Perkins: Hillary Wants to Destroy the Family!

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council (read: Anti-gay Bigot Council) went on an extended rant about Hillary Clinton, claiming that because she’s pro-choice and pro-gay rights, she wants nothing less than the “complete demolition of the natural family.”

Over her long career as a senator and America’s top diplomat, Hillary Clinton has been a global advocate for abortion-on-demand and the complete demolition of the natural family, making her anything but an ally of children or the family. Even her presidential announcement video made a point of elevating the homosexual agenda above other key American priorities. “I’m getting married this summer to someone I really care about,” says one man in the video before the camera pans to him holding hands with another man. “When families are strong,” viewers hear Mrs. Clinton saying, “America is strong.” In the next frame, another same-sex couple is featured. Proving once again just how out of touch the Left is with mainstream America, the ad ignores the military and the global threat in favor of radical fringe issues.

If the two minutes of Hillary’s YouTube announcement demonstrated anything, it’s that Republicans need a candidate who is in clear contrast to the Obama-Clinton agenda — not just in rhetoric, but in record. After the failures of the last two Republican bids for the White House, a number of GOP hopefuls seem anxious to verify their conservative credentials on a full-portfolio of issues. Obviously, they’ve gotten the message that voters are not looking for a Republican, they are looking for a conservative leader who has the courage to act and undo what this administration has done. We need a leader who will not apologize for America’s exceptionalism, but embrace the source of it. And we need a leader who will contend with those in far away [sic] places trying to kill people because of their religion — while also contending with those here at home who want to kill the freedom of religion. In this year’s field, there is reason for optimism with candidates who have fought for children and families.

Let me take a page from Perkins’ playbook and go Godwin on him. This is pretty much the same tactic used by Hitler to dehumanize the Jews. For Perkins, gay people are not human beings capable of loving one another and forming families, they are boogeymen. And not just them but anyone who defends them and their equality is obviously trying to destroy your family, even though there’s no rational argument why it would affect anyone’s family in any way whatsoever.

As always, there’s this giant gap in their argument.

1. Allow gay people to get married.

2. (blank)

3. The demolition of all straight families and civilization itself.

This is classic demagoguery and classic demonization. Those people — immigrants, Jews, blacks, gays, etc — are out to destroy your way of life. They are a cancer on society and must be excised or the whole society will collapse. He’s following the blueprint laid down by Adolf Hitler.

"But, Fidel and Pierre Trudeau were friends. Think about it..."

The Gateway Pundit Falls for Another ..."
"“Judgment Day is coming and not only is God going to unleash His wrath on ..."

Crokin: God Will Reward My Crackpottery
"My cousin's wife teaches children with learning disabilities; unfortunately, she is under strict orders to ..."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."
"I saw Siegfried and Roy do that trick. Apparently, the tiger bore a grudge.."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • colnago80

    Well, Hister was not at all antagonistic towards gays before he assumed power. However, he did a 180 in 1934 as evidenced by the Night of the Long Knives when Ernst Röhm and his fellow gays were arrested and later executed.

  • cptdoom

    Secretary Clinton has proven her hostility to the “natural family” by staying married to her first husband (and who really could have faulted her for divorcing him) and encouraging her daughter to delay parenthood until she was married. She certainly can’t match the sterling character credentials of such strong “family values” Republicans like John McCain, Newt Gingrich or Mark Sanford.

  • dingojack

    SLC – citations required.

    Dingo

  • colnago80

    Re dingojack @ #3

    Try Wiki.

  • dingojack

    Your claim – your evidence…

    Dingo

  • http://www.electricminstrel.com Brett McCoy

    Wait, didn’t Hillary Clinton’s husband cheat on her yet she stayed with him? And don’t they have a daughter who is also married and has a child? How is this anti-family and anti-marriage?

  • gshelley

    I’m still not sure why they always ignore the positions Romney took in his campaign. I figure it’s either because he was not quite extremist enough, or they did not believe him, but the idea that he lost because he didn’t take conservative positions in social issues is completely at odds with history.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    The only factual flaw I see in colnago80’s # 1 is that “and later executed”, as in nearly all cases executions followed capture rather quickly during what should really be called the Weekend of the Long Knives.

  • tbp1

    4. Profit!

  • raven

    She certainly can’t match the sterling character credentials of such strong “family values” Republicans like John McCain, Newt Gingrich or Mark Sanford.

    You left out uber-xian, Sarah Palin.

    None of her kids have gone to college. Two produced children out of wedlock. One of them had a shotgun marriage followed by a divorce. Bristol Palin became the poster person for fundie xian teenage pregnancy by a guy she barely knew.

    Track Palin divorce: Sarah Palin’s son Track and wife, who …

    www. dailymail.co.uk/…/Track-Palin-divorce-Sarah-Palins-son-Track-wif…

    Dec 14, 2012 – Sarah Palin’s oldest son, Track, is getting divorced just 18 months after tying the knot, in another blow to the family values advocate.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    Correction to my # 8: Oh, and of course colnago80’s habitual refusal to type Hitler’s name.

    Plus the implication that the takedown of Röhm & the SA was about gayness and not power politics.

  • raven

    It’s a complete lie that the christofascists and the GOP are pro family. They are anti-family.

    Among their almost endless hates are chidlren, food stamps, the ACA, public education, higher education, birth control, sex education, and economic equality.

    It’s a recipe for neo-Third World status. In fact, in the last year, the middle class has shrunk in all 50 states. Wisconsin leads the pack in the race to the Third World.

    1. In GOP states, public and higher education has been slashed. They refused to extend the Medicare part of the ACA. They shut down the government to prevent a few million low income poor people buy private health insurance.

    2. A perennial target is food stamps. Most food stamp families have at least one working member. 60% of them are…children.

    3. Teen age pregnancy is highly correlated and causal with life long poverty. It’s highest in the fundie xian states.

    4. During the Bush Great Recession, US birth rates fell below replacement. They have recovered but not all that much. People look at their finances (dismal) and future (bleak) and just decide not to take on another $250,000 (cost of middle class child) obligation for 18 years.

  • Kermit Sansoo

    colnago80 says: Re dingojack @ #3

    Try Wiki.

    .

    Wiki has articles on both the Danube River and beetles, but neither of its articles on Hister mention any attitudes, let alone actions, regarding gays.

  • Kermit Sansoo

    Hillary = Ungood

    Hitler = Ungood.

    .

    What other criteria are there for forming analogies? Remember, the fundamentalist mind sees all the universe in terms of morality and authority. And “morality” is the morality of the toddler: “Daddy says”. Therefore, analogies (and metaphors, parables, parodies, and insults) are all formed simply in terms of bad or good.

    .

    Hitler was bad because he mistreated the Jews, God’s Chosen People, the proto-Baptists (not because he committed genocide per se). And Hillary is bad because she weakens authority (at least, the only authority that counts – Tony Perkins God).

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Perkins has a point. Hillary should have released a family-focused ad that concentrated on how quickly she’s going to repeal Obamacare and Dodd-Frank and how much she’s gonna kill ISIS. Maybe throw in a monster truck, if there’s time.*

     

    * “The other candidates don’t have a plan for killing ISIS” {wicked guitar lick} “Hillary does.” [monster truck, driven by Hillary, enters stadium] “Hillary’s gonna fuck ISIS” {wicked guitar lick} “Fuck it hard, for America and Freedom and America.” [monster truck crushes cars marked ‘Muslin’] “Hillary Clinton: good for America, bad for Muslins. Clinton 2016: Come Get Some.”].

  • D. C. Sessions

    You left out uber-xian, Sarah Palin.

    None of her kids have gone to college. Two produced children out of wedlock. One of them had a shotgun marriage followed by a divorce. Bristol Palin became the poster person for fundie xian teenage pregnancy by a guy she barely knew.

    That’s pretty much the standard “working class” Christian formula, yes. Abstinence Ignorance-only sex education for adolescents, leading to pregnancies before high-school graduation, shotgun marriage, lack of education forcing the young family into a low-skill employment trap while being shamed from all directions by the community for their “sin” and guided to “atone” for it by becoming the most (superficially) pious and straightlaced members of the congregation.

    And another generation of is off to vote Republican.

    It’s the Real American™ way: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C11MzbEcHlw

  • StevoR

    @ ^ modusoperandi :

    Hiiiilllllllllllarrriii FUCK YEAH!

    (To the tune of)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGQaH3-LK54

  • Trebuchet

    It’s nothing new. Republicans have been saying this about Clinton ever since It Takes a Village, which they interpreted as “It takes the government.”

  • caseloweraz

    As of today, It Takes a Village has just 100 customer reviews on Amazon, making it easy to convert the counts to percentages. These break down as follows:

    5-star: 36

    4-star: 20

    3-star: 7

    2-star: 7

    1-star: 30

    The most helpful positive review is by Aaron D. Snyder, who writes, “My leanings are more right than left but I would take issue with anyone who actually read this book (not just decided to berate the title because you don’t like the author) and didn’t conclude that Hillary Clinton is every bit [as much] a proponent of “family values” as the most right-wing republican.”

    I would guess the percentages correspond fairly closely to America’s political leanings, with conservatives (who generally panned the book as “socialism” and a push for government handouts) at about 30% of population.

  • colnago80

    Re Kermit Sansoo @ #13

    Try Ernst Roehm.

    By the way, the implication in Wiki that Hister refers to the Danube is seriously in error. If you read the French, you will note that there is no article in front of Hister (e.g. l’Hister). The English translation places an article, namely the, in front of Hister. The presence or absence of an article changes the meaning of the sentence. The absence of an article implies that Hister is referring to a person, the presence implies that Hister is referring to a place.

  • dmcclean

    The presence or absence of an article changes the meaning of the sentence. The absence of an article implies that Hister is referring to a person, the presence implies that Hister is referring to a place.

    In English, this is somewhat true. Do you read 16th century French well enough to know if a similar rule holds in French? Could you cite an authority on old French grammar to corroborate that position?

    In English, this is also not entirely true. For example, when speaking of ships we can say “He served on the Indianapolis” or “He served on Indianapolis”. Perhaps something similar is true in French with respect to places?

    Other possibilities, just to throw a few out there: Nostradamus made a grammatical mistake. Hister was a typo for some other leader’s name that hasn’t been born yet to fulfill the “prophecy”. Hister is the correct spelling of some other leader’s name that hasn’t been born yet to fulfill the “prophecy”.

    Your assertion that Wikipedia’s link of Hister to the Danube is an “implication” is woefully wrong. Wikipedia says, citing Latin and Greek dictionaries, that Hister is the Latin name for the Danube. This is not in question. The position you are supposed to be arguing for is that, although it is the Latin name for the Danube, Nostradamus’s use of “Hister” wasn’t intended to refer to the Danube because . That it can refer to the Danube is certain. That Nostradamus knew it could refer to the Danube is also certain, Wikipedia quotes a different part of his writing than the alleged Hitler/Hister prophecy saying (in translation): “A very scholarly man during this last quarter, while walking along the river Hister known as Danube, the ground subsiding, in the said river shall be lost.”

    So, even if we accept that “prophecy” is a real thing, you are still full of shit.

  • theguy

    “making her anything but an ally of children or the family.”

    Let’s see, Clinton was pushing for universal health care in the early 90’s, while (IIRC) Perkins was still working for white supremacists

    “Even her presidential announcement video made a point of elevating the homosexual agenda above other key American priorities. ”

    That is one of the key American priorities.

    “Proving once again just how out of touch the Left is with mainstream America”

    Never mind the polling data showing that most Americans support gay marriage.

    “the ad ignores the military”

    Ah, good point! There’s gay people serving in the military, much to your chagrin!

    “and the global threat in favor of radical fringe issues.”

    Translation: Perkin’s neo-Nazi friends want to bomb more brown people.

    “they are looking for a conservative leader who has the courage to act and undo what this administration has done.”

    Keep telling yourself that an even crazier candidate would win.

    “while also contending with those here at home who want to kill the freedom of religion.”

    Like the FRC, which wants to censor pro-gay speech and blasphemous speech?

  • dmcclean

    I’d also like to point out that your various alternative names for Hitler are contradictory. If his “real name” was Shicklgruber or Hiedler, why did Nostradamus write Hister? Was it a (pre-typewriter, handwritten) typo with a Levenshtein distance of 9?

  • lofgren

    Colnago80’s peculiar aversin to typing Hitler’s name is about 1/8th as annoying as people giving him shit about it in just about every thread.

  • Chiroptera

    Even her presidential announcement video made a point of elevating the homosexual agenda above other key American priorities.

    And remember, kids, for a majority of Republicans, a key American priority is putting Israel’s interests ahead of the US’s.

  • colnago80

    Re dmcclean @ #21

    I don’t think your example is very good. I doubt that most individuals who served on a particular ship would say, “I served on Indianapolis”. They would place the article in front of Indianapolis. In fact, if in was used instead of on, it would be entirely clear that “I served in Indianapolis” is not the same as “I served in the Indianapolis”.

    However, there is no article in the French, therefore why place an article in the English translation? My reading of the sentence fragment is that the English translation should not have an article. If you want to argue that it still refers to the Danube, even without the article, well, I think we will have to agree to disagree on this issue, hopefully not disagreeably.

  • dmcclean

    “However, there is no article in the French, …”

    Right, but by the rules of 16th century French, should there have been an article? What are you basing that on, other than that modern English has one in a similar situation? Can you cite an expert on 16th century French saying that you interpretation is correct, and that if Nostradamus had meant to refer to a river he made a grammatical error, by the standards of the day, by omitting the article?

    On the issue of whether a similar phenomenon sometimes occurs is modern English, I cite the US Navy Style Guide, http://www.navy.mil/tools/view_styleguide_all.asp, search for the entry on “ship names”. Here’s Wikipedia stating the same rule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28ships%29. I also submit that you may not be right about what most individuals would do: in my experience individuals with long maritime experience use specific terms of art that have been considered archaic in the broader language as a matter of pride, hang out by some sailboats and you will see what I mean. I would also submit that as this usage is perhaps, as you suggest, somewhat archaic, that that strengthens my case. How do you know what archaic French grammar was like? Have you studied it? Or have you merely studied modern English grammar in gradeschool and assumed that old French grammar must have similar rules?

    Note that even the modern rule is complicated in English. For example, it applies to common river names but not to common lake names: “I ate lunch beside Lake Erie.” So you are claiming quite a detailed knowledge of old French here, citing nothing to back you up.

    Why do we have to agree to disagree on this issue? Certainly you will grant that — aside from the issue of what the grammatical rules of old French might be — at the very least, there’s a high possibility that Nostradamus erred in omitting it? Because even you are claiming he made an error, if he meant Hitler it was a misspelling and a transposition. Why should that misspelling be more likely than an article omission? Also, isn’t it more likely that he made a grammatical error than that he predicted the fucking future? You can’t seriously believe that he was truly a prophet, or that prophets are a real thing?

  • raven

    Colnago80’s peculiar aversin to typing Hitler’s name is about 1/8th as annoying as people giving him shit about it in just about every thread.

    Sure the point has been made and it is getting down to abuse of electrons.

    The same goes for nuking Terhan every day. It’s been done over and over. If this had been real life, the former Tehran would be down around the mantle and we would be out of nukes.

  • xuuths

    raven, it isn’t just that palin let her daughter get knocked up prior to marriage — and the marriage never happened. It’s that palin let her daughter’s statutory rapist move in and live with them while he was statutorily raping her. And then brought them up to the NRC as if they were proud of the fornicators on national TV. Rather than stoning her daughter, as commanded in the bible, she shows her off. The daughter who is still shacking up with men she is not married to, still fornicating, and palin is still not treating her as the bible commands.

  • Al Dente

    colonoscopy80 @26

    doubt that most individuals who served on a particular ship would say, “I served on Indianapolis”. They would place the article in front of Indianapolis. In fact, if in was used instead of on, it would be entirely clear that “I served in Indianapolis” is not the same as “I served in the Indianapolis”.

    I’m a retired Navy Chief Petty Officer. In the Navy we rarely referred to a ship as “the whatever.” We’d say “When I was in Seawolf..” or “I’m the leading Yeoman on Anzio.” So colonoscopy80 is, as usual, wrong.

    Incidentally, there hasn’t been a ship named Indianapolis in the US Navy ever since CA35 sank in 1945.

  • Krasnaya Koshka

    “Natural family.” I’m gay and I have a family. My mom and my siblings, nieces, and nephews. I have my partner and she had a son (who died, not because she was gay). Gays are not born in a vacuum. The vast majority of my friends are gay and most have kids. I think our families are pretty natural. Maybe even typical. Perhaps, dare I say it, normal?

  • dmcclean

    It was the first name of a naval ship that came to mind, for whatever reason.

    In retrospect I could’ve chosen a more respectful example, since all I needed was any name of a ship, and since what happened was tragic. My apologies.

  • sigurd jorsalfar

    We need a leader who will not apologize for America’s exceptionalism, but embrace the source of it.

    Pardon me. What is the ‘source’ of America’s exceptionalism? The family? I’m pretty sure there are other countries that have families too.

  • dan4

    @22: I’m not a fan of the FRC…but when have they ever endorsed censoring pro-gay and blasphemous speech (and that’s even putting aside the weird inference that those two things=”freedom of religion”)?

  • John Pieret

    dan4:

    when have they ever endorsed censoring pro-gay and blasphemous speech

    Not here in the US, as such, but the FRC has generally supported the Russian “anti-propaganda” law that makes it a crime to say anything positive about homosexuality and it’s “anti-blasphemy” law under which Pussy Riot was prosecuted.

    http://www.pfaw.org/sites/default/files/globalizing_homophobia_report_final1.pdf

  • Phillip Hallam-Baker

    @7 Gshelby

    “I’m still not sure why they always ignore the positions Romney took in his campaign.”

    Isn’t he the guy who strapped one of his wives to the roof of his car?

  • http://sidhe3141.blogspot.com jy3, Social Justice Beguiler

    Conlago80:

    Are you actually a higher-dimensional being named Reltih who will be banished from our three if we can get you to say your name backwards? It’s okay, you can tell us.

  • colnago80

    Re Al Dente @ #30

    Well, I had an uncle who served on board the USS Texas during WW2 and he always put the article in front of the ship name. I would agree that if on is used, the meaning is more obscure. If in is used, it is clear that the meanings are different.

    Dmcclean @ #27

    I took 2 years of French in high school and a year and a half in college, which included reading passages from Rabelais, who was contemporary with Nostradamus and I don’t recall his non-use of articles in front of nouns.

    All of this is speculation. The French passage has no article in front of Hister. Therefore, the English translation should also have no article. Now if you want to argue that the presence or lack thereof of an article is irrelevant, have at it.

  • Nick Gotts

    The French passage has no article in front of Hister. Therefore, the English translation should also have no article. – colnago80@38

    If I want to say “my arse” in Italian, it’s “il mio culo”. According to you, if I wanted to translate “il mio culo” from Italian into English, it should be “the my arse”. Different languages have different rules about the use of articles. But in none of them was there a German dictator called Hister (or Schicklgruber, or Heidler, or Frankenberger); and in all of them, both Nostradamus and colnago80 are bladder-heads (vescica teste).

  • colnago80

    Re Nick Gotts @ #39

    What the fuck does the situation in Italian have to do with Nostradamus? The fact is that, if Nostradamus was, indeed, referring to an individual named Hister, that’s uncomfortably close to Hitler. If one were grading Nostradamus’ predictions on a scale of 1 to 10 with one being total bullshit and 10 being right on the money, IMHO, he would have to be given at least a 5 on that one. He got the name partially right, the location right and the century of occurrence right. A lot better then most of his predictions. Considering that 3 of the nations involved in WW 2 did not exist at the time (USA, Canada, and Germany), that ain’t too shabby.