Fischer: Obama 'May in Fact be a Closeted Muslim'

While taking calls from listeners yesterday, Bryan Fischer was asked by "Chip in Fitzgerald, Georgia" why nobody in the mainstream media was reporting on the fact the WND-based conspiracy theory claiming that President Obama's wedding ring proves that he is a Muslim.

While the obvious explanation would be that nobody has reported on it because it is nonsense, that was not the explanation that Fischer offered because he knows the real reason the media is not reporting on it is because it is evidence that Obama "may in fact be a closeted Muslim": 

Fischer: If Obama is Re-Elected, 'America has no Future'

As is his usual practice, Bryan Fischer began his radio program yesterday with a Bible reading and discussion, in this case a passage from 2 Kings.  It is Fischer's belief that the Old Testament was preserved so that we can understand "the principles by which God deals with nations," and this reading prompted him to declare that if this nation re-elects President Obama in November "I sincerely believe that America has no future" as the decision "will either delay [God's] day of judgment or it will hasten that day of judgment":

Right Wing Round-Up - 10/25/12

Right Wing Leftovers - 10/25/12

  • Colin Powell has again endorsed Barack Obama which, of course, means he "is a man without honor."
  • Well, this is quite the "scoop" from CBN's David Brody! 
  • FRC prays that "the U.S. Supreme Court will rule DOMA constitutional, affirming the authority of the states and the U.S. Congress to hold fast the historic definition of marriage."
  • On a related note, what is the deal with this video FRC posted that compares gay marriage to drug abuse and pedophilia? The National Organization for Marriage posted the exact same video.
  • Peter LaBarbera says Ted Haggard is "wrong to call himself a Christian and a bisexual, and he should step aside from public ministry."
  • Finally, the fact that Marjorie Dannenfelser, Penny Nance, and Phyllis Schlafly have all come to Richard Mourdock's defense just about tells you everything you need to know about the Religious Right groups that claim to represent women. 

Wilson: Obama is Leading a 'War on Christian People'

Lawsuits challenging the mandate for contraception coverage have not fared well in the courts, but American Family Association general manager Buster Wilson today said that the provision is clearly unconstitutional and is proof of the Obama administration’s purported hostility towards Christians. “There’s no war on women, that’s a fantasy,” Wilson said. “The war is on Christian people.” He later warned that the government may soon “cause you to hire homosexuals” and eradicate religious freedom.

There’s no war on women, that’s a fantasy. The war is on Christian people. The war is on the First Amendment. What does the First Amendment say, let’s just go back to basics, what does the First Amendment say? The First Amendment says Congress shall impose no law that prohibits the free exercise of religion. What is this mandate out of the Obamacare law if it is not a congressional imposition on the exercise of religion?



If they win this argument then we will lose other religious liberties. Here’s the way the argument will go: we have proven through the courts and otherwise that businesses don’t have the freedom to practice the religious liberties of the First Amendment so we can cause businesses to do anything. Next will be to cause you to hire homosexuals or next will be to cause you to pay into something else you don’t agree to. I mean it will just be one thing after another. And for all the folks out there from Right Wing Watch and all their entities that want to mock us for this, you just wait, one day something is going to come that is going to infringe on some Constitutional liberty that you cherish and you’re going to start screaming bloody murder too.

Harvey: Parents must 'Protect Their Children' from Schools with Transgender Teachers and Inclusive Policies

After urging parents to withdraw their children from schools which have bullying-prevention programs that cover anti-LGBT bullying, Linda Harvey of Mission America is now telling parents to consider keeping their children from any school with any LGBT-inclusive policy at all. Harvey on her radio commentary discussed the case of an Illinois school board that rescinded a measure, which had been approved with unanimous support, to ensure the safety of transgender students. While that board repealed their policy, Harvey warned that more schools “are starting to buy in to the monstrous idea that some children should be supported as they try to flip their biological genders,” who she said “need compassion and help, not a stamp of approval.” “These children need help, not an open door into this lifestyle,” Harvey claimed, and she went on to say that parents should look into removing their children from schools with transgender-inclusive policies and transgender teachers in order to “protect their children and if needed move them to an environment where they won’t be subjected to outright lies and corruption.” 

Most of you are aware by now of the push to get our kids to accept homosexuality in our schools, in the media and even in some sadly misguided churches. But are you aware of how rapidly another agenda is moving in right behind this one? I’m talking about transgenderism, you know, boys dressing as girls, calling themselves by girls’ names, and vice versa. Amazingly, public school educators are starting to buy in to the monstrous idea that some children should be supported as they try to flip their biological genders. Instead of enabling this disordered behavior, we should be standing strong against such conduct and making it clear to all students that this is a path they do not want to travel. These kids need compassion and help, not a stamp of approval.



It’s truly sad when there are students are so confused and troubled enough that they want to challenge the very basis of their biology and anatomy, their genders. These children need help, not an open door into this lifestyle. But the homosexual lobby and the big teachers unions have convinced a growing number of educators that there is nothing wrong with this, in some schools there are even teachers who themselves are transvestites or who have had gender-change surgery. It’s troubling when people who so easily waffle on basic ethical questions are in charge of our children’s education. When moral anarchy threatens to become the new normal, it’s up to parents to protect their children and if needed move them to an environment where they won’t be subjected to outright lies and corruption. These bizarre trends will only end if we speak out where we can and vote in new leadership where needed in these tax-funded schools. Please pray friends about what God would have you do if this comes up in your community.

Barton Offers 'Another Example of the Many Biblical Principles Directly Incorporated into the Constitution'

A few months ago, we posted a video of David Barton falsely claiming that the Constitution's provision regarding treason "is a verbatim quote out of Ezekiel 18:20." Even by Barton's lax standards, this claim made no sense as the Bible passage has literally nothing to Constitutional provision he cited:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

vs

The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

It turned out that Barton was not talking about the treason section of Article III, Section 3 but rather the provision pertaining to bills of attainder:

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

Obviously, this is not a "verbatim quote" either, but in his book "The Founders Bible" Barton tries to make the case that is evidence that these "Biblical principles [were] directly incorporated into the Constitution":

[W]hen a nation is under the curse of the Lord, children are punished for what their parents did ... But when the Lord exalts a nation, the policy changes - each individual's actions are imputed only to himself and not to his children ... Americans understood this Biblical principle, and so when they separated from Great Britain, they changed their laws accordingly so that no one would be punished for a crime he himself did not commit ... These two clauses are but another example of the many Biblical principles directly incorporated into the Constitution.

Barton's book also contains an article on the origins of the Declaration of Independence written by Paul Jehle, Executive Director of the Plymouth Rock Foundation, who claims that the rights mentioned in the document came directly out of the book of Genesis:

When we look at the Declaration of Independence and the truths they held as self-evident - the list of inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (which is another way the Founders spoke of the right to private property) - those ideas were not the invention of great minds of the Enlightenment; they originated with the source of light Himself, God. They were revealed truth our forefathers found in the pages of Scripture.

The charter that God made with Adam was threefold. First, "Be fruitful and multiply," which is mankind's basic right to life. Second, "fill or replenish, the earth." The Hebrew word fill or replenish involved the scientific method, meaning to take something that we observe, then break it down to its essential ingredients and reform it into a different form. It is a concept that requires the right to liberty. When we have liberty, we can take natural resources and then refill the earth with the same natural resources in different forms through invention and technology. Third, "subdue the earth and rule, or have dominion, over it," which is the right to own private property. Dominion of the earth simply means we have a parcel of land that is our exclusive possession that we steward before God.

Cass: 'You Can't Be a Christian if You Don't Own a Gun'

Recently, a conference was held at the Upper Room Church in Keller, Texas entitled "Deliver Us From Evil" where one of the featured speakers as Gary Cass, head of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission.

Cass, who normally spends most of his time attacking President Obama, Muslims, gays, and Mormons, spent an hour and a half blasting America for having a "broken moral compass" for electing politicians who support things like reproductive choice and marriage equality.  Cass went on to declare that the nation's colleges and universities have "now become perverted factories of unfaithfulness," especially Harvard which is now "animated by the spirit of Antichrist," before attacking "progressive Christians" as ones who "have murdered their own souls, destroyed their own churches, and have undermined our nation."

Finally, Cass explained to the audience that "you can't be a Christian if you don't own a gun":  

WND Columnist: Prosecute Liberals, Journalists for Treason

For years, conservatives have claimed that liberals seek to criminalize Christianity and conservative opinions through imaginary hate speech laws. But today, WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush writes that the government should prosecute liberals and members of the press… in order to defend freedom, of course. He accuses journalists of “treasonous collusion” with the Obama administration and said the Founders would have wanted journalists to be “found guilty of high crimes.”

“Trials for treason and the requisite sentences would apply,” Rush says, “and I would have no qualms about seeing such sentences executed, no matter how severe.” He claims that progressives’ “seditious, anti-American” speech is “excepted from protection under the First Amendment,” hoping that “the political disenfranchisement of liberals, progressives, socialists and Marxists can begin in earnest, and in the open.”

Assuming that all goes well and that we are rid of Obama in January, there will be a nation to repair – but what about the causes for this necessity? Yes, many Americans are now cognizant of the fact that progressives have “progressed” America dangerously close to being a Marxist-socialist nation and that we are collectively responsible for not having checked that progress. But aside from grass-roots efforts toward electoral and political reform, there are other widespread, organized threats to America’s ongoing concern as a representative republic with guaranteed personal liberties, free speech foremost among them.

Here, I am speaking of the press, the conglomeration of national broadcast, digital and print media organizations that has been incrementally packed with ideological liberals and socialists, and so has disqualified itself as the impartial government watchdog it once was. During my lifetime, I have seen the press become an advance force for social engineering and global socialism. The degree to which they have deceived Americans and enabled the agenda of radicals in recent decades is beyond shame. As former Democratic pollster Pat Caddell said recently, the press has become an enemy of the American people. In the matter of this president, the press largely facilitated the ascension of Barack Obama. The instances wherein they have promoted, shielded and aided him are beyond enumeration.

This goes beyond such things as MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and his man crush on Obama – I’m talking about treasonous collusion. One particularly scandalous incident occurred during the second presidential debate, when CNN moderator Candy Crowley made an interjection that appeared to have been as spontaneous as Ambassador Chris Stevens’ murder, and which led to a solid point scored for Obama. Most recently, after Mitt Romney brought up Obama’s 2009 “Apology Tour,” the press did their best to support Obama’s claim that this never happened, despite boundless reams of footage that exist chronicling the event.



It is improbable that the framers of the Constitution anticipated a situation in which the press were entirely given over to seditious, anti-American policies. If they had, it is likely that their modus operandi would be similar to that for any faction found guilty of high crimes. Trials for treason and the requisite sentences would apply, and I would have no qualms about seeing such sentences executed, no matter how severe.

This is not likely to occur, however. Radio personality and nascent media mogul Glenn Beck has the intention of putting the establishment press out of business. While I wish him every success, it doesn’t seem likely that he will accomplish this through his organizations alone. In addition to the advent of powerful alternative media sources, I believe it will be necessary to codify – or reaffirm – the nature of crimes against the Constitution and the American people. In this manner, we can thwart the designs not only of the press, but all global socialists operating in America.

Those whose speech and actions impinge upon the God-given rights set forth in the Declaration of Independence and codified in the Constitution are, by definition, excepted from protection under the First Amendment (as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment). This is a very important concept to consider, because it is based on these presumptions of protected speech and equal protection for all that progressives and socialists have engaged in their predation upon our liberties.

If these truths can be acknowledged and widely accepted as such (as opposed to progressives’ Orwellian interpretations), then the political disenfranchisement of liberals, progressives, socialists and Marxists can begin in earnest, and in the open.

Joel Gilbert: Obama Got Nose Job to Hide Resemblance to Frank Marshall Davis

Filmmaker, Bob Dylan enthusiast, and all-purpose conspiracy theorist Joel Gilbert has been getting plenty of attention recently for his film, “Dreams From My Real Father,”which presents his theory that President Obama’s real father was Communist organizer Frank Marshall Davis, who groomed the president from birth to lead a “revolution to end capitalism.” Gilbert has taken advantage of an undisclosed source of funds to send copies of his movie to 4 million swing-state households, where it has been met with decidedly mixed reviews. Gilbert’s film has earned effusive praise from the chairman of the Alabama Republican Party and Fox News’ Monica Crowley, but was panned by a Republican focus group, which found it “revolting.” A public screening of the film organized by a county commissioner in Texas has drawn promises of protests.

In the midst of this hubbub, though, Gilbert hasn’t neglected his continuing research into the president’s history. This summer, he speculated to Alex Jones that the Obama administration might have been behind the Aurora movie theater shooting. Earlier this month, he put on his “expert in Islamic history”  hat to uncover a secret “Islamic inscription” on the president’s wedding ring. And today, he drops another bombshell to World Net Daily’s Jerome Corsi: the president got a nose job (a.k.a. "facial forgery") because he was “concerned he was looking too much like Frank Marshall Davis as he got older.”


Filmmaker Joel Gilbert contends President Obama has altered his facial profile for the national stage of American politics, citing two nationally known cosmetic surgery experts he consulted who concluded Obama had a “nose job.”

“It appears Obama had some aesthetic refinement,” said plastic surgeon J. David Holcolm.



“Obama has gone to great lengths to obscure his past,” Gilbert said. “Now, in addition to the alleged document forgery and photographic forgery by Obama to hide his true identity, we now have evidence of facial forgery.”



Gilbert suspects Obama had the surgery because he was “concerned he was looking too much like Frank Marshall Davis as he got older.”

“I don’t think it was a coincidence that Obama chose to undergo a rhinoplasty before running for U.S. Senate and facing the national spotlight,” Gilbert said. “If Obama was identified as Davis’ son, it would connect the Marxist dots of Obama’s entire life journey.”

Gilbert said Obama “needed the Kenyan father fairy tale to misdirect the public away from the fact that he is a red diaper baby, the child of a Communist Party USA propagandist and Soviet agent.”

As evidence, Gilbert presents a somewhat unconvincing side-by-side photograph array.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious