, they are active in drug and alcohol rehab programs in the inner cities of America, and they are at the forefront of the pro-life, pro-adoption movement.

As for their opposition to gay activism, it is the natural offshoot of their belief in marriage as defined by Jesus himself (one man and one woman joined together for life), it is in keeping with their high esteem for sexual purity, and it is in harmony with their wholly justified concerns that homosexual activism is the principle threat to our freedoms of conscience, religion, and speech. From a biblical perspective, President Obama is on the wrong side of these critically important issues.

For Blake, “Obama is a progressive Christian who blends the emotional fire of the African-American church, the ecumenical outlook of contemporary Protestantism, and the activism of the Social Gospel, a late 19th-century movement whose leaders faulted American churches for focusing too much on personal salvation while ignoring the conditions that led to pervasive poverty.”

And Blake wants to place Obama in the line of Black Christians like Martin Luther King, Jr., who said that “any religion that professes to be concerned about the souls of men and is not concerned about the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them …is a spiritually moribund religion awaiting burial.”

But Barack Obama is no Martin Luther King, as our president has proven himself to be a great divider whereas King was a great unifier. And King, for his part, would not have shouted “Amen” to the sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s mentor, whose often shrill version of black liberation theology formed the ideological basis of Obama’s Christianity. With spiritual foundations like that, it is no wonder that the president could make the obscene comparison between “Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf” and gay marriage.

Blake closes his article by pointing to research done by Marcia Pally, author of the book “The New Evangelicals: Expanding the Vision of the Common Good.” He writes that Pally’s “perspective suggests that Obama’s faith may be treated by history in two ways: He could be seen as the last embodiment of a progressive version of Christianity that went obsolete. Or he could be seen as a leader who helped resurrect a dying brand of Christianity for a new generation.”

Pally and Blake fail to consider a third, more likely scenario: Obama could be seen as a religious apostate, a man who denied some of the most fundamental values of Christianity (what else can be said of a political leader who three times vetoed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act “that would require medical care for a baby who survives an abortion”?), a man who used the Bible to back a radical, often harmful social agenda. In that regard, Obama is more a disciple of Saul Alinsky than of Jesus.


Michael Brown holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries. He hosts the nationally syndicated, daily talk radio show, the Line of Fire, and his latest book is The Real Kosher Jesus.

NAACP And the White Sexual Anarchists

Exclusive: Matt Barber shames black organization for buckling to ‘gay’ activists

As his re-election hopes dim, the mainstream “progressive” media continue to run interference for Barack Obama. It’s predictable. They no longer even try to hide it. They persist in slobbering on their over-hyped, under-capable would-be savior as his campaign collapses around them. The sycophancy is embarrassing and the desperation palpable.

Most recently, they’ve created a stir around the NAACP crowd booing Mitt Romney at the decidedly liberal group’s national convention in Houston, Texas. The activist attendees didn’t like the fact that President Obama’s presumptive GOP challenger intends to repeal Obamacare if elected.

Still, what you won’t hear from the mainstream media is the fact that those very same left-leaning activists gave Mr. Romney a rousing ovation when he pledged to defend the institution of real marriage from secular extremists’ ongoing attempts to radically re-define it.

During his speech, Romney quoted former NAACP Executive Director Benjamin Hooks, noting that the family “remains the bulwark and the mainstay of the black community. That great truth must not be overlooked.”

The former Massachusetts governor then promised the conference-goers: “Any policy that lifts up and honors the family is going to be good for the country, and that must be our goal. As president, I will promote strong families – and I will defend traditional marriage!”

At this, the crowd erupted into sustained applause.

Herein lies the ongoing rift between the NAACP leadership, its rank and file and the African-American community at large. By recently joining with President Obama to endorse counterfeit “same-sex marriage,” the NAACP leadership betrayed the very constituency it presumes to represent. It blundered its way directly into conflict with the vast majority of African-Americans.

“Traditional marriage enjoys steadfast support in America, especially among African-Americans,” said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) in response to Romney’s pro-family pledge. “Just this past May, an overwhelming percentage of black voters supported a marriage protection amendment in North Carolina, just as they did several years ago in California and in other states,” continued Brown.

“We know that despite the actions of some African-American elites, rank-and-file voters in the black community continue to support marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” he concluded.

Indeed, by throwing their collective weight behind such extremist, San Francisco-style social engineering, both the president and the NAACP have exposed just how out of touch they are with the rest America – particularly African-Americans. (Consider, for instance, that in 2008, over 70 percent of black voters supported Prop. 8, California’s natural marriage-protection amendment.)

By backing the absurd, oxymoronic notion of so-called “same-sex marriage,” the NAACP leadership has allowed itself to be played by “the man.” (In this case “the man” is the mostly white, “progressive”-elite establishment.)

The black community is having none of it. A group of leading African-American clergy called “The Coalition of African-American Pastors” (CAAP) has called on both President Obama and the NAACP to honor their pledge to represent the interests of the black community instead of radical white special interests.

In an interview with the Christian Post, the Rev. Bill Owens, CAAP president, noted: “The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People needs to be recalled to its founding purpose. Black people face acute and urgent needs, from unemployment to education, family fragmentation, discrimination and crime.

“We are calling on the NAACP, a beloved organization in our eyes, to reclaim its mission. The black church founded the NAACP, and it is not the organization for the advancement of gays and lesbians – whatever the merits of that movement. Return to your roots and stand with the black church on marriage. The black church in our eyes remains the conscience of America.

“More than anything, this is an issue of biblical principles, and President Obama is carrying our nation down a dangerous road,” continued Owens. “Many African-Americans were once proud of our president, but now many are ashamed of his actions.”

For decades now, well-organized, well-funded and politically powerful homosexual pressure groups have, with impertinence, hijacked the language of the authentic civil rights movement.

In what amounts to a sort of soft racism, this mostly white sexual anarchist faction has disingenuously and ignobly hitched its little pink wagon to a movement that, by contrast, is built upon the genuine and noble precepts of racial equality and humanitarian justice.

Indeed, that Barack Obama and the NAACP would align themselves with a militant, immoral lobby that literally takes “pride” in arrogant rebellion against biblical principles is, perhaps, what’s most troubling about this inexplicable political misstep.

It’s offensive – disgusting, in fact – that this pleasure-based, sex-centric movement – delineated by deviant proclivities and behaviors – would dare to equate its demands for celebration of bad behavior to Christian notions of racial equality.

Pastor Ken Hutcherson, an influential black pastor from the Seattle area, put it well: “It has been said loudly and proudly that gay marriage is a civil rights issue. If that’s the case, then gays would be the new African-Americans. I’m here to tell you now, and hopefully for the last time, that the gay community is not the new African-American community.

“Don’t compare your sin to my skin!” he demands.

Alas, how far we’ve come from the character-content vision of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. who, like his fellow Republican, Mitt Romney, recognized the critical importance of marriage and family. How we’ve perverted what constitutes true civil rights.

Shame on you, NAACP.

And shame on you, Barack Obama.


Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action (LCA on Facebook) . (Title and affiliation provided for identification purposes only.)

Modified by Matthew Medlen.com