WorldNetDaily

Tom Tancredo Says GOP Can Win Over Latino Voters While Blocking Immigration Reform

In a column today for WorldNetDaily, Colorado gubernatorial candidate and former congressman Tom Tancredo lauded the House GOP for refusing to put immigration reform up for a vote, arguing that Republican intransigence on immigration will have no impact with Latino voters.

Tancredo, a leader of the Nativist movement, even lectured Republicans on how to appeal to Latinos.

"Republicans do indeed need to improve and expand their outreach efforts in Hispanic communities, and they can do so without the baggage of the amnesty debate," Tancredo said.

It was only a year ago that the Republican establishment was enthralled by the so-called bi-partisan “Gang of Eight” amnesty bill, which grants legal status to 15 million illegal aliens and sets them on a path to eventual citizenship. That scenario ended in Sen. Rubio’s repudiation of the deal, followed by backroom congressional maneuvers to plan amnesty by stealth in 2014.

Well, amnesty by stealth is also on the rocks, despite Zuckerberg’s millions, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce drumbeat, an avalanche of insulting lectures from the chairman of the Republican National Committee, a continuous stream of propaganda in the mainstream media and stacked pro-amnesty panels at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference.

Throughout 2013 and into 2014, the Beltway plutocracy had its run of the field in demanding “immediate action” on amnesty. But that game is over. Suddenly, common sense is breaking through the fog of self-delusion that has led the Republican establishment down so many blind alleys.

...

And what about Hispanic voters? The Gallup poll shows the same pattern as most previous polls going back to 2008. Hispanic voters rank immigration behind jobs, health care and education, which explains why they are increasingly dismayed by Obama’s performance as president.

What does all this mean for 2014 and 2016 elections? It means the Republican establishment should wake up and smell the coffee.

If Republican leaders and Republican candidates will start talking to Hispanic citizens as Americans who have the same hopes and dreams and fears as other citizens, they can and will win increased Hispanic support. Republicans do indeed need to improve and expand their outreach efforts in Hispanic communities, and they can do so without the baggage of the amnesty debate.

Larry Pratt: Gun Activist 'Revolt' In Connecticut Is Channeling The Spirit Of Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks

During an interview yesterday with WorldNetDaily’s Radio America, Gun Owners of America head Larry Pratt said that “the revolt is underway” against Connecticut’s bipartisan gun safety laws. He added that his group is encouraging gun owners and police officers to refuse to comply with or enforce the law, and is supporting primary challengers to “RINOs” in the Connecticut state legislature who backed the new laws.

Pratt, who recently claimed that politicians should have a “healthy fear” of being shot, said later in the interview that people are “prepared to go to jail” to resist the gun safety regulations. “If you get so many tens of thousands of people saying that [they won’t comply], it becomes rather difficult to imagine how that can happen, especially if there aren’t any police around to arrest them in the beginning,” he said.

Pratt, who has links to white supremacists and is an apartheid apologist, even compared such gun activists to Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks: “I think it’s an American’s right to exercise his conscience, he has to be prepared to take the consequences. Just like Martin Luther King, he exercised his conscience, and Mrs. Parks sat down right in the front of the bus, now she was taken off the bus and escorted away and I think she was put in jail for a bit, so she was prepared to take the consequences. But she had decided ‘no more,’ and the people of Connecticut I think are in the same frame of mind.”

William Murray: 'Morally And Spiritually, Russia Today Is The Nation America Was In The 1950s'

William Murray, head of the Religious Freedom Coalition and Government Is Not God PAC, writes in WorldNetDaily today that President Obama and the media have a “hatred for Russia” because “morally and spiritually, Russia today is the nation America was in the 1950s.”

He cites Russia’s harsh anti-abortion laws, ban on gays in the military, the influence of the Russian Orthodox Church in government, and flat tax.

Why do President Obama and the Western media have such hatred for Russia? What is all the Russia bashing really about?

In Russia the clergy are allowed to enter the schools to give instruction in the Bible. Prayer is allowed in the public schools in Russia, as well. It is against the law to sell or give pornographic literature to anyone under the age of 18. Marriage in Russia is allowed only between one man and one woman.

Last year President Putin signed a law outlawing advertisements for abortion. In 2011 Russia passed a law requiring health warnings to women before getting an abortion, and now the Duma is considering outlawing abortions completely unless the mother is in immediate danger of death. (In the old Soviet Union, abortion was the primary means of birth control).

There is no complicated tax code in Russia; they have the kind of flat tax the Republicans have pushed in the U.S. for years. In Russia everyone pays the 13 percent income tax regardless of how much they earn. The year after this flat tax was instituted in 2001, the Russian economy took off like a rocket and tax revenues increased as well. Russia is not a communist country any longer. Russia has as many or maybe even more millionaires than the United States. There is free enterprise; anyone can start a business, and many people do.

In the Russian Army the chaplains are allowed to preach the Gospel and pray in the name of Jesus Christ. Homosexual behavior is not allowed in the Russian military and punishable by court martial. (The U.S. military just held its first officially approved drag queen contest at the Kadena Air Base.)

Why do Barack Obama and the liberal media hate Russia so much but have such love for nations that are anti-Christian and repressive such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia? Morally and spiritually, Russia today is the nation America was in the 1950s.

Erik Rush Claims Obama Is Ushering In 'World War III' In Order To Destroy America

WorldNetDaily’s Erik Rush writes today that President Obama is backing a “Nazi regime” in Ukraine in hopes that it will lead to a violent conflict with Russia, “which would result in America’s devastation.” Rush’s grand conspiracy involves Ukrainian Nazis, the Muslim Brotherhood and progressives in the US, whom he claims are all united in seeking “the destruction of the entire American system.”

Rush writes that it “is common knowledge in Europe” that Obama is using the crisis in Ukraine “to touch off World War III,” but the American press is hiding Obama’s diabolical plan just as it supposedly covered up “voter fraud” and the administration’s “treason and perhaps murder in the case of the Benghazi attack.”

Rush, who has demanded the execution of administration officials and called for the imprisonment of journalists and anyone who criticizes him, ends the column by arguing that members of the press are “in the dock with President Obama and others in his administration and our government who have committed treason against America and the Constitution.”

“As the despot Obama devastates our economy and incrementally enslaves us, the press continues to prioritize trivialities like climate change and gender identity issues, while obediently paving the way for the odious, toxic witch who believes she is heir apparent to the presidency,” Rush writes. “Should Americans ever reach a level of consciousness sufficient to perceive the crimes of the press, I only hope there will be hell to pay for them as well.”

So, why would an American president – and a black American president at that – support an ascendant 21st-century Nazi regime, considering all of the attendant overtones of racism, fascism and genocide?

The answer lies in the same place as that of why 20th-century Nazis would align themselves with the Japanese and Arab Muslims, or why the American political left would align itself with radical Muslims (who would kill off half of the left’s base if they happened to gain pre-eminence in America): common philosophies and common objectives.

The common philosophy of Hitler’s Nazis, Benito Mussolini’s Italian regime and the Japanese Empire in World War II was fascism. The common objectives of Hitler and Arab Muslims was the eradication of Jews in Europe and the Middle East, respectively. The common objectives of the political left in America today and Islamists is the destruction of the entire American system.

Of course, Obama’s common objective with the Ukrainian opposition – challenging Vladimir Putin – has become worrisome to all concerned. Particularly disturbing to observers such as myself who habitually look beneath the radar is how this plays out relative to Obama’s overall designs. Given the body of clandestine, dark machinations he has brought to bear, more than a few of us fear that his confrontation with Putin may be integral in bringing about a cataclysm beyond the conceptualization of most Americans, one which would result in America’s devastation. This theme has of course been an ongoing advantage to Obama by definition, in that one cannot defend against what one cannot even conceptualize, let alone perceive.

As indicated, all of the above – with the exception of Obama’s possible intention to touch off World War III – is common knowledge in Europe, yet the American press has made no mention of it whatsoever. The reason is obvious: Americans simply would not stand for a government that allied with anything resembling Nazis.

Of course, were Americans generally apprised of any number of things in which the Obama administration has been engaged (such as an administration guilty of treason and perhaps murder in the case of the Benghazi attack on Sept. 11, 2012, providing military and economic aid to Islamists in Egypt and Syria, and the Arab Spring; clandestine domestic spying programs, the use of government agencies to persecute private citizens, the insinuation of Muslim Brotherhood operatives into high places in our government, voter fraud and so on), they would be similarly outraged.

All of which puts the press, in my humble opinion, in the dock with President Obama and others in his administration and our government who have committed treason against America and the Constitution. As the despot Obama devastates our economy and incrementally enslaves us, the press continues to prioritize trivialities like climate change and gender identity issues, while obediently paving the way for the odious, toxic witch who believes she is heir apparent to the presidency.

The American people would no more tolerate a press that shielded a government from accountability where such things were concerned than they would the government itself. Should Americans ever reach a level of consciousness sufficient to perceive the crimes of the press, I only hope there will be hell to pay for them as well.

WND: Immigration Is 'Destroying Our Society' And Turning Cities Into 'Cesspools'

WorldNetDaily commentator Selena Owens writes today about how much she valued Ann Coulter’s anti-immigrant remarks at CPAC, in which the pundit compared immigration to rape and called for “death squads” against reform advocates.

Owens, a Tea Party activist with the Conservative Campaign Committee, lamented that liberals are painting opponents of the DREAM Act and other reform proposals as similar to “the big bad wolf waiting to prey on innocent Goldilocks kids.”

“America will be overrun by cesspools of sanctuary cities destroying our society” if immigration reform moves forward, Owens said. “If amnesty passes, border patrol agents and American citizens who died defending borders and personal property would have died in vain.”

Coulter accurately points out that liberals use this “shaming” tactic to humiliate people into feeling guilty about standing up for secure borders, deportation and criminal punishment for immigrants who illegally enter the U.S. Why is a guilt trip laid upon law-abiding Americans regarding the potential fate of illegal immigrants? It’s not our fault that immigrants decide to enter America illegally, yet liberals and pro-amnesty GOP sellouts want us to emotionally own it by conveying exaggerated and inflammatory scenarios of children potentially being ripped from their families, deported and helplessly left to fend for themselves. That’s the narrative. Anti-amnesty citizens are akin to the big bad wolf waiting to prey on innocent Goldilocks kids.



Coulter expertly notes instances where “shaming is good.” She retells of an era in America in which large corporations shamed Americans about littering through “Keep America Beautiful” ads depicting Native Americans crying about people polluting the natural beauty of the earth. It worked; people stopped littering, or, at least, felt ashamed if they did. But in California, parks are closed due to littering from illegal immigrants. No, no … don’t shame them; just close the parks. If this pattern in any indication of what will happen if amnesty passes, America will be overrun by cesspools of sanctuary cities destroying our society.

Shaming can effectively be used to encourage people to feel remorseful about injustice, immorality and lawbreaking. But in the case of amnesty, the president, liberals and RINO sellouts use shaming as political power-broker deals, where American citizens are pawned off in favor of illegal lawbreakers.

Liberals use the shame game against American citizens to forcefully advance the pro-amnesty/illegal immigration agenda. I agree with Coulter that the American people are the only voice that can make a difference in this matter. If amnesty passes, border patrol agents and American citizens who died defending borders and personal property would have died in vain.

And that’s something amnesty proponents should be ashamed of.

Kupelian: Republicans Should Impeach Obama If They Take Control Of Congress

WorldNetDaily managing editor David Kupelian yesterday urged Republicans to impeach and remove President Obama from office if they take control of the Senate and keep the House in the upcoming election.

Kupelian added that if Republicans don’t move to remove the president, then they should at least block all of Obama’s policies.

Speaking yesterday with American Family Association head Tim Wildmon — who has also called for Obama’s impeachment — Kupelian said that “we need to remove this guy or to stop what he’s doing as soon as possible. The next opportunity is in November and we’ll see what the Republicans and the Christians and the conservatives can do then.”

The best case scenario: If the Republicans were to A) take back the Senate and maintain the House, and B) really develop some real background and guts -- I’m not saying this will happen, I’m saying it is possible -- they could actually go so far as impeaching the president and removing him from office. This has happened before, this is America, it’s in the Constitution, it is legal and moral to do so. Or at the very least they could defund Obamacare, there are various things that they could do.

The media would attack them and say, ‘You are destroying the country,’ they can and will do that. They would simply have the courage to say, ‘You know what, the media, a branch of the mainstream media so-called, have become a wing of the Democrat Party [sic], they’re cheerleading section, we’re just going to have to weather all the unpopularity and do what’s right.’

Now if they don’t win that election, it’s just going to continue on for the next three years and the Obama people will do the best they can, with his pen and his phone, to bypass Congress and continue to so tie up and tangle up things that when he leaves office in 2017 that it will be too difficult to ever untangle, that’s part of what he’s doing, just tying things up. Putting judges into office when Harry Reid got rid of the filibuster, what was that for? It was so that they could get hard left, progressive judges into office so that when there are inevitable legal challenges over what Obama has done, these judges will back him up. It’s pretty sad. We need to remove this guy or to stop what he’s doing as soon as possible. The next opportunity is in November and we’ll see what the Republicans and the Christians and the conservatives can do then.

Dana Rohrabacher Floats Impeaching Obama Over Immigration Reform

In an interview with WorldNetDaily today, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) railed against President Obama’s “unconstitutional approach” to immigration, warning that the president’s policies are undermining the Constitution and suggesting that Congress impeach him and remove him from office.

“We’ve got three years to get this guy out,” Rohrabacher said. “Hopefully he — well, let me put it this way, I think he probably has been engaged in these unconstitutional approaches that may make his own ability to stay in office a question.”

“But at the very least we need to make sure after three years we get a president who will set us back on the right path and we have a Congress, meaning a Senate and a House, that can stand unified and try to prevent the type of damage you have from an arrogant president who thinks he can enforce only the laws that he agrees with,” he added.

Rohrabacher said he was “outraged” by the president’s comments in a joint interview with Univision and Telemundo, where he said that eligible family members in “mixed status families” can participate and sign up for insurance plans through the health care reform law without the fear that it might endanger their family:

"For everybody out there who is in a mixed family, there is no sharing of the data from the health care plan into immigration services. You should feel confident that if somebody in your family is eligible you should sign up," he said.

The law bars anyone living in the U.S. illegally from purchasing health care on the exchanges or receiving tax credits. They are also not eligible for any federal programs such as Medicare or the Children's Health Insurance Program.

The congressman claimed that this is evidence that Obama cares more about undocumented immigrants than US citizens: “We clearly have a president who is dedicated to the wellbeing of people who are here in our country illegally and instead of watching out for the interests of the American people. We have him watching out for the interests of foreign people who come here illegally.”

Rohrabacher also suggested that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy [PDF] that prevents the agency from using health care enrollment information to deport family members of enrollees may compromise national security much like in the lead-up to the September 11 attacks.

Farah: Jan Brewer Should 'Resign In Disgrace' For Vetoing Anti-Gay Segregation Bill

When Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed her state’s “right-to-discriminate” bill, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah was so upset that he said her decision would lead to the end of freedom.

Today, Farah writes that Brewer “should resign in disgrace,” warning that now “all of the freedoms we have known in the U.S. for 238 years could vanish overnight.”

Farah writes that opposition to the anti-gay segregation bill proves that “the left hates religion” and “hates God,” and is bent on eroding the “religious freedom, press freedom and free speech” by leading a “statist, socialist, anti-American political onslaught.”

Here’s the first problem: The left hates religion. It hates God. It doesn’t recognize any behavior as sinful, with the possible exception of voting Republican. To undermine all it hates, it pushes the political envelope. It divides people up into groups rather than recognizing all people as individuals made in the image of God. It then serves up special privileges for groups as a way of buying their votes.

Here’s the second problem: The left excoriates and vilifies its opponents when they take positions contrary to their own. They are labeled racists and homophobes and worse. Slowly but surely, they know some of their opponents will do almost anything to escape the ad hominem attacks and hateful labeling.

Here’s the third problem: Non-left politicians who should be counted on to do the right thing will cave on almost any issue under that kind of fire.

That’s what happened when Jan Brewer capitulated on the freedom of religion bill known as Senate Bill 1062, which offered clear protection for people who do not want to be coerced into actions or behavior that violates their moral and religious precepts.



So why was the left so threatened by this bill?

For the same reason they detest the Constitution’s protections of religious freedom, press freedom and free speech.

They don’t believe in liberty!

That’s why the First Amendment is really in danger in America today. We could lose it very quickly. That’s why the Second Amendment is constantly threatened and under siege by the left. That’s why, ultimately, all of the freedoms we have known in the U.S. for 238 years could vanish overnight unless Americans awaken quickly and completely and stop sleepwalking through life.



Jan Brewer surrendered to the lies, the insults and the deliberate distortions. She should resign in disgrace.



The Constitution is on life support because there are so few men and women with courage, principle and a sense of right and wrong in politics today in the Republican Party, which, sadly, represents the only hope of reversing the statist, socialist, anti-American political onslaught.

Scott Lively Blames Gays For Ukraine Crisis, Lauds Russia As Human Rights Leader Of The World

Anti-gay pastor Scott Lively is standing with Russian president Vladimir Putin in the Ukraine crisis, hailing Putin’s government for cracking down on LGBT rights and becoming a “defender of true human rights.”

Writing today in WorldNetDaily, Lively said that LGBT equality in the US is destroying the Constitution and the rule of law, creating “special rights for favored groups” and putting America “in a death spiral of moral and ethical degeneracy.”

In contrast, he writes, Russia “has begun embracing Christian values regarding family issues.”

“And this is why the greatest point of conflict between the U.S. and Russia is the question of homosexuality (I believe even the conflict in Ukraine is being driven to a large extent by this issue, at least on the part of the Obama State Department and the homosexualist leaders of the EU.),” Lively writes.

It is therefore obvious why America is in decline and Russia is on the ascendancy in the matter of human rights. America has largely turned her back on God, reorganized her government and culture on a statist model and is plummeting in a death spiral of moral and ethical degeneracy. As our collective former (Bible-based) values of self-restraint and personal responsibility steadily decline, external controls and surveillance by the new police state increase. The rule of law becomes the rule of man, and equal justice under law becomes special rights for favored groups.

Conversely, Russia has begun embracing Christian values regarding family issues, albeit imperfectly, in stark contrast to its aggressively godless Soviet past. Repression in Russia is decreasing as rapidly as it is increasing in the U.S.

The crux of the human-rights debate is what it means to be human. Russia appears to be returning to its pre-Soviet understanding that humans are made in the image of God, and that our “rights” are really duties of respect and care for each other imposed on us by Him. This is why the first principle of both the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights is the protection of the Christian church, from which the very concept of modern human rights emerged. And this is why the greatest point of conflict between the U.S. and Russia is the question of homosexuality. (I believe even the conflict in Ukraine is being driven to a large extent by this issue, at least on the part of the Obama State Department and the homosexualist leaders of the EU.)

There is no human right to sodomy to be found in nearly 4,000 years of human-rights jurisprudence. It is an invention of Cultural Marxists in the late 20th century and rests on their dangerous premise that the state, not God, grants us our rights. In fact, the “right” to sodomy is really an anti-right, because it can only be granted at the expense of the true human rights of religious freedom and family values. Thus, the first principle of the Magna Carta stood unbreakable in Britain for almost 800 years until the recent introduction of “sexual orientation regulations” (SORs), and the first principle of the First Amendment stood for over 200 years until SORs were passed here in the United States.

Today, both the Magna Carta and the First Amendment are deemed to be trumped by the “right to sodomy” in case after case, and pro-homosexual activist federal judges in the U.S. are striking down “Defense of Marriage” laws in the most morally conservative states in the union with brazen disregard for the Constitution and the will of the people.

I ask you, which is the greater threat to human rights: Russia’s law preventing homosexual activists from disseminating their propaganda to children, or the lawless decrees of these American federal judges? I submit that the former is not a threat at all, but a reaffirmation of true human rights (in that case the right of parents to raise their children according to their own values), while the latter is an egregious affront to liberty and an undermining of respect for the rule of law, which endangers all human rights.

Russia has a long way to go even to meet today’s tarnished standards in America, but if current trends hold, Russia will eventually supplant the U.S. as the greater defender of true human rights. Unfortunately, at the pace that our country is falling, that day may not be far off.

Farah: US 'Becoming The Persecutor' Of Christians, Leading To Next Holocaust

WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah claims that the United States under the Obama administration is emerging as a chief “persecutor” of Christians, which may result in another Holocaust.

Farah points to the case of the Romeike family as proof that “next time it will be Christians” who will be victims of the Holocaust. The Romeikes, a German homeschooling family, recently lost their case for asylum in the US until the Department of Homeland Security granted them “indefinite deferred status.”

Before and during World War II, hundreds of thousands of German Jews seeking safe harbor in the U.S. were unceremoniously turned away and returned to certain death in the Nazi Holocaust.

“Never again,” has been the popular refrain for Jews ever since.

Jews had to found a well-defended state of their own to protect themselves against similar horrors.

Maybe the next time it will be Christians.



Until 48 hours ago, the Christian, homeschooling Romeike family, fleeing Nazi-era laws still on the books in Germany, was about to be sent back to Germany to face persecution. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, after the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of their case, the Department of Homeland Security offered a reprieve.



A society that could even think about turning people like the Romeikes away to face certain persecution is one short step away from becoming the persecutor.

Stockman: 'We Have The Skill Set To Win Again, So We'll Be Back'

Rep. Steve Stockman lost badly in his primary election against Sen. John Cornyn yesterday, takingjust 19 percent of the vote. But the congressman told WorldNetDaily that he only lost as a result of Cornyn’s hefty financial advantage and promised that he would be back:

“It’s not what we wanted, but he had $14 million,” Stockman told WND just minutes after polls closed. “I don’t think we could honestly compete with that. We tried, though.”



But he told WND, “Quite frankly, we took on a huge challenge, and we did fairly well. We still have the skill-set to win again, so we’ll be back.”

Stockman added, “I’m a fighter. I’m not going to stand down. The difference between a winner and a loser is whether you get back up. And I’m going to get back up.”

Of course, Stockman ran a pathetic race ridden with dishonest campaigning, bizarre legal threats and fake endorsements. One Tea Party group called Stockman’s campaign the “laziest statewide campaign to date,” as the congressman didn’t seem to actually campaign outside of Twitter and misleading mailers.

The only real source of Stockman’s support seemed to be the far-right website WorldNetDaily.

When he announced his campaign, we dubbed Stockman ‘the congressman from WorldNetDaily’ -- he has embraced many right-wing conspiracy theories promoted by the site and sent copies of their book on President Obama’s impeachment to every member of Congress.

WND, in turn, went above and beyond to help Stockman.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi endorsed Stockman and produced a video attacking Cornyn as a “RINO.” He later wrote an article for WorldNetDaily called, “Famous Republican About To Fall Out Of Sight?,” that praised Stockman and harshly criticized Cornyn as a phony conservative.

Other pro-Stockman articles in WorldNetDaily included “Titanic Republican Shift In Key Senate Race” and “Conservative Launches ‘Cruz’ Missile To Torpedo GOP Bigwig.” And just look at how WorldNetDaily announced Stockman’s defeat: “This time, Goliath beat David.”

Maybe Stockman was so confident about his chances against Cornyn because his entire campaign seemed to exist in WorldNetDaily’s alternate reality.

Michael Farris' Ironic Plan To Remake The Supreme Court

Homeschooling advocate Michael Farris has a new campaign, the Convention of the States Project, which seeks to introduce a constitutional convention to “stop the federal spending and debt spree, the power grabs of the federal courts, and other misuses of federal power.”

He told WorldNetDaily yesterday that the federal government “will most certainly destroy American liberty relatively soon,” and that states must be able “to impeach federal officials from their states.”

Farris also said that the Supreme Court should be replaced by a system of “50 justices and have the states appoint the justices for a specific term (six or eight years) with no right of reappointment” that is modelled after the European Court of Human Rights.

This is more than a little ironic since Farris regularly criticizes the Supreme Court for citing international law, including cases from the European Court of Human Rights. But Farris himself is now proposing “reconfiguring the Supreme Court after the model of the European Court of Human Rights” in order “to ensure a constitutional government.”

“If we allow Washington, D.C., to continue on its current course of big government, it will utterly destroy American liberty. Debt is the most tangible method of destruction. But big government complete with spying on the American public, the improper use of executive orders, over-regulation, etc., etc., will most certainly destroy American liberty relatively soon.”



“State legislatures currently have no power to impeach federal officials from their states. This is not a viable option. This would, however, be a proper amendment to suggest at the Convention of States we are proposing. I like the idea of giving the state governments the power to impeach congressman and senators from their states,” Farris said

Another possibility?

“The federal courts regularly refuse to rule on constitutional issues they want to avoid by calling them ‘political questions’ or by claiming that no one has standing to sue … One of my ideas for an amendment would be to automatically grant state legislatures standing to challenge any action of the federal government as violating its constitutional limitations,” he said.

There also could be a fix to the problem of an entrenched Supreme Court.

“I [would] propose reconfiguring the Supreme Court after the model of the European Court of Human Rights. There are 46 nations in that court’s jurisdiction, and every nation appoints one judge. We should expand the Supreme Court to 50 justices and have the states appoint the justices for a specific term (six or eight years) with no right of reappointment. That one change would do more to ensure a constitutional government than anything I know,” Farris said.

WND: 'You Can Make A Black Woman The First Lady, But That Doesn't Mean She Will Have Any Class'

WorldNetDaily’s Mychal Massie writes today that the new nutrition facts label championed by Michelle Obama is proof that she’s a “bigoted, racialist” first lady who is “usurping authority and inflicting additional financial injury upon an already suffering people.”

Massie claims the cost of the program will add “more unnecessary financial burden” to families; in fact, the New York Times reports that in total, “the health benefits could eventually be as much as $30 billion.” Citing an article from the tabloid the National Enquirer about the first lady’s “disgusting” and “privileged position,” Massie writes that Michelle Obama should “stick to doing jumping-jacks and writhing around on the floor of Ellen DeGeneres’ set, much to the delight of DeGeneres.”

“It proves that you can make a black woman the first lady, but that doesn’t mean she will have any class,” he concludes.

Michelle Obama was not elected to office, and while, by definition, her husband did not usurp the position he dishonors, his bigoted, racialist wife is usurping authority and inflicting additional financial injury upon an already suffering people.


…


Now she is adding more unnecessary financial burden to already suffering families. The cost of implementing the sweeping labeling changes she is responsible for is well over a billion dollars, and that is just a low-ball estimate to silence the critics. The final cost of implementing the labeling changes she is forcing the FDA to make, I submit, will be north of $2 billion – all of which will be passed back to you and me, the consumers.


As the wife of Obama, the first lady is able to enjoy the spoils of his position, but, as I pointed out in a previous column, the DailyMail.com reported a top source “told the National Enquirer that [Michelle is] disgusting. Michelle is taking advantage of her privileged position while the most hardworking Americans can barely afford a week or two off from work.” (See Michelle Obama: First Lady of Spending Taxpayer Money,” Jan. 31, 2014.)


…


It would be barely tolerable if Michelle Obama would stick to doing jumping-jacks and writhing around on the floor of Ellen DeGeneres’ set, much to the delight of DeGeneres. After all, who wouldn’t want the first lady of the United States wallowing around on the floor of their nationally televised talk show? It proves that you can make a black woman the first lady, but that doesn’t mean she will have any class. 


American families do not need the additional financial burden her labeling edict brings. The American people need for the Obamas to be gone.

Farah: 'Homosexualists' Are 'Part Of A Religious Cult' Trying To 'Kill The First Amendment'

WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah is fuming over the demise of the “right-to-discriminate” bill that passed the Arizona state legislature, arguing that Gov. Jan Brewer’s veto is “one more nail in the coffin of the First Amendment.”

In a column today, Farah defends anti-LGBT job discrimination and lambasts “homosexualists” as “part of a religious cult” that unfairly smeared the Arizona legislation in an effort to “kill the First Amendment.”

“Soon the land of the free will no longer be,” he concluded.

The homosexualists, who, whether they admit or not, are part of a religious cult themselves, went to work. Their friends in the media joined in the chorus, proclaiming the law would create Jim Crow-style situations in which a class of people would be denied service at lunch counters. And Jan Brewer vetoed the bill.



The kind of “discrimination” we don’t like is when people are unfairly treated on the basis of their race, ethnicity or religion. That’s what this bill sought to do. But is it wrong to discriminate against people on the basis of their behavior? Let’s say a male job applicant wearing a dress comes for an interview at your office. Should you be forced to weigh his credentials and experience on an equal basis with others who are dressed more conventionally?

I don’t think so.



On almost a daily basis now we’re seeing one more nail in the coffin of the First Amendment.

Soon the land of the free will no longer be.



For heaven’s sake, if you want a wedding cake with two men on the top layer, hire a baker who thinks it’s cute. Don’t pick the one with the fish on the window. And don’t kill the First Amendment over it.

WND: Obama, Democrats Will Burn In Hell For Imposing Marxism On America

Former Romanian communist Ion Mihai Pacepa defected to the US in 1978, and is now a pundit and author for WorldNetDaily. Today, Pacepa tells WND in an interview that Obama has a “craze for Marx’s utopian creed” and that the Democratic Party is “stealthily infecting the United States” with “undercover Marxism.”

Pacepa warns that if the GOP doesn’t expose Obama’s supposed Marxism, then the U.S. will become a communist country and “end up looking like trailer camps hit by a hurricane” with “Marxist leaders roasting in Dante’s Inferno.”

WND: And this disinformation continues now in 2014 in America?

PACEPA: Indeed. For example, who will now dare mention socialism? That term has become a scarecrow as well, and so we now have “progressivism” and, of course, its adherents – the “progressives.” I hope you’ll help to open America’s eyes that progressivism and progressives are code words for socialism and socialists, whether or not those who use such benign terms to describe themselves are even aware of this.

WND: So how do we frame the debate in this war being waged on all media fronts, and in living rooms, social gatherings and even boardrooms?

PACEPA: In my view, America’s infection with undercover Marxism should be the most important political topic of our day. In every country that became Marxist, the transformation process began with undercover Marxism, disguised as various kinds of free lunches.

I walked in undercover Marxist shoes over many miles and for many years, and I am convinced that if the Democratic Party has its way, it will use undercover Marxism to transform the United States into a socialist country in all but name.



The last century has proven beyond doubt that, in the end, the only thing that results from Marxism is countries that end up looking like trailer camps hit by a hurricane and Marxist leaders roasting in Dante’s Inferno.



I also ask this question to America: What did you expect to happen by voting to bring Marxism to power in the United States? I also hope that President Obama will abandon his craze for Marx’s utopian creed, “to each according to his need.” The first black American president should have a place of honor in our country’s history, not disgrace.



Next November the voters will decide whether to preserve America as the undisputed leader of the world, or to transform it into a permanently debt-ridden socialist realm based on Marx’s utopian precepts. Unfortunately, our conservative movement has so far focused this critical electoral campaign almost exclusively on an anti-Obama strategy. I fear our conservative movement will dramatically lose the 2014 elections if it focuses them exclusively on bashing President Obama rather than on defending our country from the noxiousness of Marxism – that is, effectively exposing the entire “progressive” agenda” – which is stealthily infecting the United States.

Paranoia-Rama: Parent-Child Marriages Coming Soon, The Devil's United Nations & Michael Sam Is Aiding The Antichrist

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

This week, we learn that NFL prospect Michael Sam helped usher in the reign of the Antichrist by coming out of the closet, although apparently the Devil already controls the United Nations.

5. Satan Behind United Nations

The United Nations released a report this month that is heavily critical of the Roman Catholic Church’s handling of sex abuse cases. Church spokesmen were outraged by the scope of the study. “The range of the report appeared to infuriate the Vatican,” the Washington Post reported. “In blunt language, the committee took particular aim at church stances on sexual orientation, reproductive health and gender equality.”

Austin Ruse of the Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM) blamed Satan for the investigation. “Only the Devil could tell children they have a right to sex and abortion,” Ruse said in a message to C-FAM members.

“This committee has basically said that children have a right under this treaty to have sex, to use condoms and to get abortions. And that Church opposition to this is a violation of human rights,” Ruse said. “This Committee actually told the Church that its teaching on homosexuality has caused violence against the same-sex attracted.”

“What these radicals need a good shaking.”

4. Immigrants Will Turn Us Into Slaves

Phyllis Schlafly has been making the rounds on right-wing media to push her claim that Latino immigrants don’t share American values because they are less likely to vote Republican and back a right-wing political agenda. InfoWars host Alex Jones strongly agreed with Schlafly, and warned that immigrants will team up with George Soros to “support literally making those of us that produce their slaves.”

“This takes us back to a democracy where two wolves can vote to eat the sheep for dinner,” Jones said.

3. Michael Sam Helping The Gay Antichrist

Southern Baptist preacher Dwight McKissic is joining other anti-gay activists in criticizing Michael Sam, the University of Missouri defensive end who recently came out of the closet.

McKissic is especially concerned that the likely NFL draft pick will “become the face of the ‘gay rights’ movement that takes us down the road to Sodom and Gomorrah at a record setting pace.” America’s transformation into Sodom, McKissic warns, will bring about the coming of the Antichrist, who he thinks will probably be gay.

2. Google, Gawker Are Persecuting WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily insists that Google is unjustly threatening it for violating the company’s ad policy regarding the use of “derogatory racial or ethnic slurs to refer to an individual or group.” Adam Weinstein at Gawker noted that the right-wing website has published 670 stories on “black mob” violence, while WND editor Joseph Farah offered a less-than-convincing defense of WND’s handling of race issues.

Now Farah is striking back, arguing that Gawker has pretty much ruined the Internet with its “venomous, personal, ad hominem, groundless attack” against him.

“It’s mean-spirited. It’s irresponsible. It’s childish and immature,” Farah writes in an editorial today. “You can see it for yourself, but I would caution you the coarse, vulgar language and name-calling is pretty rough. Don’t blame me. I’m just the target. Visitor beware.” Thanks to Gawker, this “early Internet entrepreneur and pioneer” is “starting to hate the Internet.”

Farah added: “I wonder if people like this Gawker guy would allow his children to read his posts – if he has children or knows any. I guess it would be even more disturbing if he would or does. What are their standards? Do they have any? Is it supposed to be funny?”

1. Gay Marriage Leads To Parent-Child Marriage

Mitch McConnell’s GOP primary challenger Matt Bevin is doing the best he can to link the incumbent senator to a recent federal court ruling that struck down part of Kentucky’s ban on same-sex marriage. The Tea Party-backed candidate told a Religious Right talk show host this week that if same-sex marriage becomes legal, soon parents will be able to marry their children.

Bevin’s campaign spokesman defended his remarks and accused Right Wing Watch of “gross misrepresentation” of the candidate’s comments…which we merely quoted verbatim.

Joseph Farah And Alex Jones Wonder If Obama Will 'Try To Stay In' Or Just 'Hand-Pick A Successor'

It was an exciting day for right-wing conspiracy theorists as WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah joined Alex Jones on InfoWars for a lively discussion of various elements of anti-Obama paranoia.

After rattling through conspiracy theories including the “civilian national security force” the “DHS ammo buy” and the “military leaders purge,” Jones and Farah turned to the president’s future plans.

“Do you think there’s any danger he might actually try to pull something and stay in,” Jones asked, “or just put so much evil in place that he leaves and then all of his operatives just keep running things?”

“I think a part of him actually is going to be tired of being president,” Farah responded. “I think the bigger danger is laying the groundwork for tyranny that cannot be easily undone when he’s gone. Maybe he’s going to hand-pick a successor, I don’t know.”

When asked in 2012 whether Obama might try to seek a third term, Farah said, “I wouldn’t rule it out.”

Erik Rush: Obama 'Created Jihadi Cells' Across America

Among other conspiracy theories circulating throughout the pro-government Egyptian media is the belief that the Obama administration and the Israeli government are secretly aiding the Muslim Brotherhood in order to divide Egypt and destabilize the Mideast.

WorldNetDaily’s Erik Rush naturally believes the US-Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy, listing it as a reason that President Obama should be overthrown and executed.

Today, Rush writes that both Democrats and Republicans are tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and warns that Obama is personally setting up Islamsit cells in America to prevent anyone from removing him from office: “Considering the laxity of our federal law enforcement with regard to Islamists within our borders, the insinuation of Muslim Brotherhood operatives into our government and the known presence of foreign jihadis in America, could it be that the president has clandestinely created jihadi cells across country in order to ‘have his back’ in the event that a move is made to remove him?”

It appears that with each passing week – if not more often than that – we are made aware of yet more evidence of the transcendent corruption in our government and political infrastructure, if you will. Although the emerging tyranny of the Obama administration and its audacious proliferation of collectivist policies defy reason, the façade has indeed begun to crumble.

As the crimes of the president and his collaborators are revealed, however, the evidence of even more entrenched subterfuge and malevolent designs comes to light. Some of these – like the overall objectives of Marxists like Obama – have been decades in the making, and involve individuals and organizations the average American would never suspect.



In recent weeks, I have reported here on the history of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Islamist activist who worked closely with Adolf Hitler during World War II and who was a bridge figure in terms of transporting the genocidal and anti-Semitic Nazi model into the post-war Middle East. I’ve also detailed the similarities between the respective political rises to power of Barack Obama and Mohamed Morsi. This becomes particularly chilling when one considers the damage that continues to be done in Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood since Morsi was driven from office. Considering the laxity of our federal law enforcement with regard to Islamists within our borders, the insinuation of Muslim Brotherhood operatives into our government and the known presence of foreign jihadis in America, could it be that the president has clandestinely created jihadi cells across country in order to “have his back” in the event that a move is made to remove him?

Now we have evidence that there are Republican leaders who may be just as guilty as Obama of compromising our national security as well as our sovereignty and our economy. We’re well aware of the influence of high-placed faux conservatives in government and activist circles. Some may be familiar with such stories as the near-takeover of the conservative organization FreedomWorks by progressive Republicans and the infiltration of progressives into the tea-party movement from its inception.

As we move forward in battling our domestic enemies, it is imperative that we remember that this evil transcends party, and impart that knowledge to the newly engaged. The fate of this nation hinges upon those who recognize this, who adopt the Constitution alone as their herald and commit to unequivocal, unapologetic and courageous commitment.

Tancredo: GOP Will Win 2014 Election By Demanding Obama's Impeachment

Former Colorado congressman and Republicans gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo says he has found a “winning issue” for the GOP in the 2014 midterm elections: impeaching President Obama.

Writing in the far-right outlet WorldNetDaily, Tancredo claims that President Obama is “addicted to dictatorial behavior” and should face impeachment over his handling of Obamacare, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals executive order and Egypt’s political crisis, along with the phony IRS and Benghazi scandals.

Tancredo also likens the U.S under Obama to Nazi Germany: “How often do we hear from the left that Americans must not be ‘good Germans’ and remain silent in the face of oppressive laws? What about obedience to dictatorial edicts?”

The case for impeaching and removing President Obama grows stronger each week, as the president continues to violate the constitutional limits on his executive powers. His latest move in delaying the enforcement of yet another part of Obamacare should be article 20 in a bill of indictable offenses against the Constitution.

Citizens of all persuasions and parties should take encouragement in the fact that impeachment is fast becoming a respectable topic of debate even in the mainstream media. Of course, it is usually discussed with the disclaimer that it is a practical impossibility with Democrats in control of the Senate.

That Beltway conventional wisdom will soon change as Republican control of the Senate in 2015 becomes increasingly likely. But what Republicans do not yet understand is that the call for impeachment can be a winning issue in gaining control of the Senate in the November elections.

The rising tide of public opposition to Obamacare may soon be reinforced by a rising tide of demand for Obama’s removal before he can do any more damage to our liberties and our national security. In fact, the steady decline in Obama’s approval rating – now at about 39 percent – is due as much to the growing public awareness of his arrogant disregard for the Constitution as it is to disillusionment with Obamacare.

His actions in defiance of constitutional limits have become so numerous and brazen that chronicling them has become a cottage industry. The use of executive orders to circumvent Congress can no longer be called an occasional breach of faith. His abuse of power has become so frequent and brazen that it is becoming recognized as the trademark of his presidency. And that is why it must not be tolerated. How often do we hear from the left that Americans must not be “good Germans” and remain silent in the face of oppressive laws? What about obedience to dictatorial edicts?

Allowing such unconstitutional acts to be accepted as routine, as “just part of the Obama landscape,” is tantamount to accepting the inevitability of dictatorship in America. Citizens must oppose those actions vigorously and persistently, and that begins with a call for impeachment.



What makes the “Deferred Action” program so brazen an act outside his constitutional powers is that Congress had in December of 2011 voted to reject the so-called “Dream Act.” Thus, in this case, Obama did not act in the absence of congressional action, he acted in defiance of congressional action. Obama simply declared it the law of the land by unilateral, administrative decree. Contrary to media reports, he did not sign an executive order; he merely ordered it done by a junior appointee in the Department of Homeland Security.



It is time for the Republican leadership to conduct an “intervention” for a president who has become addicted to dictatorial behavior. Let’s stop being the enablers through silence for unconstitutional acts.

Kengor: People Aren't Mourning Shirley Temple's Death Because They're 'Too Obsessed With Miley Cyrus And Gay Marriage'

Paul Kengor is hoping to create a new faux-scandal surrounding Shirley Temple Black’s passing.

Writing in the perpetual-outrage-machine WorldNetDaily, Kengor asserts that Americans now ignore or actively dislike the child star-turned-ambassador because she didn’t “pole dance or ‘twerk,’” and now they refuse to mourn her appropriately.

“Our culture is too obsessed with Miley Cyrus and gay marriage to give proper recognition to [Temple Black],” Kengor writes, leaving us to wonder who exactly is criticizing the late actress.

I learned only yesterday that Shirley Temple, the iconic child actress, died earlier this week at age 85. Reports on her death were easy to miss. I went through my usual scan of various websites and saw nothing. I fortunately caught a buried “Shirley Temple, R.I.P.” by a writer at a political website.

I was dismayed by the sparse reaction to the loss of this woman who lived a great American life. Had Shirley Temple died 50 years ago, or even 30 years ago, the country would have stopped. People everywhere would have paused to give Temple her due. It would have been the lead in every newspaper.

But not today. Our culture is too obsessed with Miley Cyrus and gay marriage to give proper recognition to a woman who was one of the most acclaimed, respected, and even cherished Americans, a household name to children and adults alike.



In the 1934 classic, “Bright Eyes,” Shirley played a five-year-old who lost her father in an airplane crash and then lost her mother. She is comforted by loving people who would do anything for her, including her godfather, who is identified as just that. The godfather behaves like a true godfather. The movie includes constant, natural references to faith, never shying from words like God, Heaven, and even Jesus—verboten in Hollywood today.

Today’s sneering secular audiences would reflexively dismiss the film as Norman Rockwell-ish. To the contrary, the movie is hardly sugar-coated. Just when your heart is broken from the death of sweet Shirley’s dad, her mom is killed by a car while carrying a cake for Shirley on Christmas day.

That doesn’t remind me of any Norman Rockwell portrait I’ve seen.

What such cynics really mean is that the film isn’t sufficiently depraved for modern tastes. Shirley doesn’t pole dance or “twerk.” She doesn’t do a darling little strip tease for the boys while singing “Good Ship, Lollipop.” The references to God are not in vain or in the form of enlightening blasphemy. And the movie has a happy, not miserable, ending.

Come to think of it, maybe this isn’t a movie for modern audiences!

For 80 years, Shirley Temple’s bright eyes brightened the big screen. They reflected what was good and decent in this country. She embodied what made America great, and she brightened our lives in the process.
Syndicate content

WorldNetDaily Posts Archive

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 >
Brian Tashman, Wednesday 03/11/2015, 10:45am
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... MORE >