WorldNetDaily

Erik Rush writes today at WorldNetDaily that equality for gays and lesbians endangers “our very survival.” Rush has previously issued warnings about President Obama and his death squads, and even claimed that gay rights advocates will usher in the next Holocaust. In today’s column, Rush says that homosexuality is a “choice” that represents a “clear and present danger” to society. He calls same-sex marriage a “farcical instrument of societal destruction” that consists of “monogamous homosexual couples playing house.” Rush even equates support for gay rights to “capitulating to a developmentally disabled child who wants to play with matches simply because they have been persistent in their requests to do so.”

Private organizations that ostensibly have the right to discriminate all they like have been placed under tremendous pressure in recent years by a militant homosexual lobby that wishes to normalize the popular perception of homosexual behavior. I am convinced that many of its “true believers” aren’t even aware they are merely pawns of the radical left, but given the latter’s tenacious modus operandi, otherwise intelligent, conscientious people have nonetheless subscribed to the prevailing propaganda proffered by an agenda-driven press and the homosexual lobby.

Then, there’s the ongoing discussion and legislation relative to homosexual “marriage.” Like black Klansmen and male sorority sisters, “gay marriage” simply doesn’t exist. Oh, we have monogamous homosexual couples playing house, and certain states issuing marriage licenses to them, but there’s no marriage there. This is because marriage is not a civil union; it’s an ordained one.

I continue to find this amusing, despite the clear and present danger it represents to our culture. Here we have the opponents of this farcical instrument of societal destruction actually engaging in the debate over whether or not to “allow” something that simply doesn’t exist.

In the case of the Boy Scouts of America, they have simply bought into – or very nearly bought into – the aforementioned pro-homosexual propaganda. Here, we have the fact that homosexuals do not account for the percentages that activists tout; in reality, 1 to 3 percent of the overall population is probably fairly accurate. The entertainment media and the press would have us believe that it is closer to 10 percent, and if you watch television, you’re likely to surmise that every third person you set eyes on is homosexual. 

There’s much more, of course: The widespread myth that homosexuality is normal rather than aberrant, that it is hard-wired into individuals rather than being a persuasion or choice, that it is not harmful to society, and that it is not harmful to children. One particularly dangerous fallacy advanced by homosexual activists is that pedophiles (such as those who have been charged with molesting Boy Scouts over the years) are not homosexuals.

These submissions against better judgment are analogous to capitulating to a developmentally disabled child who wants to play with matches simply because they have been persistent in their requests to do so. Obviously, the child does not know better; as the developmentally sound individual present, it is that person’s responsibility to refuse his or her requests, not defer to them.

Everything I have described here is indicative of a very dangerous intellectual indolence that reflects either a weak moral constitution on the part of many Americans, or a kind of acknowledged apathy wherein individuals realize we are on the road to ruin, but have reconciled themselves to helplessness. They are as yet unaware that the stakes encompass far more than civil rights or the economy; they will determine our very survival.

In reading through the amicus briefs submitted by anti-gay groups to the Supreme Court, we’ve been generally impressed by the relative restraint of their legal arguments compared to their day-to-day anti-gay tirades. But not so with the two briefs submitted last week by a hodgepodge coalition of conservative groups.

Citizens United’s National Committee for Family, Faith and Prayer filed two no-holds-barred amicus briefs last week, one in defense of Prop 8 [pdf] and one in defense of DOMA [pdf]. They were joined in both by the anti-immigrant groups Declaration Alliance and English First; WorldNetDaily affiliate the Western Center for Journalism; the Institute for Constitutional Values (founded by white supremacist ally Michael Peroutka, who also argues that the solution to school violence is to abolish schools); Gun Owners Foundation (the research wing of Gun Owners of America); the extremely and occasionally comically anti-gay Public Advocate; the birther group U.S. Justice Foundation; Protect Marriage Maryland and others. Far-right Virginia Del. Bob Marshall and Sen. Dick Black joined the DOMA brief. Both are signed by Michael Boos, general counsel of Citizens United, and by Herb Titus, an attorney with a sideline as a birther advocate.

So I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that the filings contain passages like this one, in the Prop 8 brief, arguing that laws against homosexuality affirm rather than deny the humanity of gay people:

Second, while the discrimination against Blacks in America denied them their rightful status as a member of the human race vis-à-vis their white counterparts, the discrimination against homosexuals affirmed their status as full and equal members of the human race. Indeed, the very definition of the “crime against nature,” was employed to emphasize that the sexual behavior condemned was contrary to the law of human nature. Homosexual behavior, then, while unnatural did not mean that those guilty of it were any less human.

Or this one from the DOMA brief arguing that gays and lesbians have not historically faced discrimination because some criminal sodomy laws also “extended to opposite sex unnatural couplings”:

As a class, homosexuals have not been discriminated against in the way that the court of appeals has so “easily” assumed. The appellate panel below concluded that “the most telling proof of animus and discrimination is that, for many years and in many states, homosexual conduct was criminal.” Yet historically, even the crime of sodomy was not so targeted. Rather, it was defined as “carnal copulation against the order of nature by man with man; or in the same unnatural manner with woman; or by man or woman in any manner with a beast.” Thus, the crime of sodomy was “known in the common law by the convertible and equivalent name [] of ‘crime against nature,” the offense not only extended to opposite sex unnatural couplings, but was one of several sexual offenses that fit under the broad category of “offenses against the public health, safety, comfort and morals.” Among these sexual offenses were bigamy, adultery, fornication, lewdness and illicit cohabitation, incest, miscegenation, and seduction, all of which could be committed by persons of the opposite sex. Rather than a narrow negative purpose, these laws reflect a perceived concern for the public health, safety, comfort, and morals of certain sexual behaviors.

Or that the groups oh-so-cleverly invoke the court’s Obamacare decision to argue that the extra taxes same-sex spouses pay under DOMA are an acceptable way of “deterring certain activities”:

Additionally, this Court has consistently ruled that Congress’s power to tax is not limited to the purpose of raising revenue. Thus, this Court found that it is permissible for Congress to adopt a taxing policy for the purpose of deterring certain activities by the levying of a tax on them, as well as for the purpose of collecting revenue. Therefore, according to precedent, it is a constitutionally permissible exercise of Congress to adopt a tax policy for the purpose of nurturing traditional marriage as the ideal family structure for raising children, just as this Court has recently observed, that it is perfectly permissible for Congress to impose a tax “to encourage people to quit smoking” or “to shape decisions about whether to buy health insurance.”…It is not for the courts to second-guess whether Congress should promote a traditional family policy in the exercise of its taxing powers.

But what is truly remarkable about the Citizens United coalition’s legal arguments is their eagerness to burn all bridges and declare everything they come across unconstitutional. While the Family Research Council and Liberty Counsel, presumably trying to appeal to Justice Anthony Kennedy, hold their noses and accept Kennedy’s pro-gay rights opinions in Lawrence v. Texas and Romer v. Evans as law, Citizens United et al have no such scruples. Not only should Lawrence and Romer be overturned, this group argues, but so should Bolling v. Sharpe, the 1954 Brown v. Board companion case that desegregated the District of Columbia’s public schools. Bolling was the first decision in which the Supreme Court explicitly found an equal protection component in the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, thus setting the stage for six decades of prohibitions on discrimination by the federal government – all of which the coalition would like to see go.

But these groups don’t just go after decades of legal precedent. They also personally attack two judges who ruled against Prop 8 before it reached the Supreme Court, in particular district court judge Vaughn Walker, who is openly gay:

With the understanding of Judge Walker’s personal interest in the outcome of the case, it becomes much easier to understand his finding every fact for the plaintiffs and his willingness to impute ill will to the proponents of Proposition 8. For example, having in his personal life rejected 6,000 years of moral and religious teaching, we can see how Judge Walker could readily determine that California voters were motivated solely by “moral and religious views…that same-sex couples are different from opposite-sex couples [and] these interests do not provide a rational basis for supporting Proposition 8.” The same is true for Judge Walker’s conclusion that supporters’ motivations were: “fear,” “unarticulated dislike,” not “rational,” based on “animus toward gays and lesbians,” “irrational,” “without reason,” and “born of animus.” Petitioners were entitled to have their case heard by an impartial judge – not one who was leading a secret life engaging in behaviors which he appeared to believe were being unfairly judged and criticized by the proponents of Proposition 8.

(Citations omitted in block quotes)
 

Conservative leaders are continuing to rally opposition to a proposed plan to end the national ban on gay members in the Boy Scouts of America with warnings about pedophilia and “indoctrination.”

Family Research Council vice president Rob Schwarzwalder told Janet Mefferd yesterday that fathers cannot trust their sons to be around gay people.

Mefferd called gay rights advocates “totalitarian” for opposing the ban and lamented that the “violins are playing full blast” in the media when they cover stories about gay youths kicked out of the Boy Scouts.

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel said in a statement that “people like Jerry Sandusky” would be “permitted to be Scoutmasters” if the policy changes, adding, “To allow homosexual Scoutmasters or homosexual Scouts will put young boys at risk.”

Concerned Women for America started a letter-writing campaign against the move before gays attempt “to infiltrate the next generation.” The group even claimed that if gays are allowed to join the Boy Scouts, it would mean that “our religious liberties are being taken away”…somehow.

The Texas Pastors Council called on parents to “defend our children” and not “allow our boys to be targeted by those who believe there is no moral code and no definition of gender” and stop those who are bent on “forcing their immorality on society.”

Pastors, if the scouts fall, the church is next in the sights of the activists committed to forcing their immorality on society – WILL YOU COME?

Fathers, if we allow our boys to be targeted by those who believe there is no moral code and no definition of gender – WHO WILL DEFEND OUR CHILDREN?

Mothers, your voice of courage and protection of the virtue of our children is desperately needed – WILL YOU STAND ALSO?

Florida Family Policy Council president John Stemberger went on another anti-gay rant, alleging that the BSA will “open a can of worms that would cause a mass exodus” and “devastate the Boy Scouts permanently.”

If the BSA departs from its policies on allowing openly homosexual scoutmasters and boys in the program it could destroy the legitimacy and the security of this iconic institution.

As an Eagle Scout, former Scoutmaster and a Vigil Honor Member of the Order of the Arrow, I have a deep personal interest in passing on the rich experience of Scouting to my two sons and I pray that the BSA does not open a can of worms that would cause a mass exodus from a program that America needs now more than ever to train boys to become responsible men. A change of this policy could transform and devastate the Boy Scouts permanently. Additionally, the vast majority of Americans do not support changing the policy to allow openly homosexual scout leaders, so this proposed change makes no sense on many levels.

2000 presidential candidate Alan Keyes in WorldNetDaily warned of “homosexual indoctrination” and “idolatry” in the Boy Scouts if they change the policy:

The simple words of the Scout Oath were meant to encourage boys in the habit of walking this straight path; hence the endeavor to be “morally straight.” But the oath first of all made it clear that the Scout looked first of all to God as the standard of moral rectitude. Try as they might, the present-day trustees of the Scouting movement will never fit the square peg of God’s standard into the round hole of homosexual sin. Moreover, though they begin by admitting practicing homosexuals into the ranks, they must end in acknowledging homosexual activity as morally correct, else they will involve the whole movement in the perjurious administration of an oath openly violated in practice. For in that moral sense, it is not possible to be gay and morally straight at the same time. Thus what the present trustees of the BSA reportedly may do involves rejecting God’s standard for male sexual behavior. And it involves doing so in a way that willfully abandons the straight path blazed by the footsteps of Christ.

…

By accepting a humanly fabricated redefinition of the moral standard, the BSA will fall prey to the inevitable logic of such idolatry. “Their idols are … the work of human hands … those who make them become like unto them; so do all who trust in them.” (Psalm 115:8) It will speedily become evident that what masquerades as tolerance is actually indoctrination, seeking to mold boys according to the standard the BSA trustees will have raised above God’s standard. For if homosexual activity is morally acceptable as an expression of love and good fellowship, then those who express their love accordingly do what is right.

But the aim of Scouting is to encourage young men to do what is right in various ways. Therefore, once the moral prejudice against homosexuality is regarded as a violation of right, doing things that habitually assault and break down this prejudice becomes part of “moral training.” Just as, on many campuses now, refusal to experiment with homosexuality is frowned upon as a sign of bigotry, so henceforth in Scouting braking down this prejudice would be recognized as a meritorious activity. Though camouflaged in different words there will be a merit badge for this experimentation as part of the regime of homosexual indoctrination. God knows what that will lead to; and given now widely publicized possibilities, so should the BSA Inc.

Have you ever had to deal with a housefly? Maybe one even landed on you once?

Well, according to WorldNetDaily, you might just be a minion of Satan, if not Satan himself.

WND super-reporter Aaron Klein scoured the web to find people who said that the fact a fly landed on Obama’s face at a press conference means he could be “possessed by a demonic entity.” WND was so proud of Klein’s reporting that they asked members in an email, “Is Obama biblical ‘Lord of the Flies’?” in an attempt to liken Obama to Beelzebub, or Satan.

Prophecy websites are having a field day with the worldwide attention President Obama is getting for sparring with a fly yesterday.

News reports have recounted Obama’s history of attracting flies during recorded interviews and speeches.

Already, religious and other websites are using the headlines to point out that a biblical reference for Satan, the Semitic deity Beelzebub, literally translates from Hebrew into “Lord of the Flies.”

…

Those reaching to connect Obama’s fly troubles with the darkest biblical references won’t have much difficulty.

One name commonly used to refer to Satan is Beelzebub, which translates from Hebrew into “Lord of the Flies.”

A posting at the popular Free Republic Web forum discusses Beelzebub and asks, “Is the White House fly infestation evidence of demonic presence and influence there?”

The End Times blog named Obama the “Lord of the Flies.”

The blog connects Obama to Beelzebub, writing, “This really isn’t an academic question. The Lord of the Flies is real.

” Over at RevalationNow.net, a posting by “editorial staff” muses about whether Obama is possessed by a demonic entity.

“I feel like I am watching a horror movie and the secret evil character is revealed by the evil signs around him,” the post reads.

Beelzebub is first referenced in 2 Kings 1:2-3, 6, 16, in which Beelzebub is described as the god of the Philistine city of Ekron.

Jewish scholars have interpreted the title “Lord of Flies” as the Hebrew way of comparing followers of the Canaanite deity Baal to flies.

The name Beelzebub is found throughout the New Testament, mostly as a reference to the prince of demons.

In Mark 3:22, the Pharisees accuse Jesus of driving out demons by the power of Beelzebul, prince of demons. The name also appears in the expanded version in Matthew 12:24, 27 and Luke 11:15, 18-19.

Beelzebub also makes a cameo as the prince of demons in the Testament of Solomon, a Hellenistic Jewish text.

• The Christian conservative magazine WORLD notes that while abortion is illegal in South Korea, abortion rates there are “double the U.S. rate.” As we’ve said before, abortion rates tend to be higher in countries where it is criminalized. 

• Tomorrow, Rick Santorum, Rand Paul and Tony Perkins will speak at the March for Life [PDF], while Speaker John Boehner will send in a video message. 

• New Mexico Republicans want to prosecute rape survivors who terminate the pregnancy with a felony charge of “tampering with evidence.” 

• Concerned Women for America claims that feminism has left women “at the mercy of sexually liberated men.” 

• A very delusional Joseph Farah maintains that Obama “got re-elected because there was virtually no opposition.” 

• If you ever wanted to learn how to literally wrestle a demon and evade their “fiery darts,” here’s your chance.

The pollster Wenzel Strategies had several entertaining and off the mark polls in the last election, which comes as no surprise as Wenzel is the chief pollster for the always-buffoonish WorldNetDaily. The firm’s latest survey for WND finds that American voters have already lost faith in President Obama’s leadership just days into his second term.

Wenzel claims that Americans had “a despondent reaction to his re-election and the in-your-face attitude that the White House has adopted” towards Republicans, and oppose his political agenda along with his “callous disregard for the massive problems that are about to destroy our nation.” Thanks to Obama, people are now apparently afraid of the country breaking apart or falling into dictatorship and tyranny.

“This finding is undoubtedly a reflection of the belief among most Americans that their leader has lost his way. Or maybe they just think that he doesn’t believe in America as that shining city on a hill, and so have lost their hope in their own country. It could very well be, at least for some, a despondent reaction to his re-election and the in-your-face attitude that the White House has adopted in dealing with the Congress in general, Republicans in Washington in particular, and Obama’s callous disregard for the massive problems that are about to destroy our nation,” Wenzel said.

“His first solution to every problem is to increase government spending and regulation, which Americans have consistently rejected. A majority still opposes Obamacare, and a majority opposed TARP and auto bailout. The idea that the nation may well have passed the point of no return in many areas may well be behind this shocking poll finding.”

Another section of the same poll revealed that there is a “shocking willingness” on the part of Americans to give up their privacy and freedoms for the sake of “safety.” It showed that while 61 percent say domestic drones violate privacy rights, 20 percent of the people are just fine with the idea. Further, 46 percent said local governments should use cameras to monitor traffic.

In related research, Wenzel also found that one in seven Americans sees a dictator in the nation’s future, and another one in five says it eventually will break up into several sovereign regions. The survey revealed that more than one in four believe the United States likely will collapse not just in their lifetime, but in the next decade.

Also, Wenzel earlier revealed that the seeds of tyranny already are present in America, with a heavily armed law enforcement presence and a population holding a disbelief that their government could do anything that would make them want to revolt.

If only there was a way that people could either vote to retain the President or elect a different candidate in his place!

According to WND columnist Erik Rush’s definitely real “sources,” the Obama administration is giving American land to the Chinese government in exchange for debt forgiveness. While this does sound a lot like the plot of the Albert Brooks book 2030, Rush says this is all part of Obama’s push “for the disarming of the American populace” to please his Chinese overlords and usher in communism. And all this time we thought Obama was ushering in Sharia!

Let me share that which was related to me via one international business interest with strong ties to the nations highlighted in the following scenario: According to this source, President Obama had a mid-level U.S. official meet with a Chinese officer in 2011 to find out if the Chinese were open to a land and resource swap for debt forgiveness. The upshot of this is that the Chinese are now engaging in experimental “farming” and “scientific” studies in several locations in the U.S. (in various states). The personnel involved are all Chinese military, and the plan is to use these as the base for the expansion of “land settlements” in payment of the U.S. debt to China.

…

So Obama has sold America out – literally – which will come as little surprise to many readers, this plan apparently being the brainchild of Obama’s senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, and members of China’s Politburo Standing Committee. Thus, the under-reported but long-standing goals of Jarrett, Obama, David Axelrod and a host of communist Obama cronies to bring America under communist sway will finally come to fruition.

Such activities have been rumored over the last couple of years, but had not been substantiated. However, this data has been verified by sources I know to be reliable; in fact, I have reported on their information previously, much to the consternation of the Chinese government.

It is the Chinese who are pushing for the disarming of the American populace. They do not want to bear the brunt of the backlash from the American public when their work and aspirations are exposed. Three weeks ago, I was told that “this will happen in weeks, not months,” and it is now occurring.

So much for our curiosity as to why in the midst of our economic woes, Obama is so vigorously capitalizing on the Sandy Hook massacre to advance what will certainly be draconian and unconstitutional measures relative to firearms. Obama’s gun-control plan includes at least 23 different executive actions – bypassing Congress and prompting at least one GOP lawmaker to suggest impeachment proceedings if Obama acts in this manner.

At this juncture, I think that impeachment is incredibly unlikely despite his treason, given what he has succeeded in getting away with under the noses of the Republican leadership. As I have been informed, there are key Republican leaders who are aware of what is transpiring between China and the Obama administration. These have been sold the notion that America is bankrupt, but that they can work with our debtors to see that an equitable settlement is reached.

The question to which this gives rise, of course, is: Equitable for whom? Is this the precursor to the Second American Revolution, or have gun sales gone through the roof for no apparent reason and toward no apparent objective (such as “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”)? Are heretofore sane, sober citizens of this republic taking leave of their senses en masse, or are they quietly and methodically preparing to stop our Union, to which thousands have given their lives, from being torn asunder?

I lean toward the latter. God help us all, and God bless America.

Prior to the election, right-wing activists were confident of President Obama’s imminent defeat, arguing there was no way he could win another election. Stunned by his re-election and the pummeling Republicans received, now several conservatives are openly calling for armed resistance.

Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman is once again calling for a revolution in his WorldNetDaily column, telling readers to “pray that Obama and Biden and the likes of Pelosi and Reid are so stupid as to carry through with their threats, so that the masses will finally be provoked to rise up as they did in colonial times.”

He called Vice President Biden’s gun task force recommendations, which haven’t even been released yet, “a declaration of war against the American people and our way of life” and hopes they “will in the end serve to be their own undoing and result in our liberation from their evil clutches.”

But quite apart from FACA [Federal Advisory Committee Act] and open government – to use the term government loosely these days, since in practice we no longer have a republic but a despotic monarchy – Obama’s threats to use executive orders to remove or curtail our right to bear arms constitutes the final straw. It is in effect a declaration of war against the American people and our way of life.

…

So when Obama and Biden effectively threatened to seize our guns, or even just curtail our rights to gun ownership, they are making the same mistake King George III made when he sent his armies to seize and destroy the weapons caches of the colonies, which they had amassed to defend themselves against a British crown that had also raised their taxes without representation in parliament and committed other acts of tyranny. This gun grab by the king was the final straw before revolution, triggering the Declaration of Independence and subsequent war.

The irony today, as it was in 1776, is that that these miscalculations by our rulers will in the end serve to be their own undoing and result in our liberation from their evil clutches. Let us pray that Obama and Biden and the likes of Pelosi and Reid are so stupid as to carry through with their threats, so that the masses will finally be provoked to rise up as they did in colonial times. It is time that their political ilk be legally removed from our nation’s capital – along with their Republican accomplices like Chuck Hagel – before the nation is totally transformed and destroyed.

The always-amusing Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel even predicted a “second civil war” under Obama, and asserted that liberals celebrate school shootings and argued that the National Education Association is to blame for the Sandy Hook massacre.

I love guns. Grew up with ‘em. As a former police officer with 12 years in the U.S. military, I know how to use them, too – use them well. I plan to buy more – a bunch more. In fact, who’s to say I don’t already have a veritable arsenal? Point is, tain’t Big Brother Barack’s nor any other candy-keistered-liberal-cream-puff’s bloody business whether I do or not.

See, the left’s totalitarian brand of “gun control” has nothing to do with controlling guns – or bad guys. Rather, it has everything to do with controlling – disarming – the law-abiding masses. It’s not about protecting the innocents. It’s about rendering the innocents defenseless.

…

I was disgusted – physically sickened, in fact – when Barack Obama, president of these Divided States of America, shamelessly exploited the Sandy Hook memorial service to lay the groundwork for his unconstitutional gun-confiscation scheme. It was slimy to the extreme.

I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised. That’s what liberals do. Every time some evil nutjob – pumped full of psychotropic drugs by NEA members who don’t want to deal with them – shoots-up the place, the left’s collective mouth begins to water.

…

I really, really hope this president and his authoritarian cohorts in Congress will slow down, take a deep breath and realize that, right now, they’re playing a very dangerous game of chicken. If they try what I think they might, but hope they don’t, I fear this nation – already on the precipice of widespread civil unrest and economic disaster – might finally spiral into to utter chaos, into a second civil war.

But then again, that may be exactly what they have in mind.

In an interview with WorldNetDaily published today, Ted Nugent said that gun owners will channel Rosa Parks and defy any future “anti-American” law prohibiting certain assault weapons. He told WND that measures to reduce gun violence emerge from a “subhuman culture” that is “infesting our government and society.”

“If it comes to the actual implementation of an actual confiscatory directive from our president, then I do believe that the heroes of the law enforcement will defy this order. I do believe that there are enough soulless sheep within our government who would act on such an illegal order but I believe the powers that be at the local, state, and regional law enforcement would halt such an illegal, anti-American order,” said Nugent.

Nugent continued, “You are talking to a guy who talks to more gun owners in more heated and concerned conversations than anyone who lives. These are top notch heroes of law enforcement and military who understand this experiment in self-government and we will not let it [gun confiscation] happen, we will do it peaceful.

“But there will come a time when the gun owners of America, the law-abiding gun owners of America, will be the Rosa Parks and we will sit down on the front seat of the bus, case closed.”

Nugent has been a long-time champion and outspoken defender of the Constitution and Second Amendment. He told WND the media narrative after the Sandy Hook tragedy in Newtown, Conn., has been shameful.

“The shock and dismay and heartbreak, then just the specific gun issue, but there is a subculture, dare I say subhuman culture, infesting our government and society that would zone in on hardware and inanimate objects instead of people’s conduct and the justice systems failure,” he said.

He hammered the Obama administration for going after the constitutional right to bear arms, as he said, “The media and the government is hell-bent on convincing that water is dry and we should all reconsider our conclusions about the dampness of H20. These people are out of their cotton-picking minds and they scare Americans who are committed to logic, truth, and common-sense, and real solutions instead of the insanity that I witness from our government and media.

“If you were attempting to write an offensive script to a new ‘Planet of the Apes’ movie, I couldn’t come up with a dumber and [more] unbelievable insanity than our government and our media is perpetrating on the American public,” Nugent said.