The context of this doesn't really matter much (it came off of a conservasite, but I don't care about the politics at the moment). The author of an op-ed piece declared something to be "a cross before werewolves"--warding off something nasty that was trying to get in, I guess from context.
Only--maybe I've spent too much (or too little?) time reading horror and folklore, but to the best of my knowledge, a cross before a werewolf doesn't do anything at all, unless it's silver and re-shaped into a weapon. I guess you could stab a werewolf with a silver cross, if you got close enough, and in Silver Bullet, a silver crucifix is melted down to make the title object... but a cross in front of a werewolf? Dude. Crosses in front of vampires have a history. Werewolves are considered demonic, but the religious paraphernelia haven't been especially prominent in lycanthropic lore.
Maybe this qualifies me as being way too picky over ephemera. But would it have been that hard to just say "a cross before vampires" instead?