The Washington Gadfly
Weyrich: Neas is Devil's Little Helper
"He may be doing Satan's work from time to time, like now...."

Free Congress Foundation chairman Paul Weyrich these days treats Evan Gahr, who famously called him a "demented anti-Semite" for something he said only with love for Christ and no malice in his heart towards Jews, with the affection and pride of an older brother.

Even when the investigative reporter embarasses his pet causes, such as the anti-gay marriage movement, and more recently, John Roberts, whose star-studded resume, Gahr reported, included his central role in the Reagan Administration's notorious effort to subsidize bigoted Christians at www.chimpstein.com Bob Jones University.

But Weyrich was less than impressed when Gahr emailed him last year to say he had just seen the very office from which Ralph Neas as Leadership Conference on Civil Rights head coordinate the successful effort to block the Supreme Court nomination of Bob Bork (who unlike Neas long sported a little devil goatee).

Gahr told his newfound brother that "I thought I was in the Devil's lair.

You were, Weyrich replied. Ralph Neas is Satan.

Weyrich yesterday reiterated his allegation.

He also suggested that those who call themselves pro-choice Republicans might be carrying pitchforks in their part of the GOP big tent.

Evan Gahr Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 7:25 AM To: Paul Weyrich Check out the finished product. It's totally awesome.

Did you tell me or were you quoted somewhere or both that liberalism is built on deceit? The reaction from PFAW when I tried to ask simple questions about products which they've publicly endorsed is a good example. What scares them?

You called Neas Satan in emails to me, but I notice you didn't call him a "so-called progressive Catholic" or "self-hating Catholic," as some conservatives do to Catholics who don't follow their policy prescriptions.

Is my understanding correct that the Church has no specific concept of "so-called progressive Catholic" or "self-hating Catholic?"

Even Catholics who are ex-communicated are not called self-haters?

Farrenheit 12/6

[Quoted text hidden]

Paul Weyrich Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 6:13 PM To: Evan Gahr

Yes I did say that modern liberalism is built on deceit. The truth scares them. That is why they always warn Republicans not to campaign on the social issues. Most Republicans, except for Bush, have given in to these warnings. Just like Satan flees from the cross, these people flee from the truth.

I can't judge Neas. Only God can do so. What I can say is that his public positions are not in accord with the church he purports to be a member of. While since Vatican II the church does not formally excommunicate people except in extraordinary circumstances. The church claims that people excommunicate themselves when they publicly disagree with church doctrine. While it may be true that some Catholics are self haters there is no precedent for calling them such.

From: "Paul Weyrich"
To:
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 09:30:14 -0500
Subject: RE: Matthew

Why do you persist in saying that I called Neas Satan. I did not. He may be doing Satan's work from time to time, like now, but that is a subjective view and I certainly don't believe he is Satan.

Is Mark Green the Grinch?
Mark Green, the New York City political fixture whose most recent electoral defeat was to Big Apple Mayor Mike Bloomberg in 2001, last night said that People for the American Way probbly acted illegally when they barred from their December 6 Kennedy Center gala a conservative-minded reporter determined to ask about the Noam Chomsky books and even more venal stuff that the group hakws on eBay.

If the Harvard Law School graduate's comments during an improptu interview (he was suddenly deluged with questions on the uptown Lexington Ave subway by a reporter who didn't introduct himself other than to say "Hey, Mark, PFAW hawks Noam Chomsky books) are typical, it seems he seems animated by a core set of liberal principles that he follows without regard to political expediency.

Or marital harmony. The Harvard Law School grad noted that his wife is director of PFAW's New York City chapter.

Rabbi David Saperstein, however, a PFAW Foundation Board member refuss to criticize his comrades-in-arms for the Kennedy Center caper.

He was however brave enough yesterday to criticize the Republican Jewish Coalition for an advertisement cricial of the Union of Reform Judaism's resolution about the Iraq war.

Saperstein won't condemn Ralph Neas for quashing free speech. But he busts on the RJC for expressing an opinion?

Justice, Justice. Yee shall seek. But only outside your own ideological camp?

Apparently so.

Art Spitzer (ArtSpitzer@aol.com), director of the ACLU's local DC office, first dodged repeated inquiries than finally said, with no factual or legal eviden offered, that PFAW didn't violate the law. He too won't break ranks.

Spitzer in 1991 unequivocally criticized all-women health clubs as blatantly illegal. But hey Spa Lady, unlike PFAW, is no liberal behemoth.

Does the PFAW Foundation fund directly or indirectly the ACLU?

Why doesn't Art Spitzer, who refuses to offer his personal view of the Anti-Flag CD which calls Bush a turncoat, understand, as Green does, that sunlight is the best disinfectant for hard left filth?

Asked if Noam Chomsky, whose books PFAW auctioned last year much to their embarassment after Chimpstein www.chimpstein.com broke the story, is anti-American, Green, a Harvard Law School grad, made a distinction with a difference.

"I don't think [Chomsky] hates America," said Green, a former acolyte of Ralph "I felt like a nigger." "I think he hates certain things about America."

Saperstein won't condemn Ralph Neas for quashing free speech. But he busts on the RJC for expressing an opinion?

Justice, Justice. Yee shall seek. But only outside your own ideological camp?

Green, a steadfast liberal Democrat whose most recent accomplishment is losing the mayoral election to Mike Bloomberg, then started to offer some random, unsolicited insights about the body politic.

Reporter: Considering that you keep losing elections why should anybody care what you say?

Marc Green: I've one six elections [counting primaries]

Reporter. Oh, really? Remind me, again. You beat D'Amato?

Marc Green: How many have you won?

Reporter: I'm the reporter. You're the public figure. I ask the questions.

Mark Green: I've been on New York one for four years. I'm a journalist.

Reporter: Oh, really? Can I see your press pass?

Marc Green: Let me ask you a question about Iraq. Do you think we're doing the right thing there.

Reporter: Wait. Wait. You're switching topics.

Marc Green: [Another loaded question]

Evan Gahr: I'll answer your question if you answer mine.

Marc Green: OK

Evan Gahr: I think Bush lied about the whole thing and should be held accountable.

Evan Gahr: So did PFAW violate the law when the barred me from the event?

Marc Green: What?

Evan Gahr: There was an event at the Kennedy Center. It was in the paper. Sharon Stone was there. I told Ralph Neas that I wanted to ask questions about Noam Chomsky [and the AntiFlag CD that calls Bush a turncoat and liar. They wouldn't let me in.

Sadly, Art Spitzer and David Saperstein are too busy defending freedom of expression against the Christian Right to worry about Ralph Neas's new wall of seperation between Evan Gahr. and Sharon Stone.
Marc Green: Was it a public event?

Evan Gahr: Yeah, open to anyone.

Marc Green: They probably did, then.

No wonder Mark Green keeps losing to Republicans. He is animated by a set of core liberal principles and does not apply them selectively for political expediency. Like Nader and Paul Weyrich, he just says what he feels is right, come what may.

Meanwhile, Gahr this week faxed a discrimination complaint against Neas to the DC Commission on Human Rights.

Never mind Robert Bork's America.

What would Ralph Neas's look like if his crypto-fascist tactics at the Kennedy Center event, headlined by actress Sharon Stone, are any indication?

Neas quite possibly made a calculated and shrewd decision that to bar Gahr would cost him less negative publicity than to have the journalist inside.

Fair enough. Everyone has agendas.

But what does it say about Neas that he places political expediency first, and free speech second?

Maybe Green, an honorable and unabashed liberal in the best tradition of Joe Rauh, can find him a lawyer.

Sadly, Art Spitzer and David Saperstein are too busy defending freedom of expression against the Christian Right to worry about Ralph Neas's new wall of seperation between Evan Gahr. and Sharon Stone.

Satan is pro death. It appears Alito is pro life. Working against Alito, especially being the chief organizer, is apparently doing Satan's work just as I believe those who are doing their best to confirm Alito are apparently doing the Lord's work. If someone has been taught by Church authorities a completely distorted view of the Gospel then it is understandable why someone like that might be inadvertently co-operating with Satan. So the burden would be on whoever incorrectly taught the Scriptures. The problem appears to be that Neas does not have a properly formed conscience.

If I could ask him one question it would be: How does what you are doing square with the Catholic faith which you purport to practice?

   Evan Gahr EvanGahr@aol.com, a former press critic for the late New York Post editorial page editor Eric Breindel, recently broke the story of a race discrimination lawsuit against the Washington Post. He has written for almost every major conservative publication.