The Brody File

The Boy Scouts Of Gay America

David Brody — Fri, 24 May 2013 18:46:21 GMT

This is NOT your father’s Boy Scouts. The gay agenda wins out again.

The Boy Scouts of America will never be the same. Some will say the organization’s decision to allow self-identified gay youth to join the Boy Scouts is a good thing. Others believe it is the beginning of the end of Boy Scouts. What is for certain is that homosexual activists have succeeded once again. They are determined. They don’t give up. They have taken the first step in reshaping the Boy Scouts of America into ostensibly a pro-gay rights organization. Are we seeing the first signs of a new organization called, "The Boy Scouts of Gay America?"

Why do I say that? Look, we all know the next move here. Ultimately there will be gay Boy Scout leaders. Gay youth coupled with gay scout leaders is eventually going to lead to programs and merit badges aimed at satisfying the homosexual community. Maybe you can earn the “Diversity” merit badge? How about the “Inclusion” merit badge? Or how about a new “Homosexuality” merit badge (whatever that might entail)? Don’t believe me? You might want to check out the already formed National Gay Eagle Scout Association to give you a sense of where this is going. Or how about you stop by the Inclusive Scouting Network store to buy your already for sale “Inclusive Scouting Awards, pins and badges. I’m not making this stuff up. It’s already happening. Do you think all of this is going to increase attendance in the Boy Scouts or decimate it?

This may be the beginning of the end for the Boy Scouts. Already we are seeing an effort to start a new type of Boy Scouts organization. A group called, “On My Honor,” made up of concerned parents and scout leaders who are against inclusion of gays into the Boy Scouts is going to meet privately next month in Louisville, Kentucky where they will discuss creating a, “new character development organization for boys.”

Look, let me give you a little clue into how many conservative Christian parents feel right about now. I know this may be tough to read but it is what it is. I have two sons who are both Eagle Scouts, so as a dad who has been on plenty of campouts I know a thing or two about the Boy Scouts. Folks, here’s the dirty little secret that nobody wants to talk about: The reason this is a problem for so many evangelical Christians is that (NEWS FLASH!) homosexuality means men are attracted to other men. Boys are attracted to other boys. Not emotionally attracted as much as physically attracted. When you’re on overnight campouts or at sleep away camp, this aspect is going to make some heterosexual boys and dads feel a bit uncomfortable. Sorry, I know some people will say that’s homophobic but it’s not. It’s just the plain truth. Adding gay children into the mix makes everything a bit more complicated and uncomfortable for many.

You know, it seems all the talk is about how the Boy Scouts need to be inclusive of gay scouts. Well wait a minute! What about being sensitive to the fact that heterosexual scouts very well might feel uncomfortable? Nobody ever talks about that. This fact alone will have many parents pulling their kids out of Boy Scouts.

Look, I’m all for EVERY child being involved in scouts. It’s a great organization. BUT let’s be honest. Including openly gay scouts will invariably lead to some sort of homosexual rights agenda. They cannot be separated. If we’ve learned one thing about gay rights activists it is that they are pushy and aggressive. They don’t just stop at inclusion. They want to control the agenda.

I’m sure many people will say that this is a new day in America and that conservative Christians have to get with the program and stop living in their insular conservative 1950’s Bible world. And I’m sure those same people will say that if the homophobic Christians don’t like the new policy then good riddance! Well you know what? Plenty of conservative Christians are about to say adios to the Boy Scouts and it could very well leave one of America’s most cherished organizations wondering what in the world they have just done.

The Brody File Show | Under Siege

David Brody — Fri, 24 May 2013 16:59:29 GMT

This week on the Brody File we take a close look at the multiple controversies swirling around the Obama administration.

We are joined by Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., and CBS News Reporter Sharyl Attkisson to discuss these issues.

Also, CBN News White House Correspondent Jennifer Wishon reports on the use of drones under the Obama administration.

CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson on Brody File Show

David Brody — Fri, 24 May 2013 16:59:25 GMT

Watch this week's Brody File Show segment with CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson as she talks about the media's role in the Benghazi story.

Lois Lerner's Lawsuit Crusade Against Christian Coalition?

David Brody — Wed, 22 May 2013 17:08:55 GMT

Lois Lerner’s past history may be catching up with her. She’s in trouble right now because of her role in the IRS scandal but the practices she employed while head of the Enforcement Office at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) is also raising some red flags. It appears that she doesn’t necessarily have a fondness for conservative Christian groups.

We already know that besides Tea Party groups, the IRS asked a religious pro-life group to details information about their prayers and religious activity. Well, maybe we shouldn’t be so surprised that this was coming under Lerner’s watch. Why? In turns out that when Lerner headed up the Enforcement Office of the FEC in the 1990’s, they brought a lawsuit against the Christian Coalition and during the process, many of the FEC attorneys asked invasive questions centering on personal faith and prayer practices. They made the Christian Coalition jump through hoop after hoop to try and prove that they were not coordinating issue advocacy expenditures with public officials running for office.

James Bopp, who was lead counsel for the Christian Coalition back then, said the following in his 2003 congressional testimony:

“The FEC conducted a large amount of paper discovery during the administrative investigation and then served four massive discovery requests during the litigation stage that included 127 document requests, 32 interrogatories, and 1,813 requests for admission. Three of the interrogatories required the Coalition to explain each request for admission that it did not admit in full, for a total of 481 additional written answers that had to be provided. The Coalition was required to produce tens of thousands of pages of documents, many of them containing sensitive and proprietary information about ﬁnances and donor information. Each of the 49 state afﬁliates were asked to provide documents and many states were individually subpoenaed. In all, the Coalition searched both its offices and warehouse, where millions of pages of documents are stored, in order to produce over 100,000 pages of documents.”

Over the top? Sounds like it to me. There’s much more, especially as it relates to inquiring about personal faith practices. The Weekly Standard details more here.

The Biggest Threat To President Obama

David Brody — Wed, 22 May 2013 16:17:59 GMT

Out of all the controversies swirling around President Obama right now, the biggest threat to him is the one involving the snooping by the justice department when it comes to reporters’ phone conversations and emails. You see, this is the story that really gets the media angry. The IRS story? Yes, nice story. Good political sizzle. Benghazi? Sure that’s a decent one too. But spying on reporters is the one that gets the mainstream media juiced. This is the one that could contain the most damage for the president because the media doesn’t like to be played with. That’s like playing with fire. They will turn on you and we have begun to see that already.

When the media turns on the president, watch out. Then he’s in a world of trouble because they’ll go after him harder in just about every area. And when that happens, he and his administration will be exposed even more. The result? More negative stories and a swift drop in his poll numbers among Americans. At that point, he will start losing the country and when that happens, his legislative agenda is kaput and his presidential legacy could end up as road kill on the side of the highway. Yes, he will go down as a historic president because of the racial barrier he broke but will he go down as an historic president who succeeded or an historic president who fell way short of expectations?

Exclusive: CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson On Media Benghazi Coverage: "Some in the media were not as curious as I think naturally journalists ought to be"

David Brody — Thu, 16 May 2013 16:36:07 GMT

In an exclusive interview with The Brody File, CBS Investigative Reporter Sharyl Attkisson says that when it comes to reporting on the Benghazi controversy, she believes that “some in the media were not as curious as I think naturally journalists ought to be.” She goes on to say that, ““The media’s not always consistent in the vigor that they use to pursue a given topic.”

Attkisson has been lauded by conservative groups because she has been one of the few mainstream media reporters to continually investigate the controversy surrounding Benghazi since the beginning.

Attkisson dropped by The Brody File on Tuesday to record the interview. More of her interview can be seen on next week’s Brody File show. Parts of her interview appeared today on The 700 Club.

The video and transcription of her remarks are below.

Mandatory Video, Audio and Print Courtesy: CBN News/The Brody File

CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson: (On the media’s role in their coverage of Benghazi:) “The media’s not always consistent in the vigor that they use to pursue a given topic and I never quite understand why the difference because I think that if something is important when one administration in office then an equal thing should be treated equally when another administration is in office and I don’t see that as always the case. I do think the media did not use the opportunity in the weeks and months after Benghazi to be as persistent and as pointed as they should have considering the importance of the issue in my view after independently looking at the facts I just think you can’t walk away and conclude anything other than it is an extremely important story with many unanswered questions and contradictions and I think some in the media were not as curious as I think naturally journalists ought to be.”

Video Exclusive: CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson: "There hasn’t been an appetite for the stories that I’ve offered on Benghazi”

David Brody — Wed, 15 May 2013 17:55:10 GMT

In an exclusive interview with The Brody File, CBS Investigative Reporter Sharyl Attkisson says that while top executives at CBS have been very supportive of her Benghazi coverage, it’s been hard to get her offerings on television saying, “There hasn’t been an appetite for the stories that I’ve offered on Benghazi.”

Attkisson has been lauded by conservative groups because she has been one of the few mainstream media reporters to continually investigate the controversy surrounding Benghazi since the beginning.

Attkisson dropped by The Brody File yesterday to record the interview. More of her interview can be seen on next week’s Brody File show. Parts of her interview will also appear tomorrow (Thursday) morning nationally on The 700 Club.

The video and transcription of her remarks are below.

Mandatory Video, Audio and Print Courtesy: CBN News/The Brody File

CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson: “I’ve received a lot of encouragement from the top executives who I consider Jeff Fager, who is our CEO and David Rhodes who is our president who have certainly never said anything to try and interfere with the coverage. They’ve complimented a lot of my work and strongly supported it. On the other hand, every story that you present as a reporter has to be bought by a broadcast meaning, not purchased for money but you have to get them interested in it so maybe the evening news wants one story, morning news wants a story and there hasn’t been an appetite for the stories that I’ve offered on Benghazi so I’ve published a lot online because there’s unlimited content space and I’ve done a lot of my reporting there. Until recently there hasn’t been as you said much of a market for on the air and that’s for a variety of reasons I can’t speak to. I don’t know all of the decision-making that’s involved except that on a given day there’s a finite amount of time to put stories on and there are plenty of stories happening every day that obviously someone’s judging to be more important or more urgent."

(Later she adds)

“This is not the first or the last story that I’ll be doing that I differ with some of my colleagues as to its importance.”

Where is Border Security Priority In "Border Security" Immigration Bill?

David Brody — Mon, 13 May 2013 15:09:21 GMT

So let me see if The Brody File understands this correctly: The Senate’s Gang of Eight immigration reform bill is called the, “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act.” Nice title. Now, we noticed that the words “Border Security” come first in the title, thus making us think how actual border security would be the priority. How naïve of us.

During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week, plenty of Republicans offered amendments to the bill so that border security would be strictly enforced and/or enhanced. The result? Nearly every amendment was voted down. And not surprisingly, Republican gang members Senator Lindsey Graham and Senator Jeff Flake voted with the Democrats to kill the additional border security provisions.

The Brody File doesn’t doubt that Flake and Graham believe that border security must be enhanced despite voting against the amendments. But let’s be real. They voted against the amendments because they’re trying to keep their original Gang of Eight immigration bill intact as much as possible. The more changes, the less likely it is to pass, especially with strong bi-partisan numbers.

So this is really about politics. This is about getting a bill passed rather than making the bill stronger.

Video Flashback: President Obama Jokes About Getting IRS To Target University

David Brody — Mon, 13 May 2013 14:27:22 GMT

With the IRS now admitting they targeted conservative groups, maybe President Obama's 2009 remarks joking about getting the IRS to target Arizona State University doesn't seem as funny today.

Back then, ASU wouldn't grant him an honorary degree because of his lack of experience. Obama addressed the controversy by saying, "I really thought this was much ado about nothing, but I do think we all learned an important lesson. I learned never again to pick another team over the (Arizona State) Sun Devils in my NCAA brackets. . . . President [Michael] Crowe and the Board of Regents will soon learn all about being audited by the IRS."

Hillarious (no exclamation point).

Watch below.

Where's The Outrage On IRS Cover-Up?

David Brody — Mon, 13 May 2013 13:59:26 GMT

Where’s the outrage from The White House and top Democrats on this whole IRS cover-up story? Are they not saying anything because the IRS decided not to target groups with “progressive” in their word portfolio? I guess targeting Tea Party groups doesn’t garner the same outrage.

President Obama says he represents ALL Americans. He is fond of saying that he doesn’t want to pit Red America against Blue America and instead wants to be President of the United States of America. Well, what about now? What happened at the IRS should shake every American (conservative or liberal) to the core. This is NOT what America is about. It’s time for President Obama to put away the teleprompter and speak from his core on this. Some conservatives will say that under these circumstances that is impossible.