Wayne Allyn Root, a Nevada activist and the 2008 Libertarian nominee for vice president, comes across as something like the poor man’s Donald Trump. Like Trump, Root is loud, bombastic and full of barely thought-through conspiracy theories about President Obama. The two also know each other: Trump wrote a blurb for Root’s most recent book and Root volunteered to be Trump’s “Karl Rove” if he’s elected president.
Root boasted of his role in the Trump rally during a rambling speech at a summit hosted by Frank Gaffney today that at least three GOP candidates are scheduled to attend.
Here is a brief introduction to some of Root’s favorite conspiracy theories, which we can only imagine he will touch upon at tonight’s rally:
1. Obama Both Did And Did Not Attend Columbia
Root’s signatureconspiracy theory has to do with Obama’s time at Columbia University, which Root says is where Obama learned his strategy to impose socialist control on the U.S. even though, according to Root, he was never seen in classes and probably is lying about going to Columbia at all.
2. Obama ‘Cut His Afro’ To Become The ‘Manchurian Candidate’
Root put a new spin on his Obama theory during a 2014 campaign stop for Mississippi Senate candidate Chris McDaniel, when he said that Obama’s Columbia classes (which he both did and did not attend) taught him to “cut his afro” in order to infiltrate the political class and become a “Manchurian candidate” meant to take down America from within.
4. Obama Wants A Race War So He Can Impose Martial Law
Like many conservative commentators, Root contends that America’s troubles with race were in the past until Obama came along to divide everyone, saying that the president “didn’t come in to help us end the specter of racism, he brought it back.”
Root wrote during the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, that “Obama needs ‘division.’ Race warfare. Class warfare. Anger. Resentment. Civil war.” Obama, he wrote, saw Ferguson as “the perfect opportunity to divide the nation, to incite unrest and violence across America” and could “use spreading unrest to declare martial law.”
5. Democrats Win By Voting 10 Times Each
Root has taken voter fraud hysteria to a new level, claiming last year that President Obama won reelection because “Democratic voters across this country are voting four times, five times, 10 times each for the Democrats.”
Some of the biggest applause lines at today’s “Nevada National Security Action Summit,” hosted by the Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney, have been comments accusing President Obama of being a secret Muslim and deliberately trying to bring down the country.
John Bolton, an ambassador to the United Nations during the Bush administration who has since become a conservative activist, offered more of the same in his address to the summit, which will also feature at least three Republican presidential candidates.
“The fact is, Barack Obama does not view American national security as one of his priorities,” Bolton said. “It gets in the way of what his real priority is, and he told us very candidly in the 2008 election, it was to fundamentally transform the country. And national security just distracts from that.”
He told the crowd that Obama’s supposed indifference to national security shows that it must be the first priority for electing a next president.
“And I think that you can see the risks that we’ve undertaken over the last seven and soon to be eight years by electing somebody who’s utterly unqualified to think through foreign policy issues, who simply doesn’t care about them,” he said. “The net effect of Barack Obama’s presidency will show that the biggest threat to national security we have is sitting in the Oval Office, because he’s indifferent to national security.”
In an interview with conservative Wisconsin talk radio host Vicki McKenna last week, Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) spokesman Ira Mehlman, warned that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s acceptance of Syrian refugees would endanger the U.S.
McKenna lamented that the United States is doing “nothing to secure our borders” and described our border with Mexico as the “porous as they come,” stating that it is a “conduit point for people from Middle Eastern countries.” Our border with Canada, McKenna said, is just as insecure. Mehlman agreed, adding that Trudeau has agreed to continue taking in refugees from what McKenna referred to as “known terrorist countries.”
“If you think our southern border is not secure, our northern border is not secure at all,” Mehlman said. “We haven’t had the need before now, but I guess if the new prime minister up there in Canada has his way, you might start seeing people in Wisconsin coming across.”
Conservative activist Jesse Lee Peterson is coming to the defense of Donald Trump’s proposal to ban all Muslims from entering the country, writing in WorldNetDaily over the weekend that only “traitors” like President Obama disagree with Trump’s plan.
Peterson laments that just seven years after the 9/11 attacks, Americans elected “a man with a Muslim name and sympathies” who “sides with the enemy.”
“Knowing the administration’s desire to overrun us with Muslims, Trump’s position makes a whole lot of sense,” he writes … unless, of course, you’re a traitor.
For many American citizens, the murder of nearly 3,000 of our own on 9/11 by Muslim fanatics was a wake-up call. The naïve way many of us had viewed the world melted under shattering reality in the space of one chilling morning.
Unfortunately, after the immediate shock passed, most went back to sleep and stayed asleep. Just seven years later, a man with a Muslim name and sympathies, Barack Hussein Obama, was elected president, and four years later, was re-elected. Now after Paris and San Bernardino, it couldn’t be clearer that he sides with the enemy. God help us.
Paris and San Bernardino brought some of the post-9-11 reality back to us – that Muslims represent a clear and present danger. It was another wake-up call for some, and for others, another opportunity to deny their country’s need for self-preservation by siding with the enemy.
The deniers are cowards – and traitors.
After San Bernardino, Americans rejected Barack Hussein Obama’s call for gun control and massive Muslim immigration. The people instead clamored for Muslim control.
In this environment, one man, Donald Trump, dared to voice what was on the minds of millions of Americans, and called for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the U.S., until we can get a grip on our nation’s security. Knowing the administration’s desire to overrun us with Muslims, Trump’s position makes a whole lot of sense.
Unless you’re a Quran-believing Muslim, liberal or RINO Republican.
This all points to the insanity of today’s world, where Muslim savages follow a seventh-century madman who grew up without his father, and waged bloody jihad against Jews, Christians and other “infidels.” And yet, almost all of our leaders – instead of standing against the atrocities committed by members of the “religion of peace” – are actually supporting their reign of terror by doing nothing to stop it. Worse, they’re actively working against the few who – like Donald Trump – are standing up for the American people.
Ann Coulter, the conservative pundit who has taken credit for shaping Donald Trump’s immigration policy, spoke with Breitbart News on Saturday, where she said that Trump’s “genius” plan to ban Muslim immigration should lead to a sweeping suspension of all immigration.
Coulter said that the ban on Muslims from entering the country should lead to a halt on non-Muslims immigrants as well, likening it to Obamacare, which she insisted was designed as a “two-step” plan that was designed to fail and then usher in a single-payer health care system.
“Trump’s immigration policy paper, the greatest political document since the Magna Carta, proposes a moratorium on all immigration,” she said. “It’s completely out of control. It isn’t just the Muslim terrorists we’re letting in, though that is stupid enough. Far more Americans are killed by Mexicans than by Muslim terrorists, Muslim terrorists do it in a more spectacular way.”
She added: “Why not just suspend it all? It seems to me that’s the two-step we’re moving to here until we can figure out what’s going on with any of these immigrants coming in.”
On the Saturday edition of Breitbart News’ Sirius XM show, Ben Carson said that while he would consider leaving the Republican Party if officials “subvert the will of the voters” in the presidential nomination contest, he would rule out running as a third-party candidate for president.
“That would guarantee Hillary’s victory,” Carson said of a third-party bid. “If we get another progressive president and they get two or three Supreme Court picks, America as we know it is gone.”
Carson has previously said that if he is elected president, he would not feel obligated to recognize Supreme Court rulings, claiming the executive branch does not “have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law.”
Last month, Donald Trump appeared on “The Alex Jones Show,” where he told the right-wing pundit that he has an “amazing” reputation, unlike other journalists, whom Trump commonlyrefers to as “scum.” Among Jones’ many wild conspiracy theories is his belief that the massacre at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, which took place three years ago today, was “staged” by the Obama administration.
Trump has not faced any criticism from his fellow Republicans for going on Jones’ program or for touting his work, despite the fact that Jones has been instrumental in pushing the harmful Sandy Hook conspiracy theory.
A 2013 Fairleigh Dickinson University poll found that “a quarter (25%) of Americans think that facts about the shootings at Sandy Hook elementary last year are being hidden and an additional eleven percent are unsure” and that “Republicans are more likely to think that the truth about Sandy Hook is being suppressed, with 32 percent agreeing.”
Sandy Hook truthers, who largely believe that the attack was faked as part of a government plot to push strict gun laws, are not alone in delivering twisted responses to the mass shooting. Others have used the massacre to attack gay marriage, the separation of church and state and, of course, gun laws.
WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush said that Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza “positively reeked of what intelligence operatives I know would call the tell-tale signs of recruitment and conditioning,” and wondered if Lanza was the target of a government scheme to recruit “vulnerable individuals for psyops” to advance “their diabolical agenda.”
Renew America’s Austin Miles similarly suggested that the massacre was “purposely orchestrated” to “disarm all Americans to retard resistance,” writing that Lanza and others were “brainwashed into carrying out such deeds that would prove a point about private gun ownership and the threat to all families as a result.” Then, he said, there would be no opposition to Obama using an “Executive Order to declare himself president (dictator) for life.” Fellow Renew America pundit, Laurie Roth, claimed Obama “staged” the attack because he’s on a “mission to take assault weapons from the people.”
Radio host Rick Wiles stated that “Sandy Hook was timed to coincide with the political agenda of the socialist Democrats such as Barry Soetoro [Obama], Chuckie Schumer, and Dianne Feinstein to pass stringent federal gun control laws,” alleging that “the shooting event was timed to coincide with the gun control initiative.” Another conservative radio host, Bradlee Dean, likened the Sandy Hook killings to Adolf Hitler “attacking his own Reichstag to start a world war” and said that it was orchestrated to pass an arms control treaty.
The Tea Party-aligned National Liberty Foundation insisted that the “staged” massacre showed just “how far your president went to get your guns”: “He wants to be a dictator, he doesn’t want to get out of the White House and he loves spending your money.”
Many of their assertions relied heavily on discredited claims that “crisis actors” posed as grieving family members at the school and that one of the young victims later met with President Obama (she didn’t, it was her little sister).
One Republican congressman, Louie Gohmert, however, told a fan of his that he would watch a Sandy Hook conspiracy theory video because he’s “always learning new things.”
Religious Right’s Reaction
Several Religious Right activists responded to the Sandy Hook shooting by warning that the massacre was a sign that God is no longer protecting America, removing his hand of protection due to supposed societal ills such as gay marriage, abortion rights and the separation of church and state.
“Millions of people have decided that God doesn’t exist, or he’s irrelevant to me and we have killed 54 million babies and the institution of marriage is right on the verge of a complete redefinition,” Focus on the Family founder James Dobson lamented. “Believe me, that is going to have consequences too. And a lot of these things are happening around us, and somebody is going to get mad at me for saying what I am about to say right now, but I am going to give you my honest opinion: I think we have turned our back on the Scripture and on God Almighty and I think he has allowed judgment to fall upon us.”
“We’ve taken God our of our school, we’ve taken him out of our government and now we seem shocked at all of these things,” Franklin Graham stated following the attack. “Why are we shocked? We shouldn’t be shocked. This is what happens when a society turns its back on God.” Author Joel Rosenberg said the shooting was one of the tragedies America is “reaping as a result of a society that increasingly ignores God,” specifically blaming comedian Jon Stewart for waging a “war on Christmas” and mocking conservatives.
One pastor said that a “gracious,” “merciful” and “loving” God decided not to intervene to prevent the shooting because it would “bring us back to our senses” and make people realize that God’s judgment “has really come by our turning away from the Lord.” Bryan Fischer of American Family Radio specifically blamed legal abortion and the lack of state-sponsored prayer for the attack, stating that God is a “gentleman” who “is not going to go where he is not wanted.”
Blocking background checks
Ted Cruz has proudly boasted of his role in successfully blocking a bipartisan Senate measure to expand background checks on gun purchases following the school shooting, bragging that unlike Republican “squishes,” he stood firm in opposing universal background checks. The Sandy Hook-affected families who supported the efforts, he said, were being used as “political props.”
National Rifle Association board member and musician Ted Nugent blamed the shooting on America’s “politically correct culture” and “‘anything goes’ value system” which “vilifies, condemns and mocks traditional societal values and customs at every opportunity,” while NRA executive director Wayne LaPierre delivered an unhinged speech against gun control measures, lashing out at the group’s critics, the entertainment industry, video games, the media and a lack of guns in schools.
But while nearly nine out of 10 Americans, including nine out of 10 gun owners, support more background checks, Republican lawmakers care more about the support they receive from groups like the NRA, and have done next to nothing to tackle the issue of gun violence in the wake of tragedies like Sandy Hook.
Instead, Republicans claimed that the government should focus on mental health and thentried to block access to mental health services.
Few if any of the GOP presidential candidates are offering any meaningful gun reform proposals, outside of their unwavering dogma: More guns.
Admiral Ace Lyons, who received an award from CSP alongside Sen. Jeff Sessions earlier this year, took a question from a woman in the audience who told him, “I’d like to know why no one — that’s literally no one — is gutsy enough to call a Muslim a Muslim in our White House. It’s pretty obvious that he is.”
After what appeared to be a brief consultation with Gaffney, Lyons responded: “Well, all I can say is he certainly acts the part, doesn’t he?”
It’s hardly surprising that Lyons got that question since he spent his entire speech claiming that President Obama is deliberately working to take America down from within with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood, which he said has infiltrated every U.S. national security agency and is shaping foreign policy.
“When the president of the United States is not interested in America leading or America winning, then you understand that greatest threat to our national security resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,” Lyons declared to applause.
Obama, he said, has been pushing policies that are “anti-American, anti-Western, but pro-Islam, pro-Iranian and pro-Muslim Brotherhood.”
“I have to ask you,” he said. “Why would an American president embrace the Muslim Brotherhood when their creed is to destroy America from within by our own miserable hands and replace our constitution with Sharia law? It makes absolutely no sense.”
The Supreme Court issued a ruling today in another of its series of arbitration cases. Yet again, the Court upheld the ability of a powerful corporation to force consumers to agree to arbitration and sign away their right to engage in class action should the company violate their legal rights. Class actions are a vital mechanism to hold large businesses accountable. We’ve been writing about this trend for the past several years in cases like AT&T v. Concepcion and American Express v. Italian Colors Restaurant.
Unlike the other cases, today's ruling in DIRECTV v. Imburgia was not 5-4 in the predictable lineup. Instead, it was 6-3, with Justice Breyer writing the opinion, joined by Justices Kagan, Scalia, Alito, Kennedy, and Chief Justice Roberts. Justice Ginsburg (joined by Justice Sotomayor) dissented, while Justice Thomas had a separate dissent.
Ginsburg’s dissent opened up with clear description of how the Roberts Court has empowered corporations and weakened consumers:
It has become routine, in a large part due to this Court’s decisions, for powerful economic enterprises to write into their form contracts with consumers and employees no-class-action arbitration clauses. … Acknowledging the precedent so far set by the Court, I would take no further step to disarm consumers, leaving them without effective access to justice.
Americans have long been able to count on strong consumer protection laws to protect them for being victimized by predatory corporations. Those laws, including the right to class actions, have been essential in letting ordinary people stand as equals to giant corporations and hold those businesses accountable. Ginsburg is correct to say that the line of 5-4 arbitration cases has left us “disarmed,” because giant corporations are increasingly empowered to change the relationship between buyer and seller into one between predator and prey. We are, indeed, disarmed and without effective access to justice … despite laws designed to protect us. In closing, Ginsburg wrote that the Court is:
further degrading the rights of consumers and further insulating already powerful economic entities from liability for unlawful acts.
We deserve better from our nation’s Supreme Court.
Katrina Pierson, a national spokeswoman for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, addressed concerns about Trump’s proposal for a ban on Muslim immigration on Friday by saying such a ban would not be “religious discrimination” because you don’t “have the freedom to kill Americans just because it’s based on your religion.” She added that any Muslim “can just flip into a jihadist” and that Americans victimized by Islamist terrorism are now being “criminalized.”
“It’s absolutely not religious discrimination,” Pierson told One American News Network’s Liz Wheeler , because one of the things that we keep hearing is that it’s not constitutional, it’s un-American, etc., etc., freedom of religion. But I have to tell you, I’m not sure that anyone in this country agrees that you have the freedom to kill Americans just because it’s based in your religion.”
Pierson then linked Trump’s proposal to the American lives lost in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “But more importantly,” she said, "this was a ban simply on immigration coming in as a Muslim. We all know that Muslims are not hostile, all of them. However, we also know that they are killing Americans in the name of Islam and we have to take that seriously. And what I don’t understand is that since 9/11, we have the Iraq War, we have the fight in Afghanistan, that’s 10,000 American lives, and we still have a porous border, we haven’t reformed the visa system, and just when we had the San Bernardino attacks, he was radicalized for a couple of years and she came in on a visa and passed with flying colors.”
“I’m not quite sure why there’s this real big push to sort of cover the hostility that comes within the faith of Islam,” Pierson added later in the interview. “We have two sides of this coin. We have the ‘Islam is a religion of peace,’ but, at the same time, all of the sudden the same people can just flip into a jihadist. We have to figure this out one way or another because one thing we can no longer continue to do is allow Americans to be attacked on their own soil and then be criminalized afterwards.”
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah is quite pleased that the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination, Donald Trump, is a birther, but would like to remind everybody that he and fellow WND “reporter” Jerome Corsi were the drivingforce behind the conspiracy theory that President Obama is ineligible to be president.
Farah writes today that while the GOP-led Congress will never get to the bottom of the “fake” birth certificate, “maybe history will judge Obama more honestly.”
“Maybe 20 years from now, when it no longer matters, the truth will come out about his eligibility scam,” he continued. “Maybe Obama himself will get millions of dollars by revealing it all in his memoirs.”
Obama’s legion of minions, by the way, still claim to this day that Trump’s repeated calls for Obama to release his birth certificate also “disqualify” him from running for president.
One in-the-tank supporter, Gloria Steinem, had this to say: “He was a birther. He should be disqualified on the single fact he was accusing President Obama of not being a legitimate president. He was like chief of the birthers!”
Actually, Trump wasn’t the chief. That role would belong to one of two people – me or, my colleague, Jerome Corsi, who wrote the bestselling book, “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” The rise of that book to No. 1 on Amazon prompted Obama to the desperate measure of manufacturing a long-form birth certificate.
Trump rightly called that document a “fake” at the time.
Trump spoke the truth when he called Obama a liar. Haven’t we figured out by now that Obama lies easily, prolifically and instinctively? Isn’t that how he achieved the presidency – legally or not?
It’s hardly just Obamacare that Obama lied about. It’s everything – everything! As impostor president, he has created with his shameless, flagrant, incessant dishonesty a kind of national virtual reality. I don’t even think he knows what truth is – or cares.
The tragic part is that his beloved followers do not know the truth or care about it, either. They are like mirror images of the fraud they helped empower – the epic sham they helped perpetuate.
It’s probably too late to do anything about the Obama fraud.
He’s got just a little over a year left in office. The Republican Congress has no stomach for holding him accountable in the slightest way. They continue to write him blank checks to finish the job of “fundamentally transforming America,” running up deficits in the process. If Obama committed a high crime on live television, they wouldn’t move for impeachment.
Maybe history will judge Obama more honestly. Maybe 20 years from now, when it no longer matters, the truth will come out about his eligibility scam. Maybe Obama himself will get millions of dollars by revealing it all in his memoirs.
Ted Cruz sent a fundraising email on behalf of the radical gun group Gun Owners of America yesterday, boasting that he was “honored to work with GOA” to stop gun legislation after the Sandy Hook massacre and declaring that President Obama’s gun control efforts “have nothing to do with keeping Americans safe, and everything to do with his left-wing hatred of your liberty and your rights under the Constitution.”
When GOA mobilized to help defeat background check legislation in the wake of the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting, the New York Times identified Cruz as the gun group’s “key ally in the Senate.”
GOA is, in the words of the Southern Poverty Law Center, “a more radical alternative to the National Rifle Association,” which through an absolutist stance against any and all gun regulation has helped to push both the NRA and the gun debate to the right and away from any possible compromise.
Pratt’s and GOA’s extremism is evidently no problem for Cruz, however, who signed on to an email raising funds for the group that sounds exactly like any of Pratt’s rants, declaring that President Obama “hates the 2nd Amendment for the same reason he hates most of what is in the Bill of Rights – it limits the power of government and protects the liberty of individuals” and that the president is “angry at the American people for rising up against him in defense of our liberty.” He urges GOA members to sign a petition calling for the defunding of a potential Obama proposal to expand background checks at gun shows and, of course, to give generously to GOA so that the group can continue “exposing the truth behind the anti-gun politicians’ real agenda of mass confiscation.”
Here are some excerpts:
Dear Fellow Patriot,
This is not a fundraising letter for my campaign.
You see, I am writing you today about something more important than any one man or one election: your 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
My father fled an oppressive regime in Cuba where the people were not citizens, they were mere tools of the state.
That is why, during my time as Texas’ Solicitor General and in the U.S. Senate, I have taken all threats to the 2nd Amendment very seriously. The ability of people to arm themselves has been critical to securing liberty from monarchs and tyrants throughout history. And the 2nd Amendment upholds your fundamental right to protect yourself and your family from harm.
But President Obama disagrees. He hates the 2nd Amendment for the same reason he hates most of what is in the Bill of Rights – it limits the power of government and protects the liberty of individuals.
*** And so, just as he did in 2013, the president is trying to exploit a tragic shooting by unhinged lunatics as a reason to weaken the 2nd Amendment and punish law-abiding citizens. ***
However, he is not bothering to try and pass a law in Congress – he is scheming to do an “end run” around Congress and use Executive Orders to impose more intrusive background checks, restrictions on private sellers, and other illegal anti-gun regulations that will weaken your rights while not doing anything to keep Americans safe.
Congress has a chance to stop him, but we must act quickly and we must hear directly from millions of citizens like you.
Specifically, I am urging pro-2nd Amendment colleagues in the House and Senate to use the appropriations process – the “power of the purse” granted Congress by the Constitution – to defund President Obama’s Executive Gun Grab.
If the Obama ATF has no money to enforce his lawless anti-gun regulations, the president will be powerless to enact his grand schemes to shred the Constitution by executive decree.
Only with a huge grassroots outpouring from the American people can we stop the president’s desperate push for new gun controls . Why am I so confident this can work?
Because I already saw it work back in 2013. Do you remember how, in the wake of the sickening massacre at Sandy Hook, the president chose to use that tragedy as an excuse to further his long-standing hostility to the 2nd Amendment?
Back then, I was honored to work with GOA and lead a massive outpouring of grassroots opposition that shut down the Obama Gun Grab (shocking the media and the D.C. elites), but obviously, the fight is not over.
And, it is clear to me (and I know it is to you) that President Obama’s new plans to impose gun control by Executive Order have nothing to do with keeping Americans safe, and everything to do with his left-wing hatred of your liberty and your rights under the Constitution.
Gun Owners of America – an organization dedicated to no-compromise grassroots lobbying in support of the 2nd Amendment – has developed a massive plan to stop the Obama gun grab dead in its tracks . But there’s not much time to put it into action!
The good news is, we can stop them. But this fight will not be easy – or cheap.
That’s why, in addition to your signed PETITION, I hope you’ll agree to make a generous contribution to help stop the Obama Executive Gun Grab.
Your generous contribution will help pay for GOA’s massive mail, phone, and digital program designed to mobilize upwards of four million Americans to lobby their elected officials. That way, you and I can ensure all my colleagues in the House and Senate really begin to feel the heat.
Your contribution will also help GOA launch a full-scale public relations and advertising campaign nationwide, exposing the truth behind the anti-gun politicians’ real agenda of mass confiscation.
Gun Owners of America has already prepared hard-hitting ads calling on Congressmen and Senators by name to oppose President Obama’s radical, anti-liberty, anti-Constitution agenda.
But GOA needs an urgent – and substantial – influx of dollars from individual citizens to put this nationwide plan into action.
If GOA has the resources to put the full plan into action, we can send a strong message to everyone in Washington that the American people are not going to sit idly by and watch a failed, lame-duck president destroy the 2nd Amendment with his last gasp of power.
If we can send that message loud and clear, I can tell you the last thing any of my fellow senators will want to do in an election year is anger you and the millions of other Americans who take your 2nd Amendment rights seriously .
That’s why I urge you to act TODAY!
We’re staring head-on at one of the most desperate gun-control pushes we’ve ever seen, all brought to us by a president who is angry at the American people for rising up against him in defense of our liberty. President Obama is counting on you to be too distracted by other issues to do anything about his plans to shred the 2nd Amendment with the stroke of a pen in the Oval Office.
On Wednesday, Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., joined Houston talk radio host Sam Malone to discuss President Obama’s response to the San Bernardino shooting and the threat from ISIS.
After Malone asked the congressman why President Obama is showing “no leadership” and “can’t say ‘Islamic,’ ‘Muslim,’ whatever,” Kelly said that “most clear-thinking people” now “realize the old saying, if it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck. We’ve had seven years of this waddling and quacking going on and we’re finally starting to identify who this person is.”
Kelly said that Obama has checked out of his job as president and “never believed that this was a truly exceptional country.” “Where in the heck did this guy come from and who raised him?” he continued. “That answers everything for you, if you look into the background you say, ‘Now I get it, now I get it.’”
Kelly went on to say that the president only cares about a few issues, terrorism not being one of them:
It’s gun control, it’s climate control and it’s totally no direction on terrorism that’s out of control. It’s, ‘No, no, no, that’s not really a problem and, for God’s sake, whatever you do, watch how you speak, you don’t want to say anything mean about these people.’ Meanwhile, we’re watching as a country, and we listened Sunday night and I think very clearly, if you were still wondering for some unknown reason where this guy’s coming from, you know today he’s not coming from an area that we would have confidence in. He is not coming as our commander-in-chief. He is not coming as the leader of the free world. He is coming on board as a guy who would rather lecture and preach than actually get on the field and get it done, he’s just not going to do it.
Kelly argued that Obama’s remarks “embolden our enemies” and predicted that terrorists would soon gun down a children’s ballet while Obama dithers. “Wake up on and smell the gun smoke, wake up and smell the sulfur,” he said, accusing Obama of “turning his back on the people that he took a vow and an oath.”
In an interview yesterday with the Washington Post, James Dobson, the influential founder of Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council, revealed that he is likely to endorse Ted Cruz’s presidential bid, noting that the Religious Right is “coalescing around Senator Cruz” thanks to his “strong record on religious liberty, life and marriage.”
Guandolo told North Carolina talk radio host Vince Coakley on Monday that all Muslim groups share the same ideology, so, “If that’s the ideology and we’re going to rely on the Muslim community in America to help us — because he said we can’t do it without the Muslim community and we can’t do it without our quote-unquote Muslim allies — except the organizations that the U.S. government exclusively rely on to provide advice and counsel on these issues, the Muslim organizations, are all Muslim Brotherhood organizations that share the same ideology as ISIS.”
Guandolo told Coakley that Obama was not ignorant of this. “I think he knows and that the people in charge know and either this is the dumbest, most incompetent group of people ever to be assembled or there’s an intentionality here about it and they know,” he said. “And that means there’s treason going on, and I think we need to start looking legally at what the implications of this are because, as you know, I believe it is treason. I believe this is absolute treason.”
In another interview with Coakley yesterday, Guandolo insisted that the existence of Muslim reform movements proves that all Muslim ideology is the same because “why would you call for a reform if there’s nothing wrong with it?”
“Neither Andre Carson nor Keith Ellison, the two Muslim members of Congress, have ever come out and said, ‘Yes, Sharia is incompatible with U.S. Law, with the Constitution, with federal code,’” Guandolo said, picking up on the argument of Rep. Steve King. “To the contrary, they have said that Sharia is fine, there’s nothing incompatible with it, which is an absolute lie.”
“When you hear things like there are thousands of interpretations of Islamic law,” he said, “that is simply untrue. And whether the person knows it’s untrue, which, in most cases I believe that they do, or if they’re just ignorant, it doesn’t matter. That’s untrue. The bottom line is 100 percent of Sharia law mandates jihad until the world is under Sharia law, period. There’s no version of Islam that doesn’t require that, and Andre Carson and Keith Ellison know it.”
“Neither one of these guys is denouncing Sharia,” he added, “they both have aligned themselves with easily identifiable Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas organizations, and the mantra that they speak is the same mantra, quite frankly, that the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda speak, and they just do it in a little softer tone so it’s not so obvious. But it’s pretty obvious to anybody who’s paying attention to how these people communicate.”
Back in 1999, Donald Trump nearly ran for the nomination of the Reform Party, warning that his chief rival at the time and eventual winner of the nomination, Pat Buchanan, was far too conservative and divisive. Of course, now Trump seems to be running to Buchanan’s right, and his former opponent is commending the GOP presidential frontrunner for proposing a sweeping ban on Muslim immigration.
In his syndicated column today, Buchanan claims that Muslims reject America’s “‘Hollywood values’ regarding abortion, adultery and homosexuality” and Americans don’t want to follow the path of European countries that “regret having thrown open their doors to immigrants and refugees from the Islamic world.”
Trump, Buchanan writes, has captured the sentiment of the people who “want people here illegally to be sent back, the borders secured and a moratorium imposed on Muslim immigration until we fix the broken system.”
Calling for a moratorium on Muslim immigration “until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on,” Donald Trump this week ignited a firestorm of historic proportions.
As all the old hate words – xenophobe, racist, bigot – have lost their electric charge from overuse, Trump was being called a fascist demagogue and compared to Hitler and Mussolini.
The establishment seemed to have become unhinged.
With ethnic and sectarian wars raging in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Yemen, Libya, Nigeria and Somalia, why would we bring into our own country people from all sides of these murderous conflicts? Many European nations – Germans, French, Swedes, Brits – appear to regret having thrown open their doors to immigrants and refugees from the Islamic world, who have now formed unassimilated clusters and enclaves inside their countries.
Ought we not explore why, before we continue down this road?
In some countries of the Muslim world, Americans who embrace “Hollywood values” regarding abortion, adultery and homosexuality can get their heads chopped off as quickly as converts to Christianity.
In what Muslim countries does Earl Warren’s interpretation of the First Amendment – about any and all religious presence being banned in public schools and all religions being treated equally – apply?
Trump’s success tells us that the American people really do not celebrate “globalization.” They think our negotiators got snookered out of the most magnificent industrial machine ever built, which once guaranteed our workers the highest standard of living on earth.
They don’t want open borders or mass immigration. They want people here illegally to be sent back, the borders secured and a moratorium imposed on Muslim immigration until we fix the broken system.
In another classic just asking the question column for WorldNetDaily, conservative activist and radio host Bradlee Dean lays out a series of questions about President Obama, claiming that we don’t know enough about the president’s birthplace or that of his daughters.
He even demands that Obama release information about his past girlfriends and classmates, along with his graduation and wedding ceremonies (if they even took place).
“No one person has ever come forward from his past,” Dean insists.
We are all aware of the lack of incontestable birth records for Obama; that document managing has been spectacularly successful.
There are, however, several additional oddities in Obama's history that appear to be as well managed as his own birth issue. For example, due to a lack of transparency there are questions about the birth records of his own daughters.
It's also interesting that no one who ever dated him has shown up. The charisma that caused women to be drawn to him so strongly during his campaign certainly would, in the normal course of events, lead some lady to come forward, if only to garner some attention for herself.
Who was the best man at his wedding? Start there. Then check groomsmen.
Then get the footage of the graduation ceremony. Has anyone talked to the professors? It is odd that no one is bragging that they knew him or taught him or lived with him.
When did he meet Michelle, and how? Are there photos there? Every president gives to the public all their photos, etc. for their libraries. What has he released?
Ever wonder why no one ever came forward from President Obama's past saying they knew him, attended school with him, was his friend, etc.?
Not one person has ever come forward from his past. It certainly is very, very strange.
This should be a cause for great concern. To those who voted for him, you may have elected an unqualified, inexperienced shadow man.
Obama has never successfully run a candy store, yet Americans stand down and allows him to destroy their country.
Days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, President George W. Bush visited a Washington, D.C., mosque to declare that “the face of terror is not the true faith of Islam” and to urge Americans to treat their Muslim neighbors “with respect,” citing stories of American Muslims who were afraid to leave their homes after the attacks.
So, naturally, conservatives have been attacking President Obama for making very similar remarks at the end of an address about the recent the terrorist shooting in San Bernardino.
Joining the fray on Tuesday was Virginia Republican Rep. Robert Hurt, who told Virginia talk radio host John Fredericks that the Obama administration is so obsessed with “the premise that America is racist” that it wants Americans to “not be concerned about all these threats and not be concerned about the fact that 14 people” were killed in San Bernardino.
“I think that this administration begins with the premise that America is racist and America needs to get a grip and get a hold of itself and not be racist and not be concerned about all these threats and not be concerned about the fact that 14 people, innocent people, were murdered at a Christmas party by Islamic terrorists,” Hurt said. “That is their concern, and that is so far away from the real concerns of the American people, who are not racist in general and don’t need to be lectured about how to treat other human beings.”
“Obviously we should have respect for all human beings regardless of their religious faith,” he said. “Obviously. It’s the premise of our country. And we don’t need to have finger-wagging by this administration at a time when they should be sitting in the Oval Office developing strategy, delivering resources to law enforcement, to intelligence agencies to make sure that this never happens again.”
The congressman added that “a lot of it has to do” with “this apologist embarrassment about America and about what this country stands for.”
Conservative activist “Coach” Dave Daubenmire thinks “something stinks” about the recent string of mass shootings, predicting in a column in NewsWithViews.com yesterday that “somewhere, somehow, somebody is directing this entire effort in an attempt to take away our guns.”
Daubenmire speculated that the San Bernardino shooting was a botched attempt to kick off a wave of violence in which terrorist attacks from radical Islamists would be met with attacks on mosques by government agents posing as right-wing extremists, all as part of a duplicitous effort to pave the way for the confiscation of firearms.
While Daubenmire doesn’t know who is responsible — the Bilderbergers, the New World Order, or someone else — he does know that someone or something is orchestrating all of this mayhem.
I believe that terrorism is alive and well in America, but I don’t always believe the “facts” that we are told about the events. I believe that there really is a conspiracy involving those in “high” places. If you are deceived enough to actually believe the narrative coming out of the government and their partners in the media, I really don’t know what to say to you.
We are clearly being conditioned. Although it’s difficult to figure out who the players might be, there is surely no doubt that somebody is trying to set us up. Each time one of these “mass-shootings” occurs there always seems to be a few holes in the “official” story.
I’m not going to take the time to replay every one of the scenarios. Looking for “conspiracies” has become almost a cottage industry on the internet. But one thing that all of these events have in common is a cry for “gun control” and the disarming of law-abiding citizens as the solution to the problem.
Something stinks. Somewhere, somehow, somebody is directing this entire effort in an attempt to take away our guns. We can argue all day long about just who those forces might be, but there can be no doubt that someone powerful is diligently working to advance that agenda.
Imagine this: Another “random” shooting occurs unexpectedly somewhere in the heartland and as expected every available emergency unit responds to the scene. In the recent attack over 350 first responders answered the call. They are sitting ducks for carefully placed bombs remotely exploded when the emergency help races into the building.
Along with the explosion of additional bombs will be a small army of fellow “terrorists” who will descend on the scene with their weapons blazing. This would immediately decimate the first responders and with it a city’s ability to defend the citizenry. Dead cops can’t defend anybody.
What if this “attack” occurred simultaneously in 20 different cities in America?
Although I am not sure of the order of events the second event will be a staged “attack” of a mosque by “right-wing” Christians. Nothing would fit the narrative they have written any better than the poor, peace loving Muslims being attacked by a group of “fundamental” Christians who have not stopped clinging to their God and their guns.
Can you imagine the howls from the left? It would be a two-fer for them; another reason to confiscate all guns while at the same time further demonizing public enemy number one—the Christians. Our government has been warning us for years about the “hateful” pro-lifers lurking outside Planned Parenthood and the radical agenda that these hateful Bible-believers promote.
Some call it the NWO. Some say that “secret societies,” The Illuminati, Bilderbergers, United Nations, or others are behind it all. I am not here to point out who “the man behind the curtain” might be but to hopefully open your eyes to see that there IS a curtain and some shadowy figure is standing behind it. Un-American “President” Obama is merely a front-man.
It will be quite a contest this year for who takes home People For the American Way’sannual Equine Posterior Achievement Award, which “honors” the individuals leading the Radical Right’s extreme and intolerant agenda.
As the presidential campaign continues to bring out the worst in conservative politics, with the help of right-wing politicians and pundits, there are many possibilities to choose from.
Trump’s toxic politics of resentment and paranoia, however, hasn’t elicited strong rebukes from Republican leaders, who have seldom criticized the business mogul and have almost unanimously said that they would support him in a general election if he wins the GOP nomination.
Ted Cruz: The winner of the 2013 and 2014 “awards,” Ted Cruz, has maintained his image as a favorite of the Tea Party and the Religious Right movements, even though his only accomplishment in Congress seems to have been putting up pointless political battles, including one which led to a wasteful government shutdown, and becoming the most despised member of the Senate.
He has refused to condemn Donald Trump’s bigoted tirades and policies, while at the same time launching into his own rants about what he sees as the real source of intolerance in America: a nonexistent gay “jihad” on Christians.
Huckabee is always on hand to cheerlead for the Religious Right celebrity of the moment, defending Josh Duggar after he faced scrutiny over a sex scandal and championing Kim Davis, the rogue Kentucky clerk who repeatedly flouted court orders to comply with the Supreme Court’s gay marriage decision, even self-righteously volunteering to go to jail in her place. He also told pastors that the gay community seeks to destroy all of the churches in the U.S.
Greg Abbott: Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has continued his predecessor Rick Perry’s legacy of turning the governor’s office into a source of national ridicule. He gained notoriety for describing discrimination as a Texas value, unsuccessfully attempting to prevent refugees from entering the state and embracing far-right fears that the Jade Helm 15 military exercises would lead to a federal takeover of Texas and imposition of martial law.
He ordered the Texas State Guard to monitor and regularly update him on the Jade Helm 15 trainings, after conservative politicians and media pundits whipped up suspicions that the Obama administration would use the drills to arrest Christians, conservatives and patriotic Americans. When Jade Helm 15 ended in September without any of these dire predictions materializing, Abbott’s office offered little information about what he discovered in his briefings on the matter.
While his ludicrous legal arguments were ultimately unsuccessful and Davis eventually stopped preventing her deputy clerks from issuing marriage licenses, Staver used the case to capture the limelight for himself and raisemoney for his legal group, all the while insisting that Davis’ brief incarceration proved his point that American Christians are in fact under siege.