WorldNetDaily

Birther King Joseph Farah Cheers Canadian-Born Ted Cruz's 'Electrifying' Presidential Announcement

WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah has been trying to backtrack on his years of promoting birther conspiracy theories about President Obama, which center around the claim that Obama was born abroad and has a fraudulent Hawaiian birth certificate, in order to promote his new favorite GOP presidential candidate: Ted Cruz.

Farah, who has suggested in the past that Obama is ineligible to be president because he was secretly born abroad to an American mother and a Kenyan father, does not seem to have a problem with Cruz, who – unlike Obama – was actually born abroad. Cruz has an American mother and a father who was a Cuban national at the time of his birth.

The champion of the birther cause praised Cruz in a column this week as a Reagan-like leader who could not only win the presidency in a landslide but could also stand “on his own two feet without the assistance of a teleprompter,” which Farah hails as “refreshing after six years of Barack Obama.”

It’s been a long time since I’ve heard any political figure do what Sen. Ted Cruz did yesterday in his announcement he is seeking the Republican nomination for the presidency.

He delivered an electrifying, motivational, rousing case for liberty – explaining why it’s not too late, why Americans don’t need to lower their expectations, how this country has overcome greater odds in its history.



He is going to be a formidable candidate. More importantly, he’s a breath of fresh air for giving Americans hope again – the kind of hope we haven’t had since Ronald Reagan was articulating his vision of national renewal.

He does it standing on his own two feet without the assistance of a teleprompter – also refreshing after six years of Barack Obama.



I am not making an endorsement for the presidency here. But I am giving Ted Cruz a big hallelujah, a heartfelt amen.

This is the way I wish other Republicans and conservatives would talk. There’s a reason Ronald Reagan, with similar views, was able to win landslide victories in the 1980s. It’s because he was the Great Communicator. Ted Cruz may be one, too.



Unlike most of my colleagues in the media, I like that Ted Cruz denies man-made catastrophic climate change. Why? Because it’s not real. It’s a scam for more government control over the lives of individual citizens. It’s one of the biggest and worst collectivist schemes in history.

Unlike most of my colleagues in the media, I like that Ted Cruz helped shut down the government. I’d like to see much of the federal government permanently shut down to be in line with the limits of the Constitution.

Unlike most of my colleagues in the media, I like that Ted Cruz invoked God and liberty so frequently in his announcement.

I don’t think he’s out of step with mainstream American values. Not at all. I think his message is going to resonate. He’s a serious contender.

Rick Scarborough: Gay Marriage Will 'Unleash The Spirit Of Hell On The Nation'

Texas pastor Rick Scarborough took to WorldNetDaily today to expound on his call for anti-gay civil disobedience if the Supreme Court strikes down bans on same-sex marriage, warning that such a ruling will usher in attacks on Christianity and “a brave new world with tyrannical laws and regulations.”

Insisting that the Supreme Court will “silence” Christians and the “thousands of ‘former homosexuals,’” Scarborough compared a potential marriage equality ruling to Dred Scott and Buck v. Bell.

“Now the high court is threatening to unleash the spirit of hell on the nation, if they deny what nature clearly teaches on this subject of gender and marriage,” Scarborough said. “The time has come for pastors and leaders to stand up and declare what innately we all know to be true – that this idea is morally unacceptable and we will not allow it proceed without our objection. There can be no compromise on this issue.”

With all due respect, I must refuse to honor any ordinance or judicial ruling that makes restricting marriage to a union between one man and one woman, which God ordained and our nation throughout our history protected, invalid. Regardless of the consequences.

It is the duty of all Christ’s followers to lovingly uphold a standard of righteousness and be true to God’s Word, which never changes. God’s Word provides an offer of hope and forgiveness through Jesus to anyone who is caught up in sin, but if we compromise His Word, on what authority can we offer His hope?

Homosexuality is a sin – but it is not an unforgivable sin nor worse than any other sin. Though some who have chosen homosexuality may choose to reject me for saying this, I am willing to suffer such if that is the cost of being true to God’s Word. If Christians quietly allow marriage to be redefined, we will find ourselves being forced to be quiet as judges impose the acceptance of more and more aberrant behaviors.

We will soon find ourselves in a brave new world with tyrannical laws and regulations forcing us not only to accommodate same-sex marriage but to keep our message of love and forgiveness to ourselves, lest our message cause some to be offended. Paul spoke clearly about such a time as this: “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”

Those who are advancing this agenda want Christians to be silenced, thinking that to be a good thing. But if they succeed, they will cut off the very Gospel that can change their lives and provide hope and forgiveness, not only for sexual sin, but for all sin.

There are thousands of “former homosexuals” who can testify that Jesus has the power to set us free from any sin. Traditional marriage doesn’t discriminate. There are many former homosexuals now rearing their children in such marriages, and they are living proof of God’s forgiveness and matchless love.

That alone is reason enough for Christians to defend marriage as God designed it.

We must be reminded that the courts are not the final word on this subject. The Supreme Court has gotten it wrong more than they want to admit. More than 200 previous decisions of the Supreme Court have either been rescinded or overturned. Some of those past rulings have been infamous for wrongheadedness, like Dred Scott v. Sandford or Buck v. Bell.



Now the high court is threatening to unleash the spirit of hell on the nation, if they deny what nature clearly teaches on this subject of gender and marriage. The time has come for pastors and leaders to stand up and declare what innately we all know to be true – that this idea is morally unacceptable and we will not allow it proceed without our objection. There can be no compromise on this issue.

We are witnessing a culture March toward Madness!

Larry Klayman: Obama Seeks To 'Be Rewarded With 72 Virgins In Islamic Heaven'

Conservative legal activist Larry Klayman took to WorldNetDaily on Friday to defend Fox News pundit Andrea Tantaros’s claim that President Obama is anti-Semitic, alleging that Obama is not only an anti-Semite but also an “ultra-leftist, pro-Muslim, racist.”

Warning that “our Muslim president” is “selling out the country to the radical mullahs in Tehran,” Klayman said that the president wants Iran to get a nuclear weapon because “in so doing, Obama will have furthered the will of his faux god, allah, and been a good Muslim.”

“Perhaps he will be rewarded with 72 virgins in Islamic ‘heaven,’” he said.

I have said it before, and I will say it again. It’s time that we stop mincing words and call it like it is. We have a president who lied his way into the White House and continues to lie while in office. He is not a Christian. He is a Muslim, through his father and given his Islamic education as a child, as well as his continuing association with black-Muslim despots, Jew-haters like Rev. Louis Farrakhan and a host of others who are well-known for their racism and bigotry. This explains how he acts and does not act with regard to Israel and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the rest of us. Thus far, in the media only Andrea Tantaros of Fox News has raised the issue of Obama’s apparent anti-Semitism, suggesting Obama is a racist and an anti-Semite, plain and simple.



So the reality is that Obama did not want regime change in Iran. As a fellow Muslim by blood – under Shariah law he is Muslim by virtue of his father’s lineage – and in his heart and soul sympathetic with the so-called religion and culture, his actions vis-a-vis Iran, Israel, ISIS, the Palestine Liberation Organization and many other Islamic states, interests and terrorist groups can all be explained. Wherever Obama was born, he is not an American in heart and soul, but a traitor in all senses of the word. It’s time to start saying it like it is; and that goes for the Republican Party, which has also danced around this reality with couched and cowardly words over the last six years of the administration.



The Republicans were afraid to harshly criticize Obama for fear of being called racists. Yes, the race card is powerful in this country, particularly since the president is an African-American, and he had the bully pulpit to politically neuter the great elephant. But our Founding Fathers were not so timid when it came to calling it like it was with regard to the tyranny of King George III – and the king was a saint compared with Obama and his ultra-leftist, pro-Muslim, racist, compromised minions in government and outside of government, like Attorney General Eric Holder and the Rev. Al Sharpton, to name just two.

So here were are, on the brink of our Muslim president selling out the country to the radical mullahs in Tehran, who will build nuclear weapons and missiles to either annihilate Christians and Jews, or at a minimum use these weapons of mass destruction to blackmail us into submission as their Middle Eastern and worldwide Islamic caliphate marches on.

And, in so doing, Obama will have furthered the will of his faux god, allah, and been a good Muslim. Perhaps he will be rewarded with 72 virgins in Islamic “heaven.”

Rick Scarborough: Congressmen Back Plan To Go To Jail To Defy Gay Marriage

Anti-gay pastor Rick Scarborough, notorious for insisting that HIV/AIDS is God’s punishment for homosexuality, is working with Religious Right leader James Dobson, televangelist James Robison and conservative legal activist Mat Staver to recruit leading Religious Right activists and politicians to sign a pledge to commit civil disobedience in protest of a potential Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage.

Scarborough told WorldNetDaily in an interview yesterday that once gay marriage becomes the law of the land, there will be mass arrests of Christians, even though such an event has never taken place in the dozens of states where gay marriage is legal. The government “better have a lot of prisons and jails,” Scarborough said, if they dare to legalize same-sex marriage.

He added that members of Congress “are lining up to sign the document” pledging to go to jail rather than recognize a Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage.

Back in 2009, Scarborough similarly warned that Christians would be hauled off to jail after a gay-inclusive federal hate crimes law was signed into law, which obviously didn’t happen.

A team of prominent Christian leaders is preparing a statement that will inform the public – including justices on the U.S. Supreme Court – that they will engage in civil disobedience rather than follow a ruling that establishes homosexual “marriage” in the United States.

Among those leading the charge is James Dobson of Family Talk Radio, Rick Scarborough of Vision America Action, Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel and James Robison of Life Today, whose brand new publication called The Stream reported on a recent telephone conference call discussing the issue.

Stream Executive Editor Jay Richards told WND there were about 20 other Christian leaders on the call. He said members of Congress have expressed an interest in the plan, which will be disclosed in the next few days in a statement regarding marriage and the U.S. Supreme Court.

However, Scarborough wasted no time in an interview with WND explaining what is, and is not, going to happen.

“We’re taking a very adamant stand,” he said. “If the court declares same-sex ‘marriage’ to be on the same par as a civil right, that’s a bridge too far. We won’t obey. We’ll go to jail.”



Scarborough confirmed congressmen “are lining up to sign the document.”

“The undeniable case is that when same-sex “marriage’ becomes, declared by the Supreme Court, as the law of the land, they will begin to enforce it, like all civil rights laws.”

That is where the civil disobedience will loom large.

“We’re saying, before that, we will never obey that tyrannical law. It’s counter to natural law, and God’s higher law.

“We will simply refuse to comply with recognizing same-sex ‘marriage’ as legitimate,” he said. “The Supreme Court does not have the inherent right [to make that change]. We’ll going to continue doing what we’ve always done.”

He said the hope is that thousands of churches and millions of Americans will join.

Those who plan to use the power of federal law enforcement to enforce same-sex marriage, he said, “better have a lot of prisons and jails.”

WND: Solar Eclipse A Warning To America About Relationship With Israel

Although WorldNetDaily frequently reminds its readers that the earth is just 6,000 years old, the far-right outlet reports today that an event which “only takes place once every 100,000 years” is “an unmistakable sign of judgment.”

According to WND, “biblical experts” are excited that a solar eclipse on Friday “will darken the sun just in time for the sunrise at the North Pole,” which obviously means that God is about to punish Europe, and possibly the U.S., for its allegedly poor treatment of Israel and growing “anti-Israel sentiment.”

A solar eclipse coming on March 20 won’t just be an astronomical wonder – it will be an event that may be unprecedented in human history, according to biblical experts who say it is an unmistakable sign of judgment.



Such an astronomical event only takes place once every 100,000 years, experts said.

In an exclusive interview with WND, Root Source co-founder Bob O’Dell pointed to the significance of an eclipse visible from the North Pole at this particular time.

“The North Pole can’t really be called the territory of any particular nation or people,” O’Dell said. “This is likely a message from God to the entire world.”



Pastor Mark Biltz, author of “Blood Moons: Decoding the Imminent Heavenly Signs,” sees a heavenly warning in the consequences of the eclipse, especially for the northern Europeans, who will be most affected.

In an exclusive interview with WND, Biltz explained, “In Jewish tradition, a total solar eclipse is a warning to the Gentiles and a sign of judgment on the nations. When we look at where the darkness will be, it will be in northern European countries like England and Sweden where we see the rise of Islam and anti-Israel sentiment. Europeans especially should take heed.”



“This comes at a time when American aid for Israel has become an important political issue in the United States. But Israelis know they cannot put their survival in the hands of one who wishes their demise.

“All throughout history, Israel has put their hopes in foreign help rather than trusting in the God of Israel. From King Ahaz to King Zedekiah and throughout history. While the U.S. needs to back Israel, Israel needs to rely on the God of Israel.”

Biltz also points to other upcoming signs that will take place on feast days. There will be another solar eclipse on The Feast of Trumpets, on Sept. 13, 2015.

The final blood moon, a “super blood moon,” will appear during the Festival of Tabernacles, which is also known as a period of judgment for all the nations. Biltz believes that this is a sign that momentous events are in motion.

Paranoia-Rama: Gays And Immigrants Will Steal Your Freedom In Obama's Third Term

RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.

This week, we learned from the Right that gay people and immigrants are out to destroy our freedoms, with the help of President Obama, who is secretly preparing to stay in office for a third term.

5) Gay Marriage Threatens Freedom

Speaking with an Iowa talk show host this week, Sen. Ted Cruz once again appealed to the anti-gay Right when he railed against judges, like the members of the Iowa Supreme Court, who strike down bans on same-sex marriage. Cruz alleged that such rulings pose “ a real danger to our liberty” and are in defiance of the Constitution:

Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council also described marriage equality as a threat to freedom this week, writing that the Supreme Court is “headed for another Dred Scott opinion” if it finds same-sex marriage bans to be unconstitutional, referring to the ruling which said that African Americans could not be U.S. citizens.

“If the Court overturns marriage, it will not only further delegitimize itself as an institution, it will gravely damage American society,” he said. “And it will undermine the ‘consent of the governed’ — the only basis for just laws.”

Blackwell, notorious for his efforts as Ohio’s secretary of state to stifle voting in  the 2004 election, went on to compare judges who rule in favor of marriage equality to officials in the Jim Crow South who restricted the voting rights of African Americans: “We should remember Selma and the ‘Bloody Sunday’ that was necessary to achieve the too-long-denied equal voting rights for all our citizens. Today, rogue federal judges are engaged in the most massive case of voter suppression we have seen since the days of Jim Crow! Across the country, but especially in the South, black Americans joined other citizens in voting to affirm true marriage.”

But neither Blackwell nor Cruz can claim the prize for the most distraught outburst against gay marriage of the week, as that honor belongs to Indiana politician John Price, who suggested that Americans should “flee” the U.S. before the Supreme Court rules on marriage rights.

4) Gay Twilight Zone

So how exactly does LGBT equality threaten freedom?

Well, according to Texas GOP Chairman Tom Mechler, writing in an op-ed titled “ Free speech, rights are under attack,” the LGBT rights movement is threatening his freedom not to see photos of gay people:

I’ve watched with dismay the controversy surrounding Amarillo Town Club’s family membership policy, which was placed prominently before our community by the Amarillo Globe-News on March 2 with its front-page article showing a picture of two angry-looking homosexual women.

The story was also mentioned by a reader in a letter to the editor (Letter: Shame on Amarillo Town Club, March 6, amarillo.com) who believed the business’ conduct was “shameful.”

Shameful? Sometimes I feel like we are living in the twilight zone.

Mechler went on to write that people who criticize his view that same-sex marriage shouldn’t be legalized are actually attacking the freedom of speech: “What I find troubling is the incredible attack that has been launched on free speech. I love this country, and as an American the Bill of Rights gives me the right to say what I please.”

3) Immigrants Will Take Your Guns

Gun Owners of America executive director Larry Pratt is a staunch opponent of immigration reform since he believes that new citizens will vote Democratic and “take away our guns.”

Pratt expanded on this theory in an interview with Armed America Radio recently, explaining that immigrants have a “dependent mentality” and thus don’t understand what it’s like to want to protect yourself from bodily harm.

“A dependent class that depends on the government for their income, for all kinds of financial and other assistance, is not generally of a mind to be able to protect itself, which is after all the most important part about living, is staying alive from one moment to the next in case some dirtbag wants to try to terminate you,” he said. “And if you don’t think enough of your own freedom to take charge of that aspect of your existence, then of course you’re likely to expect handouts and ‘more, more, more’ because you have a dependent mentality.”

2) Another Petraeus Conspiracy Theory

When David Petraeus resigned as CIA director in response to allegations, to which he has since pled guilty, that he leaked classified information to a woman with whom he was having an affair, several conservative pundits rallied to his defense. According to these commentators, along with at least one GOP congressman, Petraeus was actually the victim of an Obama administration plot to stop him from exposing the truth about the 2012 Benghazi attack. In reality, since leaving the CIA, Petraeus has dismissed conspiracy theories surrounding the Benghazi attack and praised then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s response.

On Wednesday, as Media Matters notes, Rush Limbaugh made a similar claim, alleging that administration officials knew Petraeus was leaking sensitive material but “kept it in reserve” and acted on it only “when Petraeus refused to go out and spout the company line on Benghazi.” Limbaugh said that Clinton knew that this cover-up of the cover-up occurred, and that is why she used a personal email account at the State Department: “And so Mrs. Clinton knew that they knew, because she was secretary of state when they sent Petraeus out there to spout the company line and refused to do it. Plus she knew Obama — so that server is to keep things from Obama.”

1) Obama’s Third Term!

WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah wants his readers to know that he takes very seriously concerns “out there across the fruited plain” that President Obama will defy the U.S. Constitution and remain in office after the end of his second term. In fact, WND is so worried about this conspiracy theory that it even asked potential GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson how the American people can stop Obama’s (non-existent) plot.

Since “Obama himself may not even be constitutionally eligible for office,” according to Farah, there is reason to believe that “he and his family might remain in Washington after leaving office” since he has no respect for the Constitution anyway. After all, Farah believes that the Obama family enjoys lavish vacations and is “living it up” on the taxpayers’ dime so much that they may refuse to leave the White House.

Farah even suggested that groups like People For the American Way are paving the way for the third Obama term since there is “simply no organized opposition to Obama’s illegal, criminal actions and behavior.” The only one who can stop Obama, Farah writes, may be Hillary Clinton.

Bachmann: DHS Extension Guarantees 'Obama Phones' And Voter Fraud For Undocumented Immigrants

Former Rep. Michele Bachmann told WorldNetDaily yesterday that the decision of the Republican leadership in Congress to ally with Democrats to pass a clean extension of funding for the Department of Homeland Security “ensures a Democrat likely will be elected president in 2016” because immigrants protected from deportation by President Obama’s executive actions will vote illegally for Democrats.

“Practically, that bill ensures a Democrat likely will be elected president in 2016 with the Congress willing to double cross the taxpayers by paying for five million illegal work permits, driver’s licenses, Social Security numbers, Medicare, Medicaid and ultimately fraudulently directed efforts to get illegal aliens to the 2016 voting booth,” she said.

She also falsely claimed that undocumented immigrants covered by the orders would be eligible for food stamps and “Obama phones,” the name given by a racist meme to a communications program in place long before Obama became president.

WASHINGTON – The next president likely will be a Democrat and she, or he, can thank GOP leadership for that, according to Michele Bachmann.

The former congresswoman told WND that will be the result of top Republicans allowing the bill funding Obama’s amnesty for five million illegal immigrants to pass, immediately following the speech to Congress last week by Israeli Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Practically, that bill ensures a Democrat likely will be elected president in 2016 with the Congress willing to double cross the taxpayers by paying for five million illegal work permits, driver’s licenses, Social Security numbers, Medicare, Medicaid and ultimately fraudulently directed efforts to get illegal aliens to the 2016 voting booth.”

She said GOP leaders “betrayed our trust with a real bait-and-switch because no one was running in favor of amnesty in November, and then we get this.”

Bachmann lamented, “We’ve come to expect to be disappointed by Democrats,” but it was especially disappointing to see her own party flip-flop, and she predicted disastrous results.

“This was the most consequential vote for Democrats to ensure their political party’s dominance into the future.”

Bachmann said the GOP leadership “knew the outcome of the vote would be to pay for Obama’s illegal, unconstitutional work permits for non-deported illegal aliens.”

“They also knew this would mean Social Security numbers, driver’s licenses, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, Obama phones, Social Security disability benefits would also become accessible.”

And that, Bachmann observed, played right into the Democrats’ hands.

She said Democrats fully realized the vital importance and self-interest in voting for the bill, because, “They saw five million potential new voters for the all important 2016 election.”

But, didn’t Democrats assure Americans that illegal immigrants would not be able to vote?

“With Social Security numbers, a work permit and a driver’s license, they know no one doing voter registration would ever ask for legalization papers, because in light of Ferguson, that request would be construed as racist,” Bachmann retorted.

Ben Carson Upset Obama Hasn't Formed A Coalition To Fight ISIS, Which He Has

While Ben Carson ended his column at the conservative Washington Times after he announced the formation of a presidential exploratory committee, the Tea Party icon remains a columnist at WorldNetDaily, the conspiracy theorist’s outlet of choice.

Carson uses his WND platform today to declare that the U.S. should use “every military apparatus we have: banking facilities, sanctions, you name it,” against ISIS, adding that he “would not hesitate to put boots on the ground, because nothing should be off the table.”

Carson, who once said that he would allow U.S. troops to commit war crimes, suggested that President Obama should launch an anti-ISIS coalition: “We need to be the leader and take serious action. I am extraordinarily concerned about the fact that we are not responding to the barbaric acts that are taking place, as there is a tremendous leadership void. A coalition will form if it has a leader.”

Carson joins a growing right-wing chorus that seems completely unaware that Obama has already created a multinational anti-ISIS coalition which has pounded the group with thousands of airstrikes. If he cared to, he could easily find a daily list of U.S.-led airstrikes and news reports about U.S. support for the effort that has blunted the terrorist group’s momentum.

As the United States works to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, we are also dealing with ISIS as a formidable enemy that threatens our way of life. Every resource available should be used to eradicate the threat of ISIS while it is still in its adolescent stage. That means using every military apparatus we have: banking facilities, sanctions, you name it. And I would not hesitate to put boots on the ground, because nothing should be off the table.

This whole concept of “no boots on the ground because of what happened in Iraq” is silly. The threat Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida posed at that time was on a completely different level from what we are looking at now. It is immature to equate the two in terms of reactions. ISIS wants to destroy our way of life and us. We have two choices: We can sit back and wait for them, or we can use the resources we have to destroy them.

We need to be the leader and take serious action. I am extraordinarily concerned about the fact that we are not responding to the barbaric acts that are taking place, as there is a tremendous leadership void. A coalition will form if it has a leader.

I would commit everything to eliminating ISIS right now. We have to make sure that our military, which is extremely talented and maintains very good leadership, is not put into a compromised position where we are trying to micromanage things. Otherwise, we will be exposing many people to a state of grave danger.

Right-Wing Outlet: Obama May Give Himself Third Term So He Can Go On More Vacations

After years of promoting the birther myth, WorldNetDaily is now embracing the conspiracy theory that President Obama will illegally remain in power after the end of his second term. WND editor Joseph Farah writes today that since Obama was “pampered” in his youth and “never sacrificed or wanted for anything material in his life,” he and his family have been “living it up” in the White House by going on glamorous, taxpayer-funded vacations.

Citing Obama’s alleged love of vacationing, laziness and “immense satisfaction from ignoring the rule of law or placing himself and his office above it,” Farah concludes that there may be “a strong incentive for him to make the White House a more permanent home” rather than leave office.

“Do you really think Obama wants to give up the most powerful position in the world and one that affords him this kind of unimaginable, excessive, non-replicable luxury?” Farah asks.

The 2013 17-day vacation in Hawaii for the president, his family, and staff and security was estimated to cost over $4 million. Even that seems low ball to me.

And, as the story goes, they have two more years left.

Or, do they?

These folks are living it up.

Do you really think Obama wants to give up the most powerful position in the world and one that affords him this kind of unimaginable, excessive, non-replicable luxury?

Might this provide a strong incentive for him to make the White House a more permanent home?

Yes, there I go again.

It’s been a theme lately.

Last week, I dropped the suggestion that Obama might not actually vacate the office when his second term is up. Why should he? Just because it’s constitutional law? When has that ever stopped him from doing something? The answer is never.

Obama seems to derive immense satisfaction from ignoring the rule of law or placing himself and his office above it.



So let’s just consider the fact that Obama has never had it better – not even close. That’s not to say he hasn’t experienced the better things in life. He has. He got the best schooling. He’s been pampered. He never had to get his hands dirty. He never served in the military. He never sacrificed or wanted for anything material in his life.

Usually, people raised like that have high expectations for the future.

No doubt Obama will be in a position to make lots of money after the presidency, whenever he decides to end it. But it’s hard to imagine him enjoying six all-expense-paid vacations every year at his venue of choice. Not too many people live that kind of life – even with the “endowments” recent past presidents often get from their oil baron friends in the Middle East.

Do you think Obama’s about to give that up and move out of the White House to make room for Hillary Clinton?

I don’t know. The more I think about it, the less convinced I am.

Ben Carson: The People Will Stop Obama's Third Term!

WorldNetDaily has become infatuated with a bizarre conspiracy theory that President Obama will remain in office after his second term expires, and today the far-right outlet, best known for promoting birther claims, decided to ask likely GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson the question on everyone’s minds: “Who would stop Obama from remaining in office past his second term?”

Rather than just dismiss the absurd statement outright, Carson said that the people will rise up to defend the Constitution’s limitation on a president serving more than two terms in office against Obama.

President Obama leaves office on Jan. 20, 2017 – or does he? The Internet’s abuzz with talk about the myriad of ways Obama might seek to extend his White House role – sparked in part by radio conjecture from conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh – and now at least one likely presidential candidate, Ben Carson, has weighed in to say: Don’t worry, Obama will leave.

First, the question from WND to Carson: “Who would stop Obama from remaining in office past his second term?”

And Carson’s reply, via email: “We the people would oppose it through our Constitution, the 22nd Amendment of which forbids more than two terms. Even some of the timid people in the other two branches of government would be willing to stand behind the fortified walls of our Constitution.”

Sounds reasonable – but the buzz persists.

Birther Joseph Farah Wants PFAW Help To Block Third Obama Term. Let’s Make A Deal.

Last Friday, Miranda noted that birther, conspiracy theorist par excellence, and WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah was publicizing one of the more ridiculous right-wing scare-stories: that President Obama will refuse to leave the White House after his second term is over in January 2017. Farah said in a column last week that “there’s great concern” about the possibility “out there across the fruited plain.”

In classic Fox News and far-right trolling style, Farah said he didn’t actually believe Obama would refuse to leave office, but was just asking questions: why should we should take a departure for granted given what he calls Obama’s “contempt of the law” and “disrespect for American tradition” – and “the ever-present reality that Obama himself may not even be constitutionally eligible for office.”  

Farah was seemingly not pleased that RWW poked fun at his column, responding over the weekend with an appeal to another unimpeachable source of information on the president’s plans, Rush Limbaugh.  Limbaugh, says Farah, responded to a Friday caller raising the same question by spinning out a hypothetical scenario in which Obama refuses to go. Here’s Limbaugh:

“So as a service to the nation, he is going to forget the 22nd Amendment and either not leave office or run for re-election himself as the Democrat nominee. Just imagine that scenario. I don’t care how unreal it sounds, how unbelievable it sounds. Imagine it.

What would anybody do? What would Mitch McConnell do? What would John Boehner do?

Adds Farah,

“There’s simply no organized opposition to Obama’s illegal, criminal actions and behavior. He’s getting away with all of it. There are no serious repercussions. No political price. No major media opposition. Few judicial rulings that worry him. Not one political, religious or social institution that is holding him accountable – least of all the Republican Party."

Farah was apparently bothered that Miranda’s RWW post did not include a pledge that People For the American Way would “use all of its influence and legal firepower” to stop Obama from chucking the Constitution in a White House power-grab. Of course we don’t take the possibility seriously, but since Farah seems to, let’s offer him a proposition: If President Obama refuses to allow a constitutional transfer of power to his successor, we will join you at the barricades. If the American republic miraculously survives, you will stop polluting the public discourse with toxic nonsense. Deal? 

Paranoia-Rama: Muslim Infiltration, Gay End Times And Liberal Killers

Now that gay people and the Muslim Brotherhood have taken over the government, conservative pundits have a lot of thoughts that they want to share — scary thoughts about anti-Christian persecution and a (non-existent) Egyptian court case that may throw two American leaders behind bars.

Joseph Farah Is 'Just Asking': Will Obama Actually Leave Office In January 2017?

WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah personally believes that President Obama will leave office when his second term is up in January 2017, but senses that “there is great concern out there across the fruited plain” that the president will try to stay in office permanently, so he evidently considers it his journalistic duty to explore why this conspiracy theory may be true.

“[W]hy do we assume Obama will step aside willingly from the presidency following an election in 2016?” Farah asks in a column today. “I’m not saying he won’t. I’m just asking why.”

Farah then goes on to cite evidence of Obama’s possible power grab, including that the president that “respects neither the law nor the American tradition of peaceful changes of power,” has said “he and his family might remain in Washington after leaving office,” and, of course, “the ever-present reality that Obama himself may not even be constitutionally eligible for office.”

Question: Why are Americans so certain there will be a presidential election in 2016 and that Barack Obama will leave office in January 2017?

Answer: Because it’s the law and because it’s American tradition.

However, we currently have a man in the White House who respects neither the law nor the American tradition of peaceful changes of power.


And then, of course, there’s the ever-present reality that Obama himself may not even be constitutionally eligible for office. In fact, if he’s telling the truth about his parentage and the “birth certificate” he produced after years of demands from the public is real, he could not possibly be a “natural born citizen” as required by the Constitution.

So with all of this history – and much more, in fact – why do we assume Obama will step aside willingly from the presidency following an election in 2016?

I’m not saying he won’t. I’m just asking why. And judging from the number of questions I’m getting along these lines from the public, I’d say there’s great concern out there across the fruited plain.

Maybe we assume he will respectfully leave office after two terms because he has publicly said he would. In 2013, Obama said he and his family might remain in Washington after leaving office.

But that begs the question of whether Obama is truthful.

Again, do I think Obama will leave office in January 2017? Yes I do.

But, with a track record like this – and, actually much worse – should we simply take it for granted?

Phyllis Schlafly Worries Immigrants 'Don't Want To Be An American And Abide By Our Constitutional Laws'

In an interview with WorldNetDaily’s radio network posted today, Phyllis Schlafly declared that she was “tired of” Republican presidential “losers,” and said that at last week’s CPAC she was impressed by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.

In particular, Schlafly liked Jindal’s comments about immigrants not becoming “hyphenated Americans,” saying that “these illegals…don’t want to be assimilated into America.”

“I also thought a very good speech was made by Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, who covered a lot of important issues, and particularly the fact that we do not want a lot of these illegals to be assimilated, and they don’t want to be assimilated into America,” she said. “I think anybody that’s let into this country for permanent residency should want to be an American, and if they don’t want to be an American and abide by our constitutional laws, we shouldn’t let them in.”

WND Pundit: Net Neutrality Will Destroy The First Amendment, 'It's All Poop'

Tamara Colbert of Mama Grizzly Radio took to WorldNetDaily today to blast “Swami Obama” for his support for net neutrality, or as she calls it, “net brutality.”

Colbert, who seems completely unaware of the principle behind net neutrality, baselessly alleged that the Federal Communications Commission’s new rules will enable the government to “regulate speech on the Internet,” telling readers to “kiss the First Amendment goodbye, right behind the rest of the Constitution.”

Warning that net neutrality will help Obama “brutalize Americans” and transform “America into a socialist utopia no better than what Hugo Chavez did to Venezuela or Castro’s Cuba,” she wrote that Obama is acting like an abuser who beats his spouse in order “to control you.”

“It’s all poop – everything the federal government touches turns to poop – health care, airport security, education, the IRS, the EPA, the federal courts … and now the Internet,” Colbert said. “It’s time to stop the abuse and clean up the poop.”

Last week the FCC ruled in favor of Net Neutrality, which is anything but – according to the two opposing FCC commissioners who, dare I say, are heroes who tried to alert the public as to the tyranny once again about to be forced upon us for the sake of the greater good. Ajit Pai and Mike O’Reilly, the two Republican commissioners, said that these new rules will crush innovation, increases taxes and fees and finally give the FCC policing power over the Internet. This isn’t Net Neutrality; it’s net brutality!

What is more insidious, which many of us on the conservative side predicted, is that progressives see this as a victory enalbing [sic] them to now control and regulate speech on the Internet. Let the beatings continue, as we kiss the First Amendment goodbye, right behind the rest of the Constitution in the toilet of government-run anything. The most ironic and idiotic statement came from Commissioner Mignon Clyburn who said that America’s “Framers would be pleased” with the 332-page plan (to destroy the Internet).



The deception isn’t just Houdini sleight of hand, but that of an abuser – who lures you in with all the niceties and gifts for months of wooing, only to backhand you at the first chance he gets to remind you where your place is in his world. At first you’re shocked and try to justify that he was just tired; had a bad day; didn’t really mean it. You shake it off because the package looks so good, and everyone else thinks he’s wonderful, so you wonder if it’s “you.” That’s hope.

Before you know it, the emotional and physical abuse is spattered in between the gifts – which come less frequently now and typically get thrown at you, like scraps from the table, to keep you hanging by a sheer thread that everything is OK. Now your abuser thinks that you like the beatings because you don’t speak up. Your silence is a deafening seal of approval for his sadistic treatment of you, and from here things only get worse. He doesn’t really love you; he wants to control you. Here’s the change.

Net Neutrality is anything but neutral; it’s biased. Swami Obama and his administration are out to brutalize Americans – see how generous he has been with the wooing of America. He said a lot of things on the campaign trail in 2007 that hoodwinked many to fall in love with the concept of the first black president. Meanwhile, he is thinking, as most abusers do, that he just has to be nice and kind to gain control of the relationship.

Let’s face it: The American people who have supported Swami Obama are traumatized by being abused for more than six years and the progressive beat-down that lasted for another 90 years prior to Obama. The free stuff was there to get everyone hooked – free Internet, free phones, food stamps, affordable health care, unlimited unemployment benefits and free community college. When millions of Americans stood up to say “no” to the abuse, they got backhanded by the mainstream media, progressives on Capitol Hill (both sides of the aisle mind you) and Hollywood hacks, until they fell back in line, albeit a bit worse for wear, discouraged and demoralized. And just like magic, the swami didn’t have his hand on any of it. The scars from emotional abuse don’t leave fingerprints.

Net Neutrality is a major step in this screwed-up relationship to fully control an abused populace into believing that suddenly now everyone is going to have free Internet. Only now the Swami is gearing up for his last trick – he’s got less than two years to finish fundamentally transforming America into a socialist utopia no better than what Hugo Chavez did to Venezuela or Castro’s Cuba.



Seriously, does anyone think that the Thomas Edison light bulb or a toilet that used enough water to actually flush poop down was a direct threat to society? Seriously? I’m laughing as I write this because the key connection here is POOP. It’s all poop – everything the federal government touches turns to poop – health care, airport security, education, the IRS, the EPA, the federal courts … and now the Internet.

It’s time to stop the abuse and clean up the poop.

Frank Gaffney: Muslim Congressman Part Of 'Islamic Fifth Column'

Frank Gaffney thinks that Rep. André Carson, one of two Muslim members of Congress, should lose his seat on the House Intelligence Committee because he might hand classified information to Muslim Brotherhood operatives.

Gaffney, an anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist who leads the Center for Security Policy, told WorldNetDaily that Carson, an Indiana Democrat, may use his position to advance “the imposition of Shariah worldwide and the establishment of a caliphate.”

Gaffney bases his claims on Carson’s work with the Islamic Society of North America and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, alleging that the groups were “unindicted co-conspirator[s] in a terror-financing trial.” Actually, the designations were removed due to lack of evidence.

“At a minimum, Rep. Andre Carson’s presence on the House Intelligence Committee will necessitate restrictions on his access to classified information about the presence and operations in this country of what amounts to a subversive Islamist Fifth Column and his participation in the panel’s deliberations concerning how it can best be countered,” Gaffney told WND.

“Since there are, at the moment, few topics more in need of assiduous oversight by the Congress – even if there were no actual risk of compromise of national security secrets or Muslim Brotherhood influence operations associated with Rep. Carson’s presence on the House Intelligence Committee – the potential impediment he may constitute to such work demands his removal from this panel.”



“Given the Muslim Brotherhood’s unalterable commitment to Islamic supremacism,” Gaffney said, “the imposition of Shariah worldwide and the establishment of a caliphate to rule globally in accordance with that totalitarian program – in place of our constitutional republic and all other forms of government, what the Obama administration is doing is bad enough. Its serial efforts to engage, legitimate, fund, arm and otherwise empower the Brotherhood overseas and to rely upon the Brothers’ domestic front organizations as representatives of and outreach vehicles to the Muslim community in this country are intensifying the dangers we face from the Global Jihad Movement.”

Gaffney said it is “wholly unacceptable to have as a member of a key congressional committee charged with overseeing U.S. intelligence and counterintelligence an individual with extensive personal and political associations with the Muslim Brotherhood’s civilization jihadist infrastructure in America.”

“At a minimum, Rep. Andre Carson’s presence on the House Intelligence Committee will necessitate restrictions on his access to classified information about the presence and operations in this country of what amounts to a subversive Islamist Fifth Column and his participation in the panel’s deliberations concerning how it can best be countered.”

WorldNetDaily Continues Effort To Expose 'Fairy' Obama's Gay Secret

WorldNetDaily columnist Mychal Massie says he is deeply troubled that one of his friends criticized his use of the word “fairy” to describe President Obama, a criticism which Massie is treating as a grave attack on his freedom of speech.

But rest assured, Massie tells readers that he will never “accept that my using the words such as ‘fairy, niggardly, heathen, pagan,’ ad nauseum [sic] are injurious to homosexuals, blacks and Muslims.”

Massie adds that the same friend who rebuked his choice of words also has “information” that Obama “remains a closet homosexual using family as his ‘beard.’”

WorldNetDaily’s Jerome Corsi has also repeatedly suggested that the president is secretly gay.

Political correctness is the bludgeon cultural Marxists wield to demagogue the craven into obedience. It is the meme employed that ensures the acceptable form of social engineering. I reject “political correctness” in all of its constructs and have pledged to myself that I will never succumb to what amounts to a veiled unconstitutional attempt to enslave the nation on a plantation of forced group think, group speak and group behavior.

Such was the gist of a conversation I recently had with Susan Highfield. She suffered under the fallacious idea that certain speech was permissible only for her to use. She said: “Mychal, I hate the man [i.e., Obama] … but only a homosexual like myself can be calling him a … fairy. Otherwise it’s a derogatory statement against [homosexual] people. With all due respect, I’m pretty sure you understand.” She continued by saying, “calling him a fairy is basically hate speech.” Apparently, Ms. Highfield neglected to note that it was me she was speaking to and failed to consider my rejection of such asinine reasoning. I explained to her that “I refuse to have speech privatized … nor do I subscribe to the myth that homosexuals are harmed” by individuals using proper grammar as it was intended because they do not like it.

Highfield was attempting to silence any potential criticism and/or rejection of her chosen lifestyle in the same way Muslims attempt to detract attention away from their passive acceptance of the horrors inflicted the world over by those claiming allegiance to their so-called religion. It is also the weapon used to intimidate and silence criticism of Obama.

...

The word “fairy” as I intended it is defined by the Urban Dictionary as “a male who acts slightly feminine but not necessarily means that they are gay.” Thus my response to Highfield, questioning whether she had seen the photos of Obama on a bicycle or throwing a baseball, which cemented my usage of “fairy” to describe him.

...

Highfield claimed she was “disappointed” because I wasn’t “focusing on the fact that Obama is an impostor by attempting to pass himself off as a heterosexual, with a wife and children when its been uncovered that he is indeed a homosexual.” This was the source of her anger over Obama – and as she also commented, she was upset because “what he’s done to this country is liable to take a couple of generations to fix.”

Yet her angst with me is that I called him a “fairy” – while her angst with him was that, according to the information she apparently has access to, he remains a closet homosexual using family as his “beard.”

I refuse to accept that my using the words such as “fairy, niggardly, heathen, pagan,” ad nauseum are injurious to homosexuals, blacks and Muslims. Nor will I be bullied into accepting a contrived lexicon that is inherently illiterate and dishonest and serves only to promote that which is antithetical to everything I believe.

David Barton: Ruth Bader Ginsburg's SOTU Nap Was An Impeachable Offense

David Barton is outraged that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg nodded off during the State of the Union address last month, which Ginsburg attributed to the “very fine California wine” that Justice Anthony Kennedy had shared at dinner that evening.

Barton writes in a WorldNetDaily column today that while he isn’t personally “calling for the removal of Ginsburg for her recent faux pas,” Justice Ginsburg’s nap represented bad behavior and disrespect to the U.S. Constitution, both offenses warranting impeachment and removal from office.

You may recall pictures of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg sitting on the front row in the House Chamber sleeping during President Obama’s State of the Union Address. News recently broke explaining why: “I wasn’t 100 percent sober.”

A State of the Union message is a constitutionally mandated duty (Article II, Section 3), and for those who respect the Constitution, this address is serious stuff. But apparently not to Justice Ginsburg – which probably is not surprising given that her rulings routinely reflect a general dismissal of the Constitution and that she publicly advises leaders in other nations to seek something better than the U. S. Constitution for their country.

Regardless, it is certain that public intoxication by a Supreme Court justice does not inspire faith in the Judiciary. Luther Martin (one of the 55 delegates who framed the U. S. Constitution) warned: “It is necessary that the supreme judiciary should have the confidence of the people,” and to ensure this, the founders made certain that the federal bench could be ridded of those who embarrassed or misused it.

Citizens today might be dubious of such a statement, for we have long been told (and wrongly so) that federal judges have lifetime appointments. They do not – and it was the Founding Fathers themselves who specifically stipulated that federal judges could serve only for the duration of “good behavior” (Article III, Section 1). So as long as a judge acted right, he could stay on the bench, but if he acted otherwise, he could be removed. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any mention of, much less guarantee for, lifetime appointments for judges.

The first federal judge to be removed from the bench came at the behest of President Thomas Jefferson. That judge, John Pickering, was no obscure lightweight. Originally placed on the federal bench by President George Washington, Pickering had been a framer of the New Hampshire Constitution, served as the state’s governor, was selected as a delegate to frame the U.S. Constitution (but declined) and was subsequently a ratifier of the federal Constitution. So why was he removed? Among the reasons given was public intoxication (as well as a public disrespect for God). The Founding Fathers considered this to be bad behavior for a judge.

Don’t think I am calling for the removal of Ginsburg for her recent faux pas. Rather, I am pointing out that the current notion that federal judges are unaccountable because they have lifetime appointments is one of the greatest lies of our lifetime.



If America ever again expects the federal courts to be just one of three so-called “co-equal” branches rather than the supreme branch they have become, then we must recover the notion that our federal judges are not unaccountable demigods.

Gohmert: Apathetic Americans Letting Obama Turn US Into 'Totalitarian, Dictatorial Type Country'

Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert told WorldNetDaily’s Radio America this weekend that he’s heard people in America say that “maybe we just need a good, caring dictator,” and that it’s this kind of apathetic attitude that’s allowing President Obama to turn the country into “a totalitarian, dictatorial type country” through things like his executive actions on immigration.

“Unfortunately, when you have 50 percent of the American people who are saying, ‘Hey, we’re okay with not having checks and balances in our government,’ it’s a way you lose a country,” he warned.

“If we allow the president to continue this kind of lawlessness, there will not be a republic, we’ll be morphing over into more of a totalitarian, dictatorial type country,” he added. “And that’s what normally happens when you have a representative form of government, people get apathetic and forget to notice the things that kept it representative, and people start saying what I’ve heard people in America say: ‘Well, maybe we just need a good, caring dictator to clean things up and then we can go back to a democracy.’”

Fox News Pundit: Islamists Might Be 'Embedded In The White House'

Fox News contributor Thomas McInerney appeared on WorldNetDaily's Radio America yesterday, where he condemned the White House’s statement on the beheading of 21Egyptian Christians in Libya.

Angry that the statement didn't specifically mention that the victims were Christian, McInerney told host Greg Corombos that "maybe we have some Islamists embedded in the White House."

In an interview last year, McInerney called Obama a treasonous leader ​who is "helping Al Qaeda" and "helping ISIS."

Syndicate content

WorldNetDaily Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Wednesday 03/25/2015, 2:35pm
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah has been trying to backtrack on his years of promoting birther conspiracy theories about President Obama, which center around the claim that Obama was born abroad and has a fraudulent Hawaiian birth certificate, in order to promote his new favorite GOP presidential candidate: Ted Cruz. Farah, who has suggested in the past that Obama is ineligible to be president because he was secretly born abroad to an American mother and a Kenyan father, does not seem to have a problem with Cruz, who – unlike Obama – was actually born abroad. Cruz has an... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Tuesday 03/24/2015, 10:45am
Texas pastor Rick Scarborough took to WorldNetDaily today to expound on his call for anti-gay civil disobedience if the Supreme Court strikes down bans on same-sex marriage, warning that such a ruling will usher in attacks on Christianity and “a brave new world with tyrannical laws and regulations.” Insisting that the Supreme Court will “silence” Christians and the “thousands of ‘former homosexuals,’” Scarborough compared a potential marriage equality ruling to Dred Scott and Buck v. Bell. “Now the high court is threatening to unleash the... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Monday 03/23/2015, 10:55am
Conservative legal activist Larry Klayman took to WorldNetDaily on Friday to defend Fox News pundit Andrea Tantaros’s claim that President Obama is anti-Semitic, alleging that Obama is not only an anti-Semite but also an “ultra-leftist, pro-Muslim, racist.” Warning that “our Muslim president” is “selling out the country to the radical mullahs in Tehran,” Klayman said that the president wants Iran to get a nuclear weapon because “in so doing, Obama will have furthered the will of his faux god, allah, and been a good Muslim.” “Perhaps... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Thursday 03/19/2015, 2:10pm
Anti-gay pastor Rick Scarborough, notorious for insisting that HIV/AIDS is God’s punishment for homosexuality, is working with Religious Right leader James Dobson, televangelist James Robison and conservative legal activist Mat Staver to recruit leading Religious Right activists and politicians to sign a pledge to commit civil disobedience in protest of a potential Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage. Scarborough told WorldNetDaily in an interview yesterday that once gay marriage becomes the law of the land, there will be mass arrests of Christians, even though such an... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Tuesday 03/17/2015, 10:55am
Although WorldNetDaily frequently reminds its readers that the earth is just 6,000 years old, the far-right outlet reports today that an event which “only takes place once every 100,000 years” is “an unmistakable sign of judgment.” According to WND, “biblical experts” are excited that a solar eclipse on Friday “will darken the sun just in time for the sunrise at the North Pole,” which obviously means that God is about to punish Europe, and possibly the U.S., for its allegedly poor treatment of Israel and growing “anti-Israel sentiment.... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Friday 03/13/2015, 12:30pm
RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right. This week, we learned from the Right that gay people and immigrants are out to destroy our freedoms, with the help of President Obama, who is secretly preparing to stay in office for a third term. 5) Gay Marriage Threatens Freedom Speaking with an Iowa talk show host this week, Sen. Ted Cruz once again appealed to the anti-gay Right when he railed against judges, like the members of the Iowa Supreme Court, who strike down bans on same-sex marriage. Cruz alleged that such... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Thursday 03/12/2015, 11:41am
Former Rep. Michele Bachmann told WorldNetDaily yesterday that the decision of the Republican leadership in Congress to ally with Democrats to pass a clean extension of funding for the Department of Homeland Security “ensures a Democrat likely will be elected president in 2016” because immigrants protected from deportation by President Obama’s executive actions will vote illegally for Democrats. “Practically, that bill ensures a Democrat likely will be elected president in 2016 with the Congress willing to double cross the taxpayers by paying for five million... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Wednesday 03/11/2015, 10:50am
While Ben Carson ended his column at the conservative Washington Times after he announced the formation of a presidential exploratory committee, the Tea Party icon remains a columnist at WorldNetDaily, the conspiracy theorist’s outlet of choice. Carson uses his WND platform today to declare that the U.S. should use “every military apparatus we have: banking facilities, sanctions, you name it,” against ISIS, adding that he “would not hesitate to put boots on the ground, because nothing should be off the table.” Carson, who once said that he would allow U.S... MORE >