Smearing Conservatives, Raking in Cash

Matthew Vadum is an award-winning investigative reporter and the author of the book, "Subversion Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts Are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers."


Pages: 1 2

After the Southern Poverty Law Center – a quarter-billion dollar leftist attack machine funded by George Soros – labeled the conservative Family Research Council a “hate group,” a gay rights activist shot up FRC headquarters in Washington, D.C. last week.

FRC president Tony Perkins acknowledged “the gunman is responsible for the shooting,” but blamed the SPLC for “recklessly” labeling groups “like FRC that they disagree with as ‘hate groups,’ that created this hostile environment.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center’s behavior isn’t reckless as such. It’s far worse than that. It is calculated and malicious, intended to foment hatred and raise oceans of cash by bamboozling gullible liberals into giving money to what is one of the wealthiest nonprofit groups in the history of the United States.

The paranoid conspiracy theorists of the SPLC deliberately conflate conservative groups with genuinely extremist groups such as the infamous Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church, another SPLC-designated hate group. In declaring FRC a hate group, it asserts that FRC is the moral equivalent of other SPLC-classified hate groups such as the Aryan Brotherhood, Nation of Islam, and New Black Panther Party. Even liberal Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank calls it “absurd” for SPLC to place FRC “in the same category as Aryan Nations, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Stormfront and the Westboro Baptist Church.”

FRC is trying to change American culture just as SPLC is trying to push the culture in a different direction. Most Americans would say the two groups have a difference of opinion. SPLC, which pretends to champion “tolerance,” doesn’t see it this way and routinely smears FRC as a hate group in order to discredit it and the ideas it stands for.

Put another way, SPLC attacks the Family Research Council because the latter is opposed to homosexuality.

Period.

Every other complaint SPLC generates about FRC is a mere detail emanating from this central truth. To SPLC founder Morris Dees and his followers those who do not approve of homosexuality are guilty of hate, or if you prefer, thought crime. It follows that those who oppose same-sex marriage are also guilty of hate even though every time the question has been put on the ballot anywhere in the United States – even in irretrievably liberal California— Americans have voted same-sex marriage down. America, it turns out, is guilty of hate.

But SPLC is selective in singling out anti-gay “hate” groups. The Center ignores many Muslim organizations that are violently opposed to homosexuality. Instead the group attacks people like David Horowitz, Pamela Geller, and Robert Spencer who worry about the threat that radical Islamists pose to America, accusing them of anti-Muslim bigotry for daring to speak out.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has been at this game a long time, making money by smearing conservatives. It is so fabulously wealthy that it stashes money in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands, two of those tax haven countries the Left keeps complaining about. In addition to those foreign accounts, in its most recent publicly available tax return the SPLC discloses an absolutely astounding $238.1 million in net assets.

SPLC’s robust balance sheet dwarfs those of other big leftist groups. For example, the highly influential Center for American Progress, founded by Clinton White House chief of staff John Podesta, discloses net assets of just $36.6 million, or less than one-sixth of SPLC’s bank ledger.

Pages: 1 2

  • Fabio Juliano

    At least in one office building in Montgomery, Alabama, the issue of Southern poverty has definitely been solved. Yes, sir!

  • oldtimer

    Hypocrites, commies and just look at who is their biggest supporter. UnAmerican I can do what ever I want,you can't , you have to do what I say attitude needs to stop if this country is to survive as free nation.

  • harrylies

    People opposed to same-sex marriage are like Bob Jones University, which said blacks and whites should not marry. President Bush spoke there when he was in South Carolina in 2000. When McCain noted Bush spoke to a hate group, Bush said he didn't know. Then Bob Jones said opps, there's nothing in the Bible denouncing blacks and whites marrying.

    All the Confederate soldiers fought for slavery. Slaverry was the only reason for the war.

    • Miss Mellie

      You don't know history. But how do your like the "freedmen" now? They compose 13 % of the population and 51% of the prisoners in the country. They live off welfare and foodstamps. Wish the South had won?

      • HoR_Emperor

        Sadly, in this case, he does know history… at least as far as the Confederacy. Even a stopped clock is right once per day.

    • Lee Poteet

      In fact, slavery wasn't an issue until Lincoln thought he was going to lose. The issue was money. The South was the richest section of the country and through tariffs paid eighty-five to ninety percent of the total federal budget. And what did they get back? About ten per cent.

      It was the North that imported the slaves from Africa and it was in the North that there were plantations for the express purpose of breeding slaves, but it is politically incorrect to know or remember that.

      And by the way, blacks fought for the South which had an integreted army long before the North put two segregated regiments into the field.

      • Omar

        Lee Poteet, this is incorrect. You should read James McPherson's Abraham Lincoln and the Second Revolution, which stated that when Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, he not only led the way to freeing the slaves (what would be known as the 13th Amendment), he also freed himself from the stresses of having to compromise with the slave states (there were some slave states among the Union forces) in order to save the Union. Remember, because of the coalition among the states that did not secede (free and slave), compromises and tactics were necessary in order to save the Union. In addition, the U.S. already abolished the slave trade by 1807 and all of the Northern states outlawed slavery by the early 19th century. Slavery was a central issue in U.S. history from the Constitutional Convention to the Civil War.

        • brian

          Why don’t you read the Emancipation you will find it frees NO ONE (page 3, paragraph 3). I’ve read McPhearson’s trash and it is exactly that trash. You think Lincoln was so great and wanted to free the salves well here’s a little speech Lincoln gave in Illinois in 1858 (2 years before becoming president)!

          "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race"

          • Omar

            Brian, you have been reading propaganda from the far-left and "academics" like Lerone Bennet, Jr., who admires real racists like Fidel Castro, who jailed the longest serving black political prisoner in modern history, who is Eusebio Penalver (who served 28 years in prison in Cuba from 1960 to 1988- Check Humberto Fontova's books and articles for details) If Lincoln was really a bigot, why did Frederick Douglass support him? The two men worked alot with each other during the Civil War.

          • Omar

            I said that the Emancipation Proclamation eventually led way to the 13th Amendment., not that the proclamation immediately outlawed slavery entirely. The Emancipation Proclamation led to the transition to abolishing slavery. What you are posting is anti-American, pro Stalinist/Maoist and Communist propaganda.
            My apologies regarding Bennett and Castro. It was Bennett's colleague, Randall Robinson, who admires Castro. But the information on Castro and Penalver and the racism in Cuba is correct.

          • Omar

            And James McPherson is not trash. He is a well respected scholar who knows a lot about U.S. history and tells facts. He does not support atrocities like a certain pseudo-scholar named Noam Chomsky, who supported almost every despotic regime to date (Pol Pot in Cambodia as an example).

      • HoR_Emperor

        No, sorry, that's dishonest Neo-Confederate revisionism. Slavery was the cause of the war, not the tariff, which was a side-issue that would not have been significant without the division of the country into separate slave-agriculture and proto-industrial halves.

        The North did not import slaves and most CERTAINLY did not have "breeder" plantations — that's sheer arrant nonsense.

        The South did NOT have an "integrated army" and did not arm blacks until the final three months of the war, as an act of desperation.

        You smell like a white-supremacist spewing malignant propaganda.

    • Atlas_Collins

      "People opposed to same-sex marriage are like Bob Jones University, which said blacks and whites should not marry."

      No. People opposed to redefining marriage to include the barren and sterile lust affairs of perverts have a healthy aversion to having filth splashed on them by disgusting homosexuals.

    • Canyon1932

      get your history right about the civil war

      • HoR_Emperor

        Sadly, he does.

    • mlcblog

      Not if you read history. There were major economic and states right issues at the time, too.

      • HoR_Emperor

        They were all side-issues to slavery.

        • mlcblog

          There are many opinions about this, each ascribing more or less weight to each issue. You have yours, I am still mulling. Others have theirs.

    • HoR_Emperor

      False analogy.

  • Larry James Dungan

    It Figures George Soros Would be behind this HATE Group.and Liberals are gullable enough to believe the Lies it spews out, what was that old saying: "Repeat a lie often enough and people will begin to believe it."

    • Timmie

      Where is your brain? Oh, you're sitting on it.

  • http://senatorjohnblutarsky.blogspot.com/ Senator Blutarsky

    I always thought the Red Sox and their fans were just fellow citizens peacefully exercising their rights, including the right to express opinions with which I disagree. How blind I was.Thanks to the Southern Poverty Law Center, I now realize what should have been obvious all along – the Red Sox and their followers are a hate group:
    http://senatorjohnblutarsky.blogspot.com/2012/08/

    • Tanstaafl jw

      Do not go there. I could say some things about Yankee fans.

      • http://senatorjohnblutarsky.blogspot.com/ Senator Blutarsky

        That would be a hate crime, just ask the SPLC

    • mlcblog

      Good one!! expose the devils!! glad you have a readership. We should all get one.

  • amused

    The Southern Poverty Law Center , brands as "hate groups " ,any group that espouses hate towards another . FRC has , and is thus branded as such . "Smearing Conservatives " ?? No , SPLC brands any group that speak or teaches hate . FRC has , and is therefore branded as such ….oh well , this one happens to be "a conservative darling " …..if the shoe fits ….

    • Kufar Dawg

      Except CAIR, the front group of Hamas, which calls for the worldwide extermination of Jews in its charter.

  • Schlomotion

    While SPLC is every bit the nasty organization Mr. Vadum describes, one must note that he vehemently uses its nastiness to exculpate Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller. In truth, this Mad Lib of an article reads similarly if you substitute SION and Jihad Watch for SPLC. If Mr. Vadum's thesis is true, then it is true for all similarly situated organizations whose fanatical adherents (Mr. Vadum doesn't even try to prove that Floyd Corkins was acting because of a Mark Potok fatwa) turn around and shoot somebody.

    One might wish to argue that FPM, Jihad Watch, and Discover the Networks are not similar in nature to the SPLC, but are they not both Lawfare and/or Journalismfare organizations for singling out political enemies in a database, smearing them, and raising funds in order to push a fringe political view? Mr. Vadum doth protest too much. Anders Breivik is conspicuously absent from his analysis.

    • Tanstaafl jw

      You must believe in "Islamophobia". How about the Easter Bunny? Tooth Fairy? Great Pumpkin?

    • http://www.matthewvadum.com Matthew Vadum

      You misused “vehemently.”

      • Schlomotion

        Oh really? You didn't find yourself ardent or rancorous when you misused the keyboard?

        • Matthew Vadum

          I don't misuse keyboards. I'm not even sure what would constitute misuse of a keyboard. Is it a misdemeanor somewhere?

          • Kufar Dawg

            He meant when you criticise Islam, or Muslims.

    • Zionista

      shmo you too are a 'hate group' with all your sick personalities – each one a Jew hating loser

    • Drakken

      We on the right can always count on you silly useful idiots of the left to always side with the enemy, good luck in the future Sparky.

    • HoR_Emperor

      Hateful lying troll spews his hatred and lies once again.

  • mcrobbins

    A little bit of science fiction: What if the staff of the SPLC were transported via time machine to seventh century southern Arabia. Wouldn't their Intelligence Report be filled with articles about a religious fanatic who was responsible for hate crimes against polytheists, Jews, and Christians? Wouldn't this little band of misfits be likened to The Order who committed armed robbery to finance their extremist and racist cause. Wouldn't they be railing against the murderous founder and his Arab chauvinism? Wouldn't they attack the separatist notion of one people, one language, and one religion for Arabia? Wouldn't the founder's recitation be likened to the Turner Diaries, a recipe for murder and destruction? Maybe after returning to 2012, the SPLC staff would find that Robert Spencer had a point. Maybe. (Or is political correctness a stronger impulse than truth?)

    • Kufar Dawg

      The "morality" of the SPLC is based entirely on who contributes the most to its funding. I'm willing to bet a lot
      of its cash these days is coming from islamofascist NGO's or front groups.

  • http://rkeefe57.wordpress.com/ Richard Keefe

    There is no legal definition for “hate group.” which is why even the FBI does not, cannot, designate “hate groups,” but somehow a private fundraising group like the SPLC can?

    The SPLC’s “hate group” label is designed to be inflammatory, to rile up its mostly elderly donor base in hopes of getting them to send in even more cash. It’s nothing more than a highly profitable brand name. A marketing ploy.

    Because the term is subjective, and therefore meaningless, it allows the SPLC to denigrate and dehumanize the “other” without accusing them of any actual crimes. It’s designed to stifle all conversation on any given topic because who in their right mind would speak to a “hate group”?

    It’s little more than old time vigilantism at its worst and now blood has been spilled because of it. The SPLC can deny it all it wants, but that blood is now on their hands.

    http://wp.me/pCLYZ-eq

  • http://twitter.com/shilparules @shilparules

    SPLC = Shysters Punking Liberal Chumps. Old Morris Dees is almost a caricature of the shifty Southern snake-oil salesman.

    • Matthew Vadum

      Almost?

  • http://tarandfeathersusa.wordpress.com/ Iratus Vulgas

    The SPLC's image of conservatives is a Mad Magazine caricature that's as old as this leftist organization itself. Their narrative has changed little since their inception. I consider their work instructive of how out of touch the Left is with the modern conservative movement. Stuck in the Sixties? At least.

  • clarespark

    Liberals get away with this nonsense because the Stalinists won the cultural Cold War, and maintain their grip through useful idiots. I wrote about that here: http://clarespark.com/2012/08/20/ernest-hemingway…. "Ernest Hemingway, Carlos Baker, and the Spanish Civil War." They won; true liberalism lost and we are disabling ourselves by ignoring this history of penetration and ongoing coverup.

  • stevefraser

    A Leftwing Hate Group.

  • Ghostwriter

    It's a shame that Morris Dees and the SPLC are doing this. They did good work in fighting groups like the Klan. I'm afraid they made a mistake in attacking the FRC. I watched a little of "Huckabee" yesterday on this. They said that they were praying for the welfare of the gunman. To me,I'd be happy if the gunman spend some time in jail for what he did. That's what he deserves.

  • amused

    SPLC , does not designate hate crimes , however the SPLC does designate groups that preach hatred of other groups , they are politically neutral.FRC went over the line and you folks here condemn them simply because the organization that is branded happens to be a Conservative darling . Oh well too bad .
    So lets slander SPLC , and lets blame it for the gunman . Yea , practice what you allegedly preach . I read the statements isaued by FRC , that is hatespeech , so if the shoe fits – WEAR IT .

    • HoR_Emperor

      Cut-and-paste troll.

      • amused

        juvenile , and no although repetitous of my reply to another , it is not a cut and paste ………assssshole .

  • Lou

    [Hi Matthew. You are right on with your excellent thoughts. Happened to spot this think-piece on the net.]

    Hatred Behind the DC Shooting

    If something is unnatural or anti-American or anti-Christian, the Southern Poverty Law Center is drawn to it like flies to something smelly. Which is why the SPLC hates the Family Research Council which is pro-traditional family, pro-America, and pro-Christ.
    After the shooting at FRC headquarters, which could have been a massacre, FRC president Tony Perkins stated that the SPLC has "been reckless in labeling organizations hate groups because they disagree with them on public policy."
    The SPLC calls the FRC a "hate" group because it follows Christ who said to His followers "Love your enemies" (Matt. 5:44).
    By way of contrast, heavily Jewish SPLC follows the ages-old Talmud which HATES science, females, children (homosexual sex with children is okay!), all Gentiles, Jesus (who was born a "bastard" – Jewish Encyclopedia), and all Christians! For sources Google or Yahoo "The Earliest Hate Criminals," "The Talmud and double standards" (July 3, 2012), and "Talmud" (Wikipedia).
    Be sure to Google "Zionist Watch" (5/26/2007) which called SPLC founder Morris Dees "a Jewish radical leftist pervert…sexual deviant…flagrant adulterer…[and] alleged child molester," also Google "The Anti-Chick-fil-A Jihad" and "Mikey Weinstein, Jesus-Basher."
    As you can tell, the SPLC (which is chummy with fellow schmucks including the ADL and ACLU) is a "love" group!
    BTW, the one five-letter name starting with "J" that SPLC etc. hate (no, not James or Julia) warned in Matt. 24:9 that in the end times "ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." (I wonder how soon the SPLC will work for the banning of the Bible, the one book that America's greatest leaders highly exalted – Google "Dangerous Radicals of the Religious Right.")
    While the SPLC and think-alikes are busy back-stabbing evangelicals (viewed as Israel's best friends), the same schmucks are creating a huge backlash that will bring about the predicted end-time slaughter of two-thirds of Jewry and Jerusalem's devastation (Zech. 13 & 14). By doing all it can to help fulfill the Bible's predictions, the pervs at the you-know-what are actually making the Bible even more believable!