Erik Rush

Erik Rush: Obama A Communist Operative And 'Evil Incarnate'

WorldNetDaily’s Erik Rush believes that the Obamacare rollout is all the proof he needs that President Obama is a communist agent who was put into office as part of a conspiracy to destroy America, citing a fake Nikita Khrushchev quote to back up his claim.

“Obamacare and the nefarious undertakings of this administration now coming to light are the smoking guns we needed to prove to millions of Americans that we have indeed been experiencing an insidious and incremental encroachment of Marxism over many years, just as Nikita Khrushchev predicted in 1959 and just as conservatives have increasingly warned over almost as many years since,” Rush writes.

“With these wedges, we have the opportunity to reveal to America that not only is Barack Obama a treasonous criminal, but he and his cabal are long-seasoned operatives, carefully maneuvered into their positions for the express purpose of ushering in that which was unthinkable in 1959: Communism.”

Rush claims that the only people who could support Obama, who he believes is “this side of evil incarnate,” are either “enemies of the republic” or are “so pitifully dim that they may not merit rescue from a burning building.”

Well, it’s finally happened. We have reached the point where it has become so evident that President Barack Hussein Obama is just this side of evil incarnate and that his administration and radical leftists in Congress are constitutional criminals that those who continue to support them and their policies are either ideologically kindred (and thus, enemies of the republic), or so pitifully dim that they may not merit rescue from a burning building. No … I think I’ll save that dog over there; at least he may wind up being of benefit to humankind someday...



Obamacare and the nefarious undertakings of this administration now coming to light are the smoking guns we needed to prove to millions of Americans that we have indeed been experiencing an insidious and incremental encroachment of Marxism over many years, just as Nikita Khrushchev predicted in 1959 and just as conservatives have increasingly warned over almost as many years since.

These are the only things that (at present) have the potency to overcome the cult of Obama and the perceived imperative of preserving Our First Black President’s legacy, and they must be employed via grass-roots effort. With these wedges, we have the opportunity to reveal to America that not only is Barack Obama a treasonous criminal, but he and his cabal are long-seasoned operatives, carefully maneuvered into their positions for the express purpose of ushering in that which was unthinkable in 1959: Communism.

If these wedges are properly utilized, we will be able to make sense to these perplexed Americans of the societal dissolution they have witnessed over the preceding 50 years. They will understand why it was imperative for the political left to encourage us to stray from a moral center and embrace the secular humanist worldview, and how the dismal, destructive results thereof have been of great use to them. They will understand why it has been necessary for the left to foster an irrational fear and hatred of Christianity and Judeo-Christian values. The weakening of our economy and international standing will be seen as the strategy of puerile, petty walking mediocrities who simply hate America and want to see it burn, rather than the incompetent bungling of imprudent weaklings.

When our neighbors perceive the breadth and depth of this administration’s criminality and the culture of corruption that has inculcated itself into our government, they will call for a real fundamental transformation of America – back into a constitutional republic. They will realize the need to return to our philosophical roots of government, education, integrity and to constitutional principles. They will realize that they have been exploited by a parasitic, avaricious ruling class with the worldview of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, and that they are in no way obliged to countenance their actions for one more day.

Erik Rush Wonders If Obama Is In A Satanic Cult

Conservative columnist Erik Rush believes that celebrities such as Jay-Z and Beyoncé are part of a “little know satanic cult group” and therefore, President Obama might be involved in Satan-worship too.

“Other than Obama himself being manifestly evil and a supporter of Muslim Brotherhood killers,” Rush writes. “I have it on very good authority that satanic worship has gone on quite close to the sphere of this White House.”

Now, this really pisses me off. Not just as a Christian, (as such, I take Luciferianism very seriously), but given the moral ambivalence and social decline America is facing, to have inordinately revered celebrities (idols) embracing and advancing satanic cults is just too over the top. Wake the hell up, America.

Back in the 1960s, of course there was a pack of celebrities who foolishly hooked up with Anton LaVey, the author of the Satanic Bible (he published it in 1969). Many wound up regretting it, because contrary to their initial impression, it wasn’t all fun and games and a lot of sex.

LaVey had picked up where British occultist Aleister Crowley left off. Crowley styled himself as “The Great Beast 666,” and was so dark and freaky that the Masons kicked him out. Crowley’s motto was “do what thou wilt,” which LaVey also adopted.

According to recent reports, quite a few Hollywood celebrities and music artists are members of a little known satanic cult group called Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO), which has picked up where LaVey left off. Rapper Jay-Z, his mentally deficient wife Beyonce, and rap artist Peaches are among those celebs who are reportedly members of this group; Beyonce routinely flashes satanic signs and her latest album cover features the satanic goat’s head of Baphomet. Jay-Z’s clothing line, Rocawear, is replete with OTO imagery (such as sigils and the legend “do what thou wilt”).

Nice, huh?

These are not only people who millions of American youth idolize, but guess what – they’re President Obama’s good friends to boot! Other than Obama himself being manifestly evil and a supporter of Muslim Brotherhood killers, I have it on very good authority that satanic worship has gone on quite close to the sphere of this White House.

Erik Rush: Obama Will Begin Staging Hate Crimes

Citing the false claim that the Department of Justice used the George Zimmerman trial to aid “anti-Zimmerman activists,” WorldNetDaily’s Erik Rush predicts that President Obama may be collaborating with members of the press to stage a “‘false flag’ racial incident.”

Rush, who demanded that Mitt Romney put journalists in jail for treason if he won the presidency, warned that “starry-eyed, Obama-worshiping journalists” may help “create” bias crimes.

Last Friday, the New York Times published an item by John Harwood that similarly propagandized the state of race relations and the Republican Party’s deportment with regard to race. Employing clever if furtive suggestions that white Republicans disfavor Obamacare because the president is black, Harwood contextualized the comments of those Republicans he quoted to suit his account, a fanciful if desperately cynical and dangerous one.

As I mentioned, I might have taken this as routine far left race-baiting, but I’m inclined to think it’s more than that. In true community-organizer fashion, the Obama administration has been keenly adroit at capitalizing upon events in order to advance its objectives. If you’ll recall, Obama and Co. were on the February 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin almost within hours, helping to shape the narrative that turned George Zimmerman from an American Latino defending himself against a belligerent young thug into a sinister Wagnerian Anglo huntsman, prowling the night looking for hapless black children to murder. The Department of Justice was even caught funneling funds and personnel to aid anti-Zimmerman activists during his trial.

Inasmuch as this crowd pioneered the orchestrated crisis, in my view it would be profoundly imprudent to dismiss the possibility that the administration might go beyond exploiting tense racial situations (or those that might be construed as such, even if remotely) and actually create some.

It’s been reported that in recent weeks that President Obama has conducted meetings with “select” members of the press. Obviously it’s natural for a president to wish to ingratiate himself to members of the press to some extent and convey his ideas to them, but considering his timing and characteristically aloof manner, I am inclined toward suspicion. The Associated Press recently expressed displeasure at being fed “propaganda” photos by the administration and only being given access to the president for photo ops twice in five years, and there have been other recent indicators that the press at large is finding this White House increasingly difficult to work with.

Then, there’s the fact that the identities of the individuals participating in these powwows have been kept secret.

Is it possible that our propagandist-in-chief “innocently” impressed upon certain starry-eyed, Obama-worshiping journalists how tenuous he believes things are with regard to race in order to manipulate them into bringing these issues to the collective top of mind through their reporting? Further, might he be doing so as a precursor to some manner of “false flag” racial incident or incidents that are in the works? It does seem interesting that in addition to the usual suspects (like Jesse Jackson), we are seeing an upsurge in race-related rhetoric and reportage, despite nothing in particular having transpired in this area lately.

While race-baiting is nothing new for the left, the aforementioned incidents appear to have come somewhat out of left field with regard to the news cycle. Should some high profile, highly unpleasant race-related incident occur in the near future, it wouldn’t be the first time such a thing happened at a juncture that proved to be advantageous to the administration.

At this particular juncture, one might say that the Obama administration could use all the help it can get, considering Americans’ anger over the Obamacare rollout, mounting concern with regard to the several scandals in which the president is involved, his plummeting approval rating and the growing alienation of the press.

Let’s just hope that “help” is not forthcoming, for all our sakes.

Right Wing Leftovers - 10/31/13

  • Liberty Counsel has "distributed over 4,500 copies of 'Silence is Not an Option' to pastors throughout Virginia."
  • The Christian Medical and Dental Associations supports efforts to repeal "exemptions to child abuse and neglect laws, which currently do not place parents at fault if they refuse medical treatment for a child because of religious beliefs."
  • Erik Rush finds the "perennial liberal claim of loving America akin to that of the domestic abuser who claims to love his wife, but beats the crap out of her on a daily basis."
  • TVC opposes ENDA because "transgender people are 'psychologically unhealthy individuals' who shouldn't be 'forced on children and parents' in schools around the country."
  • Finally, what kind of religious zealot smashes the icons of different faiths?

Erik Rush: 'Insurrection' Needed Before Obama Begins 'Herding People Into Cattle Cars'

WorldNetDaily’s Erik Rush is enraged that most Americans don’t realize “President Obama is a Marxist and Islamist sympathizer who was maneuvered into the presidency by well-heeled socialists and Saudi Islamists” bent on placing “members of the Muslim Brotherhood – an organization with a written mission to destroy America – into high places in government.”

The government, the Fox News regular lamented, is now run by a “horde of soulless monsters” and “lifelong students of old-school communism.”

He called for “civil disobedience” and even “insurrection” against Obama, but worries that “those who still insist upon defending Obama and his ilk, whether liberal commentators or our neighbors, are those who will merely shrug their shoulders when they start kicking down doors and herding people into cattle cars.”

“As such, they certainly shouldn’t be trusted,” Rush continues. “We have entered the time when we cannot be certain how rapidly this administration’s malignant agenda will advance, so the less such people know about each of us in general, the better.”

This week I had a chat, as it were, with a prominent pundit with whom every reader is probably familiar. Although this person is unabashedly liberal, I was still somewhat mortified at how far he was still willing to go in his defense of the Obama administration in light of recent developments.



In the background, the president has engaged in even deeper collusion with our enemies at home and abroad, among them insinuating members of the Muslim Brotherhood – an organization with a written mission to destroy America – into high places in government. His administration has conspired to sign the U.S. on to the U.N. International Arms Trade Treaty, which would impinge upon American citizens’ Second Amendment protections, as well as providing a disadvantage to our allies abroad. Through the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), he is attempting to subordinate America’s economic policy to foreign interests.

The realization among an increasing number of Americans that this cannot stand has also given rise to the awareness that this did not happen overnight, or even over the last five years; Americans’ perfunctory if grudging acceptance of this culture of corruption has spawned a horde of soulless monsters. Those who are not actively engaged in destroying America are so singularly avaricious that their actions are producing the same result. Republican leaders, like my liberal colleague, have resolved to interpret the will of the people through the lens of their desires and political expedience. How do congressional Republicans justify coming down on the side of a communist as though it was garden variety bipartisanship?

The answer? They don’t bother to.

Even the Supreme Court has not escaped corruption. Two of the justices appointed by Obama are lifelong students of old-school communism (as is he), and one might very well be part of the subterfuge surrounding his law school records cover-up. Recently, the Court refused to hear a case involving the administration quashing the indictment of fugitive domestic terrorist Elizabeth Duke, despite said case having involved criminal misfeasance on the part of a magistrate who earlier ruled on the matter.

Since all of the checks and balances in our government have been effectively subverted, the solutions will have to be out of the box. There is the course of civil disobedience to consider; obviously we saw elements of this in protests stemming from the recent government shutdown. There is insurrection, but of course this should be considered only as a last resort. Given the dictatorial proclivities of this president, such action might ultimately wind up being a reaction rather than being initiated by the American people.

It has been suggested that efforts be made to prosecute the Obama administration under the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO). While I am not an attorney, it occurs to me that this would still necessitate working within a system that has been inherently compromised by parties with decades of preparation, limitless financial resources and legions of lawyers at the ready.

One thing I find monumentally disturbing is the extent to which some, like the liberal colleague I mentioned, continue to go in order to validate and justify this administration’s actions. Given the sheer weight and scope of the evidence, at this juncture only ideology or deep denial could facilitate such a position. From a preponderance of evidence gleaned from the press, intelligence operatives, military personnel and lay witnesses, it is evident that President Obama is a Marxist and Islamist sympathizer who was maneuvered into the presidency by well-heeled socialists and Saudi Islamists. The latter has become more readily apparent as a result of several revelations published recently concerning Obama’s Middle East policy.

I fear that those who still insist upon defending Obama and his ilk, whether liberal commentators or our neighbors, are those who will merely shrug their shoulders when they start kicking down doors and herding people into cattle cars. As such, they certainly shouldn’t be trusted. We have entered the time when we cannot be certain how rapidly this administration’s malignant agenda will advance, so the less such people know about each of us in general, the better. Speak out – but be prudent, and stay safe.

Erik Rush: Civil War Needed To Overthrow Obama Before He Imposes 'The Cruelest Totalitarianism'

Regular Fox News guest Erik Rush is convinced that a civil war is about to take place, and writes in WorldNetDaily today that Americans need to rise up like the Egyptians to overthrow the “ruthless tyrant in Barack Obama.”

“This criminal administration has the darkest of designs on the nation and its people, and we have every right and the duty at this point to resist it,” according to Rush. “Those of us who see that the course we are on, if unaltered, will either necessitate civil war or end in the cruelest totalitarianism.”

Over the last few weeks in print and on my streaming radio show, I’ve articulated my sentiment that it is past the time millions of Americans should have swarmed the Capitol and the White House, demanding the resignation of the president, his Cabinet, and every representative and senator in Congress, à la Tahrir Square in Egypt when Muslim Brotherhood thug Mohamed Morsi was ousted earlier this year.

Granted that much of this will sound preposterous and even seditious to many Americans, but the fact is such persons simply aren’t operating with sufficient information – sort of like the intoxicant aboard the Titanic who didn’t realize the ship was sinking until it was perpendicular to the ocean surface. This criminal administration has the darkest of designs on the nation and its people, and we have every right and the duty at this point to resist it. The attendant necessity to purge the government at large of communists and socialist elites, both Democrat and Republican, would be the second order of business.

Those of us who see that the course we are on, if unaltered, will either necessitate civil war or end in the cruelest totalitarianism are also aware that there is no more room for concern over being called extremists, arsonists, anarchists, terrorists, racists, kidnappers, hostage-takers, knuckle-draggers, tea-tards, tea-baggers, Taliban, or any of the other infantile slurs establishment leftists and their lemmings hurl our way.

It also bears mentioning that the aforementioned verbal abuse is no longer the sole domain of activists, entertainers and the crude epsilons of social media. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other Democratic lawmakers have taken to employing this sort of inflammatory rhetoric in recent weeks. This, as well as the spiteful policies of the White House during the government shutdown, represents a dangerous progression of the administration’s agenda.

It is no small thing when we have such conservative stalwarts as Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and former Alaska governor and vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin standing alongside veterans as they stormed barriers (affectionately dubbed “Barrycades” by protesters and bloggers) at the Lincoln Memorial and World War II Memorial this past weekend. It is also no small thing when Sarah Palin states that any attempt by President Obama to unilaterally raise the debt limit without congressional approval is an “impeachable offense,” or when Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn, says that “We could be on the cusp of seeing some civil disobedience” in America while discussing impeachment with a radio host and referencing the millions who revolted against Morsi in Egypt, resulting in the successful overthrow of a ruthless tyrant.

In America we have a ruthless tyrant in Barack Obama. Although he may not yet be able to act in a completely unrestrained modality, rest assured that he will do anything to gain his objectives. He has managed to have laws passed using the most underhanded political devices, and openly committed treason against the United States.

Erik Rush: 'Narcissistic Sociopath' Obama Using Shutdown To 'Usurp Complete Power'

WorldNetDaily’s Erik Rush watched President Obama as he “flapped his meaty, deceitful lips” at a press conference, and saw Adolf Hitler incarnate.

Rush argues that “Obama’s obstinacy” and “interminable effluvia of falsehoods” prove “his modality has become that of a dictator” like Adolf Hitler.

“This, gentle reader, is tyranny, the tyranny of a narcissistic sociopath and lifelong student of Marxism whose end game is to usurp complete power,” he writes. “All of the historical signs of communist ascendancy are present in this administration and in this president.”

At the White House on Tuesday, President Obama delivered a statement and took questions from reporters on the partial government shutdown and the ongoing fight over raising the federal debt ceiling. I think that the only thing worse than having to endure the interminable effluvia of falsehoods was having to hear them over and again as he flapped his meaty, deceitful lips for an entire hour.



“We will not capitulate – no, never! We may be destroyed, but if we are, we shall drag a world with us – a world in flames.”

– Adolf Hitler

It is Obama’s obstinacy that so many are finding troublesome. Cited as being unprecedented, this ought not be a surprise, since having a revolutionary Marxist in the White House is also unprecedented. His modality has become that of a dictator, as evidenced by those who have recognized this and articulated the same. On Monday, Arizona state Rep. Brenda Barton posted on her Facebook page that “Someone is paying the National Park Service thugs overtime for their efforts to carry out the order of De Fuhrer [sp],” likening Obama to Nazi despot Adolf Hitler.

By now, Americans have learned of some of the more tyrannical actions on the part of the Obama administration with regard to his enforcement of the partial government shutdown. As if petty actions such as going out of the way to curtail access to open-air memorials and parks weren’t enough, we have now learned that the Obama administration dispatched federal thugs to evict octogenarians who have lived for decades in homes that happen to be located on federal lands.



While a portion of this strategy has been to put political pressure on Republicans to capitulate, the real intention has been to evidence government might, to show the American people who is in charge.

This, gentle reader, is tyranny, the tyranny of a narcissistic sociopath and lifelong student of Marxism whose end game is to usurp complete power. All of the historical signs of communist ascendancy are present in this administration and in this president. What more evidence do we need?

Erik Rush: Cruz Is Eligible To Be President But Obama Isn't; Clinton Is 'Miss Piggy'

Fox News regular Erik Rush is a champion of birtherism when it comes to President Obama, but that hasn’t stopped him from declaring that Canadian-born Ted Cruz eligible to be president. In fact, Rush hails Cruz as “a triple threat because he is conservative, Republican and an ethnic minority.”

How does Rush explain why he believes that Cruz – who was born in Canada to an American mother — can be president but that Obama — whom birthers like Rush falsely insist was born in Kenya to an American mother — isn’t? Well, he doesn’t: “There are also questions with regard to Cruz’s eligibility for the office (having been born in Canada), but given the history of this issue on the same subject with regard to President Obama, I won’t even go there.”

“Ted Cruz looks like a white guy, but he’s not – which is a non-issue to people who judge character over color,” Rush writes. “After all, our president looks like a black guy, but he’s not, and few of us make any bones about that.”

Rush classes up the column by calling Hillary Clinton “Miss Piggy” while lamenting that Cruz has been depicted as a “fringe, tinfoil hat-wearing fop.”

Because if anyone knows how it feels to be seen as a conspiracy theorist, it’s Erik Rush.

Don’t think for a moment that the ire, derision and ridicule of establishment Republicans and the liberal press that Ted Cruz now enjoys are merely a result of that speech. Considering the dire straits America is now negotiating (of which many of her proverbial passengers remain completely oblivious) and the designs of progressives in both parties, Cruz – who pledged to donate his salary to charity during any federal government shutdown – is a triple threat because he is conservative, Republican and an ethnic minority.

At a time when the GOP base was looking for a potential 2016 presidential nominee with testicular fortitude and without the historical political baggage, along came Ted Cruz – so it’s no wonder his name is already being floated for president amongst conservatives.

Ted Cruz looks like a white guy, but he’s not – which is a non-issue to people who judge character over color. After all, our president looks like a black guy, but he’s not, and few of us make any bones about that. There are also questions with regard to Cruz’s eligibility for the office (having been born in Canada), but given the history of this issue on the same subject with regard to President Obama, I won’t even go there.

It’s pretty apparent to anyone paying attention that unless Barack Obama declares himself emperor prior to 2016, Hillary Clinton (whom I affectionately call “Miss Piggy” due to resemblance rather than personal habits) is more or less a lock for the Democratic nomination. There have until recently been few prospects for the GOP, and it is highly probable that establishment Republicans and the Republican National Committee will do their best to ram another moderate or counterfeit conservative down our throats once again – perhaps Jeb Bush.

In this climate, someone like Ted Cruz, who has ingratiated himself to Americans in a big way simply by telling the truth, will remain a potential hazard to the establishment through 2016, unless he can be effectively neutralized. As we observed, GOP leaders united with the liberal press and politicians to thwart Cruz’s efforts to defund Obamacare, as well as conspiring to make him appear a fringe, tinfoil hat-wearing fop.

Erik Rush: Navy Yard Shooting Carried Out To Prevent Obama From Being Arrested For Treason

Shortly after the mass shooting at the Navy Yard in Washington, DC earlier this month, Fox News contributor Erik Rush began declaring that the attack was a false flag operation that was "part political diversion, part gun-grabbing theater."

Rush has since changed his tune slightly and started promoting the theory that the shooting was really an effort by the Obama Administration to stop the Navy from arresting the President for treason after having discovered his plans to detonate a nuclear weapon in the middle of Washington, DC in order to justify military action in Syria.

On his radio program last week, Rush promoted the conspiracy theory once again on the grounds that "a lot of stuff that seemed to some of us like conspiracy theories years ago turned out to be true over the last few months":

The idea, in a nutshell, was that [the Navy] found out that President Obama was going to set off this nuke in DC either as a reason for going into Syria or as a reason to escalate military action because this nuke would have been a retaliation for going in to Syria; I'm not quite sure about that, but I do recall a lot of people, including myself, having commented on, having written on, spoken on the fact that the President had an almost obsessive fixation and eagerness for going into Syria at that time and no one could figure out why. We had a lot of different postulations, but now one of them could be he had a time table for orchestrating this stuff.

Granted, even to some of us it may sound like the stuff of conspiracy theories, but a lot of stuff that seemed to some of us like conspiracy theories years ago turned out to be true over the last few months.

Now, again I don't know what the time table was supposed to be, but I also remember that there were a bunch of embassy closings, if you recall, right around the first weekend in August will all of these things starting to come to bear and we weren't quite sure, well why were these embassies being closed, well we have some sort of a credible threat. I don't know if we ever found out what the credible threat was, but all of this looks very, very suspicious.

Now, this Press Core site is claiming, as are the other ones now by extension who are carrying this story, that the DC Naval Yard attack was in retaliation for this attempted arrest of the President or to prevent such a thing from taking place and that the titles of the victims were not released for that very reason because it would tip people off as to who they really are, in terms of their status, if you will.

It's very sobering stuff. It's very frightening stuff.

Right Wing Leftovers - 9/23/13

  • Fox News contributor Erik Rush promotes the theory that last week's Navy Yard shooting was carried out by the government in order to prevent President Obama from being arrested for treason because military investigators "had uncovered a plot to detonate a nuclear device in the heart of the nation’s capitol as part of an Obama government false flag."
  • It has been reported that "Lois Lerner, the Internal Revenue Service official at the center of the agency’s tea party scandal, is retiring."
  • Bryan Fischer doesn't like it when President Obama "talks street."
  • Apparently forcing Texas schools and textbooks to teach Creationism will "encourage critical thinking."
  • Finally, Rep. Lynn Westmoreland says that ten days is more than enough time for Congress to find a solution that will avoid a government shut down because "God created the world in seven days."

WorldNetDaily Blames The Media, Civil Rights Activists And Obama For Navy Yard Shooting

WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush, who believes that the Navy Yard shooting was a false flag “gun-grab theater,” is out with a column today wondering if shooter Aaron Alexis was a “race warrior.”

He claims that Alexis probably went on the rampage because he “felt disaffected due to his race,” which he blames on “the self-serving machinations of the political left, career civil rights activists and the Obama administration in particular.”

According to Rush, the “political left” wins black voters over by “re-igniting the bitterness and militancy radical black activists displayed during the Civil Rights Movement,” contributing to Alexis’ supposed “racial hatred.”

Given all of the data, one cannot help but factor in the alleged racism Alexis claimed to have suffered as a possible contributing factor in the shootings. The racial climate in America has been deliberately poisoned in recent years by the self-serving machinations of the political left, career civil rights activists and the Obama administration in particular. This has led to a near-epidemic in black-on-white crime, one which goes wholly unreported by the establishment press. Might this contrived, institutional advancement of racial tension have contributed to the rage and instability of a man who already felt disaffected due to his race?

That sense of entitlement and tendency toward feeling disrespected among black Americans is part and parcel of the worldview spoon-fed to blacks by the political left. It is a common theme and corrosive thread that has run through the left’s racial narrative for decades. Indeed, this has been employed in order to entice blacks into political allegiance with the left, in keeping them in socioeconomic thralldom and – more recently – in re-igniting the bitterness and militancy radical black activists displayed during the Civil Rights Movement.

Was racial hatred the prime motivator for Aaron Alexis’ heinous attack this week, a factor, or a non-issue? While it is altogether possible that his were the actions of an individual with a psyche disintegrating so rapidly that even he may not have fully understood why he acted as he did, failing to consider race in light of the current political and social landscape would be imprudent indeed.

Rush’s WND colleague Jack Cashill agrees, and asserts that Alexis’ psychological problems “were aggravated by the message that the Democratic-media complex has been steadily pumping out, namely that a black American can never expect justice.”

“As the saner among the media elite know, the blame circles back upon themselves,” Cashill writes. “They helped create the atmosphere in which an emotionally unstable black person finds it easier to blame whites than he does himself.” The right-wing commentator goes on to blame the liberal media for having “continued to drum into the head of African-Americans the pervasiveness of racism in America.”

Aaron Alexis, the former Navy reservist who killed a dozen people in Monday’s Navy Yard shooting, no doubt had psychological problems aplenty.

But evidence suggests that those problems were aggravated by the message that the Democratic-media complex has been steadily pumping out, namely that a black American can never expect justice.

In the past, the media have desperately sought to blame mass violence directly on the right, as they did after the shootings in Tucson and Aurora, Colo., or to blame the right indirectly by focusing on guns, as they did after the Sandy Hook school shooting.

That doesn’t work here. As the saner among the media elite know, the blame circles back upon themselves. They helped create the atmosphere in which an emotionally unstable black person finds it easier to blame whites than he does himself.



In the month of his inauguration, 79 percent of whites and 63 percent of blacks held a favorable view of race relations in America.

By July 2013, those figures had fallen to 52 percent among whites and 38 percent among blacks, a calamitous decline, rarely addressed, never explained.

Although there are as many reasons for the decline in those numbers as there are for the decline in Alexis’ mental health, one fact seems undeniable: The media have continued to drum into the head of African-Americans the pervasiveness of racism in America, Obama’s election notwithstanding.

Indeed, by repeatedly interpreting criticism of Obama as racially based, the media have aggravated the tension between blacks and non-blacks.

In his paranoia and rage, Alexis seemed not at all unlike former L.A. cop and fellow Navy reservist Christopher Dorner. In February 2012, Dorner found it much easier to hold a white establishment accountable for his homicidal spree than the personal demons that beset him.

Fox News Regular Erik Rush Calls Navy Yard Attack A False Flag

Fox News hosts like Sean Hannity and Mike Huckabee seem to have no problem with hosting conservative columnist and author Erik Rush, who has urged the US to kill all Muslims and accused President Obama of being a serial killer. Rush reacted to the Navy Yard shooting yesterday by tweeting that the rampage was “part political diversion, part gun-grabbing theater. NOT random. NOT a lone psycho.”

“If you think the #dcnavyyardshooting is random or just an irate doofus, you’re kidding yourself,” Rush also tweeted.

Right Wing Leftovers - 9/12/13

  • Glenn Beck will soon be offering an email service.  Seriously.
  • It is not much of a surprise to learn that Floyd Corkins was not taking his prescribed anti-psychotic medication at the time he attacked the Family Research Council.
  • Erik Rush calls President Obama "an enormous pussy."
  • Pat Robertson's Operation Blessing has issued a statement responding to charges made in a new documentary about Robertson's misuse of charity resources for personal gain.
  • Finally, Andrée Seu Peterson thinks that gays should give up their push for equality for the good of society: "Even if you, homosexual, believe you have a legal right to practice homosexuality and to even marry, would you consider—for the sake of the children who would have to be raised with two fathers and no mother, or two mothers and the forfeit of a father—choosing to 'suffer wrong' and to 'be defrauded'? Would you put away your desires for a greater good, and avoidance of harm?"

Erik Rush: Obama Engaging In Triple Cover-Up Of Benghazi

Channeling Glenn Beck, WorldNetDaily columnist and Fox News regular Erik Rush today writes that President Obama orchestrated the attack on the US annex in Benghazi, which he claims had “clandestinely provided arms to the rebels in Syria,” to cover up the weapons shipment. 

Now why would Obama and his supposed Islamist allies attack the same US annex they believe was arming Islamists? Well, as Rush explains, it was all an effort to cover up the fact that they were doing it in the first place, and then the administration had to cover up the reasons for the attack.

A cover-up of the cover-up.

But despite the fact that this makes absolutely no sense, Rush went on to say that the insurgents in Syria “came to possess chemical weapons” thanks to Obama, so now Obama must attack Syria in order to “erase the evidence of having provided them” and cover that up too.

Yep, it’s the old cover-up of the cover-up of the cover-up.

Most observers have settled on the likelihood that it is his desire to redirect attention from his many scandals, Obamacare and immigration reform legislation that impels the president toward carrying out this attack. There is also a distinct possibility that the Muslim Brotherhood (whom he has supported worldwide and who have fighters among the rebels in Syria) is putting pressure on him to deliver after his failure to resist the ouster of former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi.

Q: How does Obama know what kind of weapons the rebels in Syria have?

A: He has the receipts …

I propose another scenario: It has been well-established that the Obama administration clandestinely provided arms to the rebels in Syria. (I say “rebels in Syria” rather than “Syrian rebels” because many of them are jihadis from other nations.) It is a pretty safe bet that this operation was at least part of the reason for the 9/11/12 attack on the American facility in Benghazi. I have contended for some time that President Obama himself either orchestrated the attack or was party to it. His motivation, I have asserted, would have been in perceiving a need to erase the evidence of the Benghazi operation – and perhaps even some of the personnel involved.

A subsequent revelation that Morsi provided military assets for the attack on the Benghazi compound does tend to lend credence to the notion that Obama was involved. After all, Obama was Morsi’s benefactor; indeed, there would have been no Arab Spring and no Muslim Brotherhood ascendancy in Egypt had it not been for Obama’s destabilization of the region.

Since it has been established that the Obama administration provided weapons to the rebels in Syria, and nearly a certainty these factions came to possess chemical weapons, is it then possible that Obama’s desire to strike Syria with all due speed stems from a need to erase the evidence of having provided them, and perhaps even other treasonous actions? It would certainly make the truth getting out with regard to Benghazi much more of a threat to Obama if evidence speaking to this being factual exists.

If this is factual, Barack Obama might ultimately be looking at occupying a noted place in history quite different from the one he currently occupies.

Erik Rush Links Obama to Oklahoma Murder

In his WorldNetDaily column yesterday, Fox News regular Erik Rush linked President Obama to the murder of an Australian baseball player in Oklahoma. Rush began his column by making the false claim that “three black youths” were behind the shooting. Rush isn’t alone in fudging the facts about the race of the alleged shooters: the fact that one of the three suspects is white hasn’t stopped right-wing outlets including Fox News, The Daily Caller and WorldNetDaily from using a phony photo to claim all three suspects are black. But for Rush, the Oklahoma murder—and a stabbing in Queens— is all part of an Obama-led race war.

It’s reaching near-epidemic proportions, but the press is still failing to report on the uptick in black-on-white crime in America. Some will be familiar with the accounts of violent black-on-white crime reported by WND of late, several of which have been incredibly brutal and gruesome.

Last Friday, 22-year-old Australian Christopher Lane was gunned down by three black youths in Duncan, Okla. The crime is not being reported as racially motivated, despite the fact that the assailants deliberately chose an upscale, predominantly white neighborhood. Neither is the stabbing attack on 17-year-old Natasha Martinez in Queens, N.Y., being classified as racially motivated, even though this one might be the work of a serial assailant. I imagine the lack of coverage could be due to the fact that Martinez has a Latino surname and appears white, whereas George Zimmerman (who was acquitted of second-degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin) has an Anglo surname but identifies as Latino. If that appears convoluted and nonsensical, that’s only because it is.



Like many of the audacious and bizarre practices of the Obama administration, the idea that it would be deliberately engaging in fomenting racial tension is incomprehensible to the average American specifically because the concept is so audacious and bizarre. Yet, we know that the Obama Justice Department was involved in materially supporting anti-Zimmerman protests within days after Martin’s killing, and that Obama has long-standing ties to black radical organizations such as the New Black Panther Party (NBPP).

There’s little doubt that such parties knew they had an advocate in their corner from the moment Obama was inaugurated; thus, they became far more vocal. While the president’s tone has been conciliatory (except for the occasional slip), his rhetoric remains in the same vein as that of a black activist, albeit more refined. In the meantime, the economic woes of blacks have increased along with the rest of America, and black-on-black crime is at an alarming high; now, they’re being told that racist whites with guns are stalking them in the night.



Whether naïveté, ideology, stupidity, or a combination thereof on the part of the press is to blame for its complicity, the fact is that this plays into the hands of the Obama administration and the radical left at large. Also incomprehensible in the minds of average Americans is the notion that these campaigns of division (race being only one) are ultimately intended to bring about a degree of civil unrest that will superficially justify the use of force on the part of the administration.

Remember, this is the president who, in 2008 advocated for a “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded [as the military].”

And all the people cheered …

Erik Rush: Obama and Oprah Will Use 'The Butler' To Stoke Anti-White Violence

After appearing on Fox News’ Hannity last night, Erik Rush published a column on WorldNetDaily today predicting that President Obama will use the new movie about an African American White House butler, along with other efforts “to rile black Americans,” to provoke a race war against whites.

Rush claims that “The Butler,” which stars Forest Whitaker and Oprah Winfrey, is part of a plan “to initiate widespread civil unrest at the president’s push of a button” and add to the “instances of black-on-white violent crime since Obama came into office.”

Winfrey is promoting a new film, “The Butler,” which chronicles a black butler’s years of service in the White House during the Civil Rights Movement. While the subject matter should make for interesting fare, given Winfrey’s sensibilities and associates (like the Obamas, for example) there is little doubt that the film will be used in the ongoing effort to rile black Americans. As I’ve said in the past, racial tension is one of the many circuits the administration has constructed that, when completed, may be used to initiate widespread civil unrest at the president’s push of a button.



There have been quite a few instances of black-on-white violent crime since Obama came into office; these have gone largely unreported by the establishment press for reasons that should be obvious. The point is that some blacks have become sufficiently motivated to perpetrate these crimes, and it is all – all – due to the lies into which they have subscribed.



All of this culminates in successful blacks like Oprah Winfrey, Spike Lee, Jay-Z and the perennially brainless Kanye West being able to carp about rampant institutional racism in America and not get laughed into the adjoining star system. Rather, their rhetorical idiocy is eagerly digested by millions (here, it actually is millions) of black Americans, and those who attempt to enlighten or defend blacks’ humanity are branded as racists.

There is, of course, a certain irony in the fact that President Obama’s ethnicity is the only thing that has allowed him to get away with a myriad of high crimes and misdemeanors. Even with the countenance of the press, any of our previous chief executives, having committed the same offenses and executed similar policies, would have run so far afoul of the people and other elected officials to warrant removal with all due speed.

Right Wing Leftovers - 8/14/13

  • Rafael Cruz will speak at Liberty University in November.
  • Notorious crackpot Erik Rush will appear on Sean Hannity's Fox News program tonight.
  • You know, if WND really thought that the SPLC's anti-gay hate map incited violence, they would stop printing it in their articles!
  • Molotov Mitchell is still mad at Glenn Beck for stealing the name "For The Record."
  • Finally, James Dobson fumes: "Shame on the schools and churches that are teaching the young that sexual immorality is not an offense against the Almighty, whether it is homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual. Sin is sin, and our leaders used to call it by that name. Now children hear regularly that perversity is a civil right protected by the Constitution. But biblical truth has not changed. The wages of sin is still death, as it has always been."

Erik Rush: Africa and India Colonized Because Their People Seemed 'Only A Few Steps out of the Trees'

WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush is upset that Americans may appreciate other (read: inferior) cultures, lamenting that it all started when “the Beatles brought East Indian culture to the West.”

Rush asks: “Why in the world ought America be more like India? It was their culture that gave the British the impression they were only a few steps out of the trees, so India was colonized. The same goes for Africa.”

He goes on to explain that it is all part of a communist conspiracy, of course, that seeks to “insidiously break down our sense of national pride” and establish “slavery to elites.”

Still, for many years, I have puzzled over Americans who become inordinately and superficially enamored of foreign things. We’ve all seen the plight of starry-eyed young American girls who fall in love with a mass media-proffered stereotype of some romantic foreign male, then run off and marry one, only to discover that the man’s culture is frighteningly cloying and patriarchal, sometimes dangerously so. They wind up losing their children to a parental kidnap, or having to escape a sadistic family situation in a misogynistic regime somewhere, coming to the heartbreaking realization that their studly beau was only looking for a quality breeding cow.

We’ve also witnessed the fads that have come and gone from overseas – sometimes not going fast enough – having been brought to light by the media or some celebrity du jour. In the 1960s, the Beatles brought East Indian culture to the West, and the ripples of that introduction are still passing through the lives of Americans in the form of yoga and other such pursuits.



Why in the world ought America be more like India? It was their culture that gave the British the impression they were only a few steps out of the trees, so India was colonized. The same goes for Africa. Contrary to the claim of liberals, these things have far less to do with race than they do with culture. Here, it bears mentioning that the British did not have nearly as easy a time with China. One will also note that in recent years, both India and China have prospered by becoming more like America, rather than the reverse.

To be entirely truthful, I would have no qualms with a one-world government, had the world’s leaders determined that the American paradigm represented the most prudent course to take. But global power players have opted for a collectivist thugocracy in which cheap hustlers, decadent old-money deviants and narcissistic elites will rule like princes over us all.

Americans have the right to take a measure of pride and satisfaction in their accomplishments. It’s taken 50 years for America’s enemies to insidiously break down our sense of national pride and pervert those accomplishments into atrocities with their lies, and the collectivist (some would say communist) movement behind it has been under way for nearly a century. Thus, it will take time and monumental effort to reverse this.

But more than that, it will take the will to do so. The enemy is determined, well-entrenched and possesses the will to do things many Americans cannot yet conceptualize. They have shown that they will go to any lengths to fulfill the leftist agenda, so we must be unapologetic in our resolve and practically militant in the delivery of our message.

America’s founders were willing to risk death to break free from slavery to elites. How many are willing to take the same risk now to prevent us from slipping back into it?

Rush & Wiles: Obama's Civil War Starting Any Day Now

Nothing delights us more here at Right Wing Watch than having some of our “favorites” get together, and we were lucky enough to see that yesterday when Erik Rush, the insane WorldNetDaily columnist and Fox News regular, was the special guest on TruNews with Rick Wiles.

Rush told Wiles that no one, even people who actually know the definition of communism, will stop him from charging that his opponents are communists. After warning of a looming police state, Rush reiterated his call to put journalists in prison for treason: “I honestly believe that there are some news bureau chiefs who deserve to be sitting and cooling their heels in penitentiaries because some of what is going on in the press I really see as being treasonous, in addition to the high crimes that are being committed by the administration.”

The pair tried to outdo each other to see who was first to warn that Obama was a communist bent on inciting a civil war. Wiles said that he predicted in 2008 that Obama’s would incite a Marxist revolution and try to “start a civil war” just as Abraham Lincoln did.

Rush, however, saw Obama’s plan to “foment a Marxist revolution” develop “before 2007 was out.” He told Wiles that he now fears “there’s any number of things he can do to push the button and have that take place and he’s just getting his ducks in a row.”

Later, Rush charged that people who refuse to believe their claims about the looming civil war are simply in denial, lamenting that “it’s not going to be apparent to them until the bullets are flying.”

Wiles: I said in 2008 that if Mr. Obama gets in the White House he will start a revolution in this country; I warned that this was a Marxist takeover of the country. In January of 2009, I said this man is going to pattern himself—his supporters are going to tell us that he’s not FDR, he’s Abraham Lincoln. Because everybody was thinking they’re going to paint him as the new FDR, and I said in January of 2009, no, they’re going to paint him as Abraham Lincoln and the reason is his agenda is to start a civil war. I know that sounds wild and crazy.

Rush: No.

Wiles: But I really believe this man wants a civil war.

Rush: I don’t want to try to sound like I’m one-upping you but I believe that before 2007 was out, only by virtue of being one of the first people on it, I looked at this guy and I was like, if this guy gets in, he’s going to try to foment a Marxist revolution, straight up. If you look at the way things stand now, he’s got any number of ways he can do it: the economy, you know, economic collapse; race; he’s got the Occupy Wall Street people with Van Jones running them, which few people know, who is still working for Obama, which knew people know. There’s any number of things he can do to push the button and have that take place and he’s just getting his ducks in a row and of course people think that you and I are nuts when we say these things but there is ample evidence there, more than ample evidence.



Rush: I know that there are people who are either socialist or socialist-leaning who don’t advocate for a wholesale communist overthrow of the government, there are some of them who just don’t believe it and then there are a small percentage who are completely, as some would say, down with that. But what bothers me of course that it is so incomprehensible to so many people, even a lot of conservatives, that I’m afraid it’s not going to be apparent to them until the bullets are flying.

Erik Rush: Obama Is Murdering Everyone And I Don't Need Evidence To Prove It

Erik Rush says he is positive that President Obama and his minions are murdering people, and he doesn’t need any proof to back up his charges because requiring evidence is just a “ruse” of the “political left.” He previously wrote a column alleging that the Obama administration had a hand in the murder of a gun enthusiast, while admitting he had “no proof” besides an “inclination.”

Now, much like the debunked Clinton Body Count claims of old, the WorldNetDaily columnist asserts that Obama killed his gay lovers and drowned a woman who may have “come by information on the night of the [Aurora] shooting that wound up being detrimental to her health.” According to Rush, Obama also killed journalist Michael Hastings, an identity theft criminal, his dog trainer, Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Andrew Breitbart (of course).

Rush insists that he is simply asking questions! This is the age of FEMA camps, Rush writes, after all.

I know it’s typical for those on the political left to demand peer-reviewed studies, videotape and signed affidavits proving the assertions some of us make concerning the machinations of the Obama administration and socialist encroachment at large, but we all are aware by now that this is a diversion. It’s also a good indicator that we’re correct in said assertions. Like the left’s tendency for projection, wherein they accuse the opposition of that in which they are themselves engaged, it’s a fairly transparent ruse.



For example: On June 11, Lord Monckton reported in WND that a U.S. congressman told him the birth certificate for the president released by the White House was “unquestionably a forgery,” and “We all know that.” The congressman went on to cite fear of political retribution as the rationale for most cases of Obama’s political opponents eschewing the subject.

Rather risk-averse when compared to those who founded this nation, and cowardly considering the stakes, but we’ll move on.

There are things that go beyond the pale even of political intrigue and scandal, and there is ample evidence the president has been involved in some of these also. Once again, you’re not going to get peer-reviewed studies, videotape, or signed affidavits here. But the coincidences or confluence of events tend to dispel the idea that these are wild accusations.

In fact, they’re not accusations at all; they’re theories.

There is an entire true crime novel in the case of the Trinity United Church murders, two gay men known to Obama who were killed execution-style in 2007 at a time when charges of homosexuality and drug use were being leveled at the candidate. Years later, as reported in WND, an entire network of closeted professional gay black men at the Chicago church was exposed.

Ancillary to the question of Obama’s eligibility, there was the case of Leiutenant Quarles Harris Jr. (not a military officer; he just had a weird name), a hustler who was also killed execution-style on April 18, 2008, during an investigation into the theft of the passport records of candidate Obama, Sen. John McCain and Sen. Hillary Clinton. John Brennan, who became Obama’s counterterrorism adviser and later CIA chief, was also implicated in this case (of the passport records, not the murder).

On Aug. 6, 2012, Jennifer Gallagher, a 46-year-old nurse, drowned mysteriously while vacationing with her family in Iowa. Gallagher had been on the team that attended to victims of the July 20 Aurora, Colo., theater shooting. She was also among staffers who met with President Obama during his highly publicized visit of the shooting victims. Several inconsistencies came to light in the theater shooting accounts and aspects of the subsequent investigation; one can’t help but wonder if Gallagher came by information on the night of the shooting that wound up being detrimental to her health.

Then, of course, we have the off-the-chart suspicious death of journalist Michael Hastings on June 18 in a car wreck worthy of any action film. The circumstances surrounding the incident are right out of a political thriller and have all the hallmarks of a staged accident. Hastings was the individual whose reporting brought down the career of Gen. Stanley McChrystal; reportedly under government surveillance, he was also said to be working on a story involving domestic government spying at the time of his death.

So there we have it. There are more than a few other suspicious deaths that some attribute to Obama, from his dog trainer to Andrew Breitbart. I have asserted that the attack on the Libyan mission on Sept. 11, 2012, had its genesis in Obama’s need to “erase” either the administration’s illegal operations in Libya or Ambassador Christopher Stevens himself.

Whether or not the president had a hand in any or all of these may never be known for certain, even if his treason someday becomes common knowledge. What chills the blood in this time of domestic spying, drones, data mining centers and FEMA camps is the possibility that there are those working among us who might actually be willing to kill for this treacherous mobster.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious