Tea Party Patriots Ordinary citizens reclaiming America's founding principles.
Showing posts with label Phyllis Schlafly. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Phyllis Schlafly. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 13, 2022

Trump’s endorsement of Dr Mehmet Oz

 


Last weekend, when President Trump announced his endorsement of Dr. Mehmet Oz’s campaign in the Pennsylvania race for Senator, the conservative world gasped in shock.  Had Trump made a really bad call?  On Townhall, John and Andy Schlafly (sons of the late great Phyllis Schlafly), explain why Trump’s endorsement is sheer “wizardry” -- and one does have to dive into the local politics to understand:

Pro-China Dave McCormick currently holds a narrow lead in the polls for the open U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania. . . . As Philadelphia just became the first major city to reinstate a mask-wearing requirement indoors, McCormick’s deep ties to the communist country that brought us Covid are unhelpful. 

. . .

His rival, Dr. Mehmet Oz, spoke out strongly against mask and vaccine mandates last year, and two years ago Oz helped save lives by promoting hydroxychloroquine. Dr. Oz received a backlash from liberal public health authorities but courageously spoke the truth they suppressed.

. . .

Dr. Oz is almost alone among physician politicians opposing Fauci’s fake science. Last December, Dr. Oz stated that “Dr. Anthony Fauci has lost the faith and confidence of the American people.”

The column closes with:

Trump further overcame his critics [at the recent North Carolina rally] by inviting 26-year-old Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) onto the stage after the Republican Establishment shunned and tried to defeat him for his blunt criticisms. Rep. Cawthorn nearly stole the show with his inspiring words that concluded with his standing up from his wheelchair.

“We have so many in the national party who believe that the key to saving our nation is cheapening our platform and going after these non-existent middle-ground voters,” Cawthorn declared. “My friend, there is no middle ground with Marxists.”

The full column is here.  And especially for those who were not happy with President Trump's reliance on Faux Fauci and the the Scarf Lady Deborah Birx, the Oz endorsement provides a counterweight. 

# # #


Monday, August 22, 2016

Happy Birthday Phyllis Schlafly


photo credit: Breitbart.com
via Breitbart: As conservative icon and living legend Phyllis Schlafly celebrated her 92nd birthday this week, leaders throughout the nation-state conservative movement offered their birthday well wishes to a woman whom they described as “America’s Margaret Thatcher,” “our true hero,” and “one of America’s greatest patriots.”
Full story highlighting Phyllis Schlafly's accomplishments is here.
# # #


Saturday, May 21, 2016

Phyllis Schlafly Elected as GOP Delegate


photo credit: cnmnewz.com

This just in: News release from Eagle Forum (h/t conservative treehouse):

Phyllis Schlafly Elected as National Delegate at Missouri Convention

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 21, 2016
CONTACT: Ryan Hite, Communications Director O 314.721.1213 /Ryan@EagleForum.org

Branson, MO: Today at the Missouri Republican State Convention in Branson, Phyllis Schlafly, founder and chairman of Eagle Forum, was elected as a national delegate to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio. Phyllis has participated in every convention since 1952.

“Politics is where the action is and the Republican Party is where we can make a difference. I am proud to be a Republican and attend our Conventions,” Schlafly said. “I look forward to joining other conservatives in Cleveland to pass our solid, conservative platform that includes a strong defense of the unborn, traditional marriage, and the American military superiority that has given us ‘peace through strength.’
. . .

“In Cleveland, I will proudly cast my vote for the next President of the United States of America, Mr. Donald J. Trump.”

Good to see Ms. Schlafly is still chairman of Eagle Forum, after the recent attempted coup.

# # #


Monday, April 11, 2016

Ted Cruz Supporters Attempt Coup At Eagle Forum


conservativefifty.com

It just keeps coming. This report is via Gateway Pundit:

Cruz Supporters Stage Coup – 
Try to Dump Phyllis Schlafly After Trump Endorsement


Conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly has been a national leader of the conservative movement since the publication of her best-selling 1964 book, A Choice Not An Echo. She has been a leader of the pro-family movement since 1972 when she led the fight to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment.
Phyllis Schlafly is 91 years-old.

On March 11, 2016 conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly endorsed Donald Trump for President at his St. Louis rally.

But not everyone in her organization, Eagle Forum – or her family – agreed with Phyllis Schlafly’s decision.

Last week Phyllis Schlafly released several board members for disloyalty to the organization.
The group was planning to hold rogue board meeting to take over the Eagle Forum.
Today the rogue Cruz supporters attempted a coup.

They held a non-sanctioned meeting and blocked Phyllis Schlafly from their conference call.
This email was sent out Monday afternoon.

St. Louis, Missouri:
“At 2pm today, 6 directors of Eagle Forum met in an improper, unprecedented telephone meeting. I objected to the meeting and at 2:11pm, I was muted from the call. The meeting was invalid under the Bylaws but the attendees purported to pass several motions to wrest control of the organization from me. They are attempting to seize access to our bank accounts, to terminate employees, and to install members of their own Gang of 6 to control the bank accounts and all of Eagle Forum.

“The members of their group are: Eunie Smith of Alabama, Anne Cori of Missouri, Cathie Adams of Texas, Rosina Kovar of Colorado, Shirley Curry of Tennessee, and Carolyn McLarty of Oklahoma.

“This kind of conduct will not stand and I will fight for Eagle Forum and I ask all men and women of good will to join me in this fight.”
 # # #

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Trans-Pacific Partnership : House passes the bill


Art credit: Radix

UPDATE Thurs. From Breitbart Big Government:


Obamatrade is alive.

One week after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly rejected Obamatrade by voting against a key provision of it — Trade Adjustment Assistance — GOP establishment lawmakers resuscitated Trade Promotion Authority and rammed it through Thursday afternoon. The final tally was 218-208. . . .

. . . Because the Senate passed TAA and TPA together, the individual House version will now have to go back to the Senate for approval, where it may face a filibuster. It’s unclear how many senators would support TPA without TAA, a measure to aid workers who lose their jobs because of trade policy.
# # #

According to The Hill, the House will vote Thursday [tomorrow] on a stand-alone measure to grant President Obama fast-track trade authority.
Phyllis Schlafly explains how bad the bills are:
On Friday, Congress disrupted President Obama’s plan for a sweeping transfer of U.S. sovereignty to an unaccountable group of foreign busybodies. Hurray for the stalwart Americans who resisted the demands of Obama, the Republican leadership and the big-donor claque – but Speaker Boehner plans to give Congress another chance this week to make this dangerous mistake.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) would turn over to globalists the power to issue regulations about U.S. trade, immigration, the environment, labor and commerce. It’s called a “living agreement,” which means the globalists can amend and change the text of the so-called agreement after it has gone into effect.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., has frankly warned about this giveaway of U.S. sovereignty. Not only would Congress give up its powers to negotiate and write the terms of a treaty, but Congress also gives up its power to debate and amend the deal, to apply a cloture vote in the Senate, and to require a two-thirds vote in the Senate.
. . .
TPP puts us in a new political and economic union before a single private citizen is told about it and with public opinion running five to one against it. Remember when Nancy Pelosi said we had to pass Obamacare in order to find out what is in it?
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., warns, “TPP calls for the formation of a permanent political and economic union known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Commission, which will have power to issue regulations impacting not only trade but immigration, the environment, labor and commerce.” He added, Congress “will have surrendered its legislative prerogatives. Before a word, line, paragraph, or page of this plan is made public, Congress will have even agreed to give up its treaty powers.”
. . .
Sessions continued: “Congress would be pre-clearing a political and economic union before a word of that arrangement has been made available to a single private citizen. This has the earmarks of a nascent European Union,” and Americans certainly don’t want to belong to a European union (that’s why we fought the American Revolution).
Rep. Hunter also warns that the new global governance institution would be “authorized to issue policies and regulations affecting our economy, our manufacturers, our workers, our immigration procedures, as well as current, labor and environmental practices.”
TPP is separating us from the U.S. Constitution and from national sovereignty and replacing both with a global governance superstructure. TPP has wrapped its audacious global governance plan in the mantle called “free trade,” which is a misnomer if there ever were one.
Read the rest here.
And here’s an update from today’s Politico:  
House Speaker John Boehner and Republican leaders are moving to revive President Barack Obama’s beleaguered trade agenda with an elaborate procedural workaround that was quickly greeted with skepticism among some Democrats.
Under the emerging plan, the House would vote on a bill that would give Obama fast-track authority to negotiate a sweeping trade deal with Pacific Rim countries, sending it to the Senate for final approval. To alleviate Democratic concerns, the Senate then would amend a separate bill on trade preferences to include Trade Adjustment Assistance, a worker aid program that Republicans oppose but that House Democrats have blocked to gain leverage in the negotiations over fast-track.
When a group of House conservatives voted last week to kill a trade bill favored by President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner and other GOP leaders who support the measure steamed. Representative Mick Mulvaney (R., S.C.) celebrated the revolt as a coming-of-age moment for rebel backbenchers. “Yesterday will be the day that we look back at as the day that conservatives finally started getting organized in the House,” he wrote in a note to the Spartanburg Tea Party. 
Led by Representative Jim Jordan (R., Ohio), a platoon of conservatives demanded that Boehner agree to a series of concessions in exchange for their support for so-called Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), legislation that would give President Obama wider latitude to negotiate free-trade agreements. When GOP leadership ignored them, Jordan and his allies tried to kill the bill on a procedural vote — a rare step made more surprising by the lawmakers’ general support for free trade. It was the boldest attempt yet from the recently formed House Freedom Caucus, which Jordan chairs, to counteract Boehner’s perceived tendency to wilt in the face of Democratic pressure.
Read more here
Find your Representative here.   The Congressional switchboard number is (202) 224-3121.


Here are details for Ohio Senators:

Sen. Sherrod Brown
Phone: 202-224-2315
Fax: 202-228-6321


Phone: 202-224-3353
# # #


Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Phyllis Schlafly on early voting, especially in Ohio



 Photo credit: dailycaller.com

Phyllis Schlafly on early voting, especially in Ohio, from Townhall:
Although the midterm elections are still two weeks away, about two million Americans have already voted. The circus of early and mail-in voting undermines the federal law, which provides: "The Tuesday next after the first Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election."
When our national elections were held on one unifying day, discussions and debates could continue among family, neighbors and the media up until the day that virtually everyone voted. The one and only debate between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter occurred only a week before Election Day in 1980, with the candidates tied in the polls while a television audience of perhaps 120 million people watched.
Why rampant early voting is even allowed remains a mystery. The Constitution requires that the members of the Electoral College, who elect the president, must cast their votes on the same day throughout the nation, because our founding fathers wisely sought to avoid the mischief caused by early voting.
Yet in this year's race for the U.S. Senate in Iowa, which may decide which party controls the Senate beginning January, some 170,000 Iowans had already cast their votes before the candidates held a key debate. Those votes that are cast before debates are held can hardly be desirable.
In Congress, a representative may change the vote he cast for or against a piece of legislation up until all the votes are cast and the voting period is closed. But the millions who vote early cannot change their vote based on new information, and candidates are wasting time and money campaigning in front of people who have already voted.
Because of the Ebola scandal, some may wish to change their vote, but that is impossible for those who have already voted. Some early voters may die before Election Day, and early voting allows the votes of those dead people to be included. If there is any dispute over whether their votes were valid or fraudulent, they are no longer with us to defend themselves.
Typically, there are no poll watchers during early voting, so the integrity of the casting of the ballots cannot be monitored. Many of the early votes are cast in a coercive environment, such as a union boss driving employees to the polls and watching over the process so there is no guarantee that their votes will be private.
Democrats promote early voting for the same reason they oppose voter ID: because they view early voting as helping their side. In the absurdly long 35-day period of early voting in Ohio in 2012, Democrats racked up perhaps a million-vote advantage over Republicans before Election Day was ever reached.
. . .
Romney lacked a message, too, but he was mainly defeated by the Democrats' superb ground game, which exploited early voting in key states such as Florida and Ohio. By continuously updating their computer-based information about who had not yet voted, Democrats could harass and nag low-information voters until they turned in their ballots.
Read the rest here.

# # #


Friday, August 15, 2014

Phyllis Schlafly Turns 90 Today






Phyllis Schlafly Turns 90 Today

Very few individuals who were not politicians or generals have had a major impact on American political history.  Phyllis Schlafly is one of the exceptions.  Twice.  In 1964, she helped launch the grass-roots conservative movement that flourishes today, transformed by the internet, and in 1972 she inaugurated what came to be called “social conservatism.” 
More than any other individual, she was responsible for the nomination of Barry Goldwater, and thus, indirectly, Ronald Reagan.  And virtually single-handedly, she defeated the so-called Equal Rights Amendment.
Schlafly was born 90 years ago today in St. Louis, the daughter of John and Odile Stewart.  Her father was a machinist who was unemployed through most of the Great Depression.  But the Stewarts were not Democrats.  “We left the party under Grover Cleveland,” Schlafly says.  Her mother worked as a librarian and teacher to support the family, and Schlafly put herself through college (Washington University, where she was elected to Phi Beta Kappa) working in a munitions plant during the war, test-firing .30 and .50 caliber rifles and machine guns 48 hours a week.
Her becoming a political activist was entirely fortuitous, she says.  She had married attorney Fred Schlafly and the couple had moved across the Mississippi to Alton, Illinois.  In 1952, some local Republican leaders came to their home to invite Fred to run for Congressman.  The district was heavily Democratic, Fred’s practice was flourishing, and he was not interested.  They turned to his wife.  Phyllis agreed.
Female candidates were a novelty in those days, and she was invited to address the state Republican convention.  She gave a dynamic speech to the 10,000 delegates sweltering in the unairconditioned Armory in Springfield, and received a lot of media attention.  Schlafly lost the race in November, but was hooked on politics.
She was frustrated, though, that the party’s Presidential nominees were invariably selected by a handful of “king-makers.”  They didn’t share the convictions of the rank-and-file, nor aggressively attack the opposition where it was vulnerable.  Frequently, they were not even Republicans:  Hoover, Wilkie, Eisenhower.  She was particularly irked by the way Robert Taft was shunted aside in 1952.
In 1964, she was dismayed to see that once again an East Coast liberal, Nelson Rockefeller, was about to be crowned by the party’s establishment.  In a white heat, Schlafly wrote A Choice, Not an Echo, had it privately printed, and began selling copies from her garage. 
The book caught fire like no other political manifesto since Tom Paine’sCommon Sense.  By the time the Republicans convened at the Cow Palace in San Francisco, about 3 million copies were in print.  Virtually every delegate had read it.
After indicting the Democrats for craven policies overseas and corruption at home—what else is new?—A Choice, Not an Echo takes a close look at Republican conventions from 1936 to 1960 and argues that the nominee was selected very much as the hemlines of women’s dresses were determined.  Just as women have no say in the new season’s fashions, so the wishes of the Republican rank-and-file have been ignored or subverted by powerful men meeting in corporate offices and private clubs in Manhattan.  The chapter on the marketing in 1940 of the insipid, unknown Wendell Wilkie, the RINO prototype, is particularly instructive.  So is her account of the manipulation of the Texas and other delegations at the 1944 convention.

Schlafly has recently updated A Choice, and a new edition, with chapters covering the nominations from 1968 to 2012, will be out in November.
Not long after the success of this book, Schlafly was contacted by Admiral Chester Ward, who told her she must write about the Soviet missile threat.  They worked together on a book, and it sold two million copies.  Schlafly wound up collaborating on five books with Ward, and toured the country warning about the danger posed by the Russians.
When a friend invited her to talk to a library group in Connecticut in 1972, she was prepared to give her standard lecture on the subject.  But the friend said her group didn’t want to hear about the missile threat, but about the Equal Rights Amendment.  Schlafly replied that she’d hardly thought about the issue, and didn’t even know if she was for or against it.  The friend said she’d send some literature, and predicted, “You’ll be against it.”  She was right.
The amendment sounded innocuous.  But as with the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, there was an agenda not publicly acknowledged (or consequences not recognized, in the case of the Civil Rights Act) by its sponsors.
Schlafly saw that the amendment would grant no new rights to women, while it threatened to abolish two privileges women enjoyed:  immunity from the draft and the legal guarantees in every state mandating that a husband support his wife and family.  Also seemingly endangered were laws against sexual assault, and legal precedents awarding alimony and child custody to women.  With American troops still in Vietnam, these possibilities struck a resonant chord both with young single women and with married homemakers.  Funding for single-sex colleges might also be in jeopardy, critics pointed out, and quotas in the workplace might be mandated by judges. 
As Schlafly saw clearly, the hidden objective of ERA was to deny women any legal claim on their husband’s earnings.  Homemakers, for the first time in history, were to be deprived of the support of society.
The talk Schlafly gave at the library in Connecticut (Ann Coulter’s brother was in the audience) became the basis for a speech she would deliver countless times across the country.
It was peppered with humor  (“Women,” she would note, are not mentioned in the ERA, only “sex”—“presumably the sex you are, not the sex you do”) and her trademark candor (the act was “a cheat and a fraud”).
By the time STOP ERA got underway in 1973, 30 states had ratified the amendment, and five more would do so.  But legislators, obliged to hold public hearings, began having second thoughts.  As Section 2 made explicit, the rights of states would be over-ridden by Congress and federal judges in legislation concerning families and the workplace.  States stood to be big losers.
Five states repealed their endorsements, and despite a three-year extension to the time limit ordered by Jimmy Carter, the amendment was dead in the water.
ERA had almost no opposition before Schlafly swung into action.  It had been endorsed by three presidents and their wives, and by both parties.  The campaign to get the GOP to oppose the amendment could be said to mark the beginning of social conservatism.  Schlafly then lobbied to include a plank in the party’s platform calling for the repeal of Roe v. Wade.
She would spend much of the rest of her life defending the traditional family.
When asked what’s the biggest change in the country that she’s witnessed during her lifetime, she doesn’t hesitate:  “it’s the decline in marriage.”  And the most pressing problem today is “the decline in the number of intact families.”
A new book—her 21st—will be out on this subject in a few weeks:  Who Killed the Family

Read the rest here