WorldNetDaily

Paranoia-Rama: Obama Launches Race War & Military Prepares For Jade Helm 'False Flag Pscyho-Coup'

Even as America — save Texas — is about to fall under a military dictatorship, the right-wing media has also found time this week to stoke fears about gay marriage and race riots.

WND Pundit: Obama Sparked Baltimore Riots To Cancel 2016 Election, Declare Martial Law

Morgan Brittany writes in WorldNetDaily today that the recent riots and demonstrations in Baltimore were all “planned” by President Obama to privilege African-Americans above all others and usher in “the breakdown of our society.” Obama worked with Al Sharpton, Brittany adds, to create “a call to war” and fan “the flames of hate for the police.”

Brittany thinks she has stumbled upon the real end game of Obama’s race-war plan. If the Baltimore police officers who were indicted in the death of Freddie Gray are not convicted, then “perhaps Obama will have to institute martial law to preserve order, form a national police force and postpone the 2016 elections.”

“Crazy? Maybe, but we are on the edge in this country,” she writes. “Attacks are coming from all sides, from inside and outside of our borders, and we are becoming overwhelmed.”

I don’t think the chaos in Baltimore “just happened”; I think it was planned and is the next step in the breakdown of our society. I’m not saying that Freddie Gray, the 25 year old African-American man who died at the start of this was responsible; he was just the catalyst that the anarchists needed. He was the spark that ignited the flames.

This is not new. The playbook for inciting riots and racial division has been followed for years, definitely at a slower pace than we are seeing today – but now the final chapters are being read, and the climax is imminent.

Ever since the election of Barack Obama, racial tensions have ramped up. He was supposed to be the one to unite all Americans and heal the divide, but instead, he did everything he could to turn the heat up and make sure the divide became wider. He surrounded himself with racially divisive people in his administration like Attorney General Eric Holder. He inserted himself into every controversy that had a racial component, like the incident in July of 2009 with the Cambridge police, the Trayvon Martin case, Ferguson and more. And whether right or wrong, even before evidence was presented, he always took the side of the African-American. It became obvious that his concern was not for all Americans but a select few. In an attempt to show “African-Americans” that he cared, he instead succeeded in tearing off the scab of old wounds from the 1960s and fanning the flames of hate for the police.

Once the seeds were planted again, he teamed up with Al Sharpton who became a regular at the White House. Certainly their meetings were not about how to heal the divide after each racial crisis, because the rhetoric Sharpton spewed was a call to war!



From now until the verdict in this trial, the agitators will continue to travel and communicate city to city, town to town, stirring up unrest and hate, keeping people on edge waiting to see the result of this cliff-hanger. If the verdict is not what they want, perhaps Obama will have to institute martial law to preserve order, form a national police force and postpone the 2016 elections.

Crazy? Maybe, but we are on the edge in this country. Attacks are coming from all sides, from inside and outside of our borders, and we are becoming overwhelmed. What happens when Baltimore spreads across the country and our television screens show four or five cities burning at once? Who will we turn to at that point? “One Nation under God” – we need Him now more than ever.

Happy Birthday, WorldNetDaily! President Romney Salutes You

WorldNetDaily, the far-right conspiracy theory outlet, celebrated its 18th birthday over the weekend.

Despite the outlet’s fringe views, particularly the site’s debunked claims about President Obama’s birth certificate, it has received plenty of publicity through Fox News and the Drudge Report, regularly scores interviews with Republican elected officials, and has provided a home for columns by GOP presidential hopefuls Rick Santorum and Ben Carson. (WorldNetDaily has, however, become much less enthusiastic about promoting birther conspiracy theories now that it is becoming a cheerleader for Canadian-born Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign).

WND is best known for its brave just asking the question style of journalism. For example: “Will Obama build a Death Star next?” Or, “‘Manchurian President’ Ushering In Islamic Caliphate?” And of course, “Is [Obama’s] intention to facilitate an Ebola outbreak in the United States?” 

“Along the path of the last 18 years, WND.com has launched some excellent reporters, editors and nonfiction authors on their careers,” WND commentator Craige McMillan boasts. “And to that list I am working hard to add at least one novelist, with my five-volume series on Armageddon.”

Another columnist, Lord Christopher Monckton, gushes that WND editor Joseph Farah is playing his part in stopping Obama’s imminent dictatorship: “WND, Joseph Farah’s vision made electronically real, is above all else a champion of keeping free speech free. For under Mr. Obama, the ‘Democrats’ are galloping toward outright totalitarianism. Their policies and their tactics are becoming indistinguishable from those of the fascists of Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy, or the Communists of Stalin’s Russia, Mao’s China or Pol Pot’s Cambodia.”

To celebrate WorldNetDaily’s years of success in stopping Obama from becoming the next Pol Pot, we are reposting our list of the 10 best “scoops” in the outlet’s history:

1. The Bible Code Forecasts a Romney Victory

WND’s “award-winning” executive news director Joe Kovacs just before the election wrote an article based on a YouTube video he saw about how the “Bible Code” prophesizes “bad news for Barack Obama” as apparently the “hidden texts in the Holy Bible indicate Mitt Romney will be America’s next president.” Not only would Romney win, but the Bible Code even predicted Romney will be a “fitting president” who has God’s favor.

2. Romney Can Still Win Despite Election Defeat

Tea Party Nation head Judson Phillips also works as a WND columnist, where he has argued that if enough states boycott the Electoral College, then the House of Representatives will get to pick the President and give Romney one last shot. “That is how we can still pull this election out and make Mitt Romney president in January,” he writes. “We need this concept shared with every tea party, liberty and patriotic group throughout the country.” Of course his proposal is completely without merit, but that didn’t stop at least one Republican state legislator from hopping on board.

3. Obama Building ‘FEMA Concentration Camps’

WND commentator and Faith 2 Action president Janet Porter wondered if President Obama was using the fears about the Swine flu to “round up American citizens” and put them into “FEMA concentration camps.” Porter has also used her WND column to push fears that Obama would enact “jail sentences for those who seek treatment outside the socialized health care system” and create a massive “food shortage” so opponents will be “starved to death.”

4. Obama Plans Negotiations with Osama Bin Laden

Porter in WND predicted that Obama bin Laden will be overjoyed by Obama’s election as President and will even be able to meet with him personally. Like most other predictions in WND, this one turned out to be false.

5. Obama is a Gay, Secret Muslim, Foreign-Born Imposter

The group’s most well-known “reporter,” Jerome Corsi, believes that President Obama wears a Muslim ring (confusing a loop-like pattern with Arabic), was married to his male Muslim roommate, orchestrated the murder of his gay ex-loverswas born somewhere outside the United States and his father may be Frank Marshall Davis.

6. Gays Behind the Holocaust and Preparing to Lead the Next One

WND columnist Scott Lively, who is best known for his work in shaping Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill, is the author of the book, The Pink Swastika, about how gays were behind Nazism and the Holocaust in order to have “vengeance against the people whose moral laws had relegated pagan homo-occultism to obscurity and ignominy.” WND Super Store sells his bizarre book and WND editor Joseph Farah eagerly endorsed Lively’s claim while warning that the gay rights movement may bring Nazism to America.

Another WND columnist, Erik Rush, even maintained that gays are planning a Holocaust against Christians, and WND commentator Judith Reisman argued that gay-straight alliances are modeled after the Hitler Youth. WND’s Molotov Mitchell has also praised Uganda for making homosexuality a capital offense because the founders would’ve agreed.

7. Obama is Orchestrating the Next Holocaust

If gay people don’t do it first, then President Obama must be the one behind the next holocaust. Farah claimed that he discovered proof that Obama wants a new Holocaust in a speech he delivered at Buchenwald where he used the line, “We are here today because we know this work is not yet finished.”

Farah admitted that he is taking the line, which was about the need to combat Holocaust denialism, out of context. But since Obama has a tendency of “speaking in code” to Muslim audiences, Farah explained, then he must be sending a secret message to Muslims to kill Jews: “So, I ask you, am I really taking Obama’s words at Buchenwald out of context? Or am I the only one seeing them in context?

8. Secession Now

WND is extremely sympathetic to the secessionist movement, they only differ on the reasons. Farah believes that America may be forced to “literally…break-up” the nation if states continue to legalize same-sex marriage and WND columnist Vox Day called for a white supremacist secession movement to repel the “African, Asian and Aztec cultures” and “immigrants from various non-European nations.” Mitchell even released a video criticizing Abraham Lincoln for his stance against secession.

9. Norway Terrorist Attacks a ‘Fabrication’ by the Victims

After far-right activist Anders Breivik targeted the left-wing Labour Party’s youth group and the Norwegian government in deadly terrorist attacks, naturally, WND suggested that the attack was a “cover-up” and a “fabrication of the Labour Party,” blaming the left’s policies for apparently encouraging Breivik’s radicalism. WND also is the home of Pamela Geller, who said that Muslims were behind the attacks and tried to justify Breivik’s actions.

10. Soy Turns Kids Gay

Yes, WND ran a six part series about how soy in children’s formula leads to “sexual confusion and homosexuality.” We only hope that WND commentator Victoria Jackson writes a column about her new idea that genetically modified food is “making more men gay these days.”

 

James Dobson: Gay Marriage Signals 'The Fall Of Western Civilization'

After warning that a Supreme Court decision striking down bans on same-sex marriage could lead to a civil war, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson took to WorldNetDaily yesterday to warn that “barring a miracle, the family that has existed since antiquity will likely crumble, presaging the fall of Western civilization itself.”

Dobson wrote that the “homosexual activist movement” is bent on “overturning laws prohibiting pedophilia” and turning the U.S. into Sodom and Gomorrah.

“Pastors may have to officiate at same-sex marriages, and they could be prohibited from preaching certain passages of Scripture,” Dobson wrote. “Those who refuse to comply will not only be threatened legally, but many will be protested and picketed by activists. Perhaps this is a worst-case scenario, but maybe not. Prison is also a possibility.”

I do not recall a time when the institutions of marriage and the family have faced such peril, or when the forces arrayed against them were more formidable or determined. Barring a miracle, the family that has existed since antiquity will likely crumble, presaging the fall of Western civilization itself. This is a time for concerted prayer, divine wisdom and greater courage than we have ever been called upon to exercise.

For more than 50 years, the homosexual activist movement has sought to implement a master plan that has had as its centerpiece the destruction or redesign of the family. Many of these objectives have largely been realized, including widespread support of the gay lifestyle, discrediting of Scriptures that condemn homosexuality or sexual immorality, muzzling of the clergy and Christian media, inclusion of gays and lesbians in all branches of the military, granting of special privileges and rights in the law, overturning laws prohibiting pedophilia, indoctrinating children and future generations through public education, and securing all the legal benefits of marriage for any two or more people who claim to have homosexual tendencies. By promoting what is known as LGBT, we must remember that the “B” stands for bisexuality. That would include acceptance of sexual relations between both genders in groups and among every category of sexual expression outside the bonds of marriage. Now the proponents of LGBT seek to legalize gay and lesbian marriage, which could mean anything or nothing in a few years.



Admittedly, there have been various societies in history where homosexuality has flourished, including the biblical cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, in ancient Greece and in the Roman Empire. None of these civilizations survived. Furthermore, even where sexual perversion was tolerated or flourished, the institution of marriage continued to be honored in law and custom. Only in the last few years has what is called “gay marriage” been given equal status with biblical male-female unions. In fact, to date only 18 countries in the world recognize the legitimacy of same-sex marriage. America appears on the verge of becoming No. 19. God help us if we throw the divine plan for humankind on the ash heap of history.



Let’s get to the bottom line. If the U.S. Supreme Court redefines marriage to include same-sex unions, I guarantee you that it will not be the end of the matter. An avalanche of court cases will be filed on related issues that can’t even be imagined today. Here are a few that we can foresee:

1. Religious liberty will be assaulted from every side. You can be certain that conservative churches will be dragged into court by the hundreds. Their leaders will be required to hire people who don’t share the beliefs of their denominations and constituents. Pastors may have to officiate at same-sex marriages, and they could be prohibited from preaching certain passages of Scripture. Those who refuse to comply will not only be threatened legally, but many will be protested and picketed by activists. Perhaps this is a worst-case scenario, but maybe not. Prison is also a possibility.

2. Christian businesses and ministries will be made to dance to the government’s tune. We’ve all seen examples of photographers, bakeries and florists being required to serve at gay weddings, on penalty of closure or bankruptcy. This kind of legal oppression is coming all across the nation.

3. Christian colleges may be unable to teach scriptural views of marriage. Any nonprofit Christian organization that opposes same-sex unions, including our own, will likely lose its tax-exempt status. Many will be forced to close their doors.

Alan Keyes: Gay Marriage Ruling A 'Just Cause For War'

Joining other Religious Right activists who warn that the Supreme Court will spark a civil war if the it strikes down bans on same-sex marriage, Alan Keyes writes in WorldNetDaily today that a ruling in favor of gay rights will “be just cause for war.”

Keyes claims that such a decision “will be an attack on the very foundation of constitutional government, of by and for the people of the United States” that, “like the Dred Scott decision that heralded the onset of the first Civil War,” will “bring the nation to the brink” and represent “a high crime and misdemeanor that effectively dissolves the just bonds of government between and among the states, and among the individuals who compose the people of the United States.”

The United States Supreme Court may presently make a decision discarding marriage as an unalienable (natural) right. By defect of reason and respect for the Constitution, the decision will return the people of this country to the condition of constantly impending war characteristic of the human condition when and wherever the just premises of government are abandoned.

A decision degrading the natural right of marriage, endowed by the Creator, to the status of a fiat right, fabricated by government, will be unconstitutional on the face of it, because it disparages an antecedent right, retained by the people, which disparagement is explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Constitution’s Ninth amendment. Under present circumstances, the decision will also invite conflict on account of the openly flaunted prejudice of two of the justices participating in it.



If the United States Supreme Court presumes to impose any redefinition of marriage on the states, respectively, or the people, without addressing the issue of unalienable right it involves, with reasoning that respects God-endowed right (which is the logic by which the American people asserted, and still claim to possess and exercise, sovereign authority over themselves), the Court’s decision will be an attack on the very foundation of constitutional government, of by and for the people of the United States. It will be a high crime and misdemeanor that effectively dissolves the just bonds of government between and among the states, and among the individuals who compose the people of the United States. It will therefore be just cause for war.

Like the Dred Scott decision that heralded the onset of the first Civil War, the Court’s action will bring the nation to the brink, whence “nothing but confusion and disorder will follow. …” If the justices do not tread carefully, their temerity could very well set in motion the death throes of what is still supposed to be their country. “Forbid it, Almighty God!”

Schlafly: Obama 'Letting All These People In Who Don't Want To Be Americans'

The Center for Immigration Studies, a group that wants to cut back on legal immigration, released a report this month on the growing percentage of the country’s population that’s made up by immigrants, which has greatly alarmed the far-right news outlet WorldNetDaily.

For comment on the news, WND turned to Phyllis Schlafly, who told them that it was all part of a “deliberate” plan by President Obama for “letting in all these people in who don’t want to be Americans, who don’t want to speak English” in order to bring about the “death to the conservative movement and the Republican Party.”

Only eight short years from now, immigrants will make up a record-high 14.8 percent of the total U.S. population, and longtime conservative leader Phyllis Schlafly views the rising tide of newcomers as a purposeful attack on the country.

By the nation’s own president.

“It’s deliberate,” Schlafly told WND in an interview. “It’s not any accident. It’s because Obama and his friends are letting all these people in who don’t want to be Americans, who don’t want to speak English.”


“I think one of the reasons Obama and his friends are so eager to open the gates to more and more immigrants is they think it’s going to defeat the conservative movement and the Republican Party,” Schlafly said. “Of course, they all come from countries that are not used to the idea of limited government. They’re used to countries where the government makes all the decisions, and they don’t know anything different.

“They don’t understand what Americans mean when we talk about limited government, so I think one of their motives clearly is death to the conservative movement and the Republican Party.”

Schlafly, however, was more optimistic than conservative strategist Richard Viguerie, who told WND that immigration could be on the verge of destroying America:

“It’s going to pull America to the left, for sure,” Viguerie told WND. “America will become closer to the European model of state control of our country.”

Schlafly and Viguerie say the GOP could decline under a flood of new immigrants, but so could the country.

“We may be at a breaking point already, I don’t know,” Schlafly said. However, she noted that she remains a Reagan optimist and doesn’t believe America will totally collapse.

Viguerie thinks the breaking point might not be that distant.

“We may be closer to that than we suspect, because Obama is on a fast track to change the voting demographics of this country by importing tens of millions of Democrat voters from South America, and so we could reach a tipping point within a few years,” he said.

“We’ve got a large percentage of people here who are not Americans, they don’t want to be Americans, they’re not assimilating, they want to keep their culture, they want to keep their language, they don’t know our history.”

Right-Wing Pundits: Obama Persecuting Bachmann With 'End Times' Joke

At the White House Correspondents Dinner this weekend, President Obama made a joke about ex-Rep. Michele Bachmann’s repeated refrain that he is bringing about the Last Days, and the former Minnesota congresswoman is not pleased. She and other Religious Right pundits told the End Times outlet WorldNetDaily that the president’s joke was an act of anti-Christian persecution and suggested that people who disagree with Bachmann’s remarks are really denouncing all of Christianity.

“The blood moons of 2014 and 2015 are forewarnings of what is to come in 2016,” author Mark Blitz told WND. “President Obama, I believe, was only half joking when he made his comments.”

Another Religious Right commentator, Carl Gallups, said, “Regardless of how uncomfortable Bachmann’s comments might have made some feel, the biblical fact is that when a nation turns its back on Israel and at the same time celebrates, promotes, and legalizes homosexual marriage it is inviting end of days judgment upon itself.”

Radio host Jan Markell, on whose show Bachmann made the remarks, at least saw the bright side of Obama’s joke, telling WND: “God has His way of getting out a message about the end-of-days scenario.”

“The Bible is filled with exciting information about living life today and in the future, both in this life and in the life to come,” Bachmann told WND. “Any message that brings people closer to God’s wonderful plans for our lives is a good thing.

“God’s word is true and brings freedom and wholeness to all who read it and believe in Him.”



“Rarely has this nation witnessed the kind of hubris, arrogance and callousness as we did at the President’s Correspondents Dinner. President Obama and his left-wing supporters in the media think it is absolutely hilarious that his policies could have fostered in an apocalyptic atmosphere in the earth,” said Richardson, author of New York Times-bestseller “The Islamic Antichrist” and director of the film “End Times Eye Witness.”



“I am rarely offended by good humor, especially upon consideration of the context in which it is spoken. But I think what is unnerving about Obama to so many Christians is his consistent mocking of Christianity, the scriptures, the basic Christian message, and even the Judeo-Christian heritage of America. A quick search on Google reveals the veracity of these concerns,” said Gallups, author of “The Final Warning: Understanding the Trumpet Days of Revelation.”

...

Markell said she has known Bachmann for 20 years as a woman whose primary goal is “glorifying God and getting people into the Kingdom.”

“To see her hammered and trashed by the left, and even some on the right such as ‘The Christian Post,’ is very grievous,” said Markell, co-author of “Trapped In Hitler’s Hell” with Holocaust survivor Anita Dittman, which has also been made into a film.

“What is there about a godly Christian woman that is so offensive to so many today when they are simply telling the truth as Michele is?”

But two solid weeks of trash talking has accomplished more to get Bachmann’s message out than any single interview on a Christian radio station ever could, Markell said.

“God has His way of getting out a message about the end-of-days scenario. If he has to use a donkey such as the left-wing outfits that have trashed Michele for two weeks, then I thank God for His creativity,” she said. “One way or another, He will get His message out that He is coming soon. I am thankful that Michele Bachmann and I, who have teamed up for many years, can be used in this manner. God is calling all watchmen on the wall.”

Joseph Farah, WND founder, chief editor and CEO, believes Obama’s mocking of Bachmann is just the latest example of his disdain for anyone who actually believes what he reads in the Bible and is willing to discuss it publicly.

“Michele Bachmann, like me, was profoundly impacted by the stunning revelations of the New York Times-bestseller ‘The Harbinger’ by Jonathan Cahn about the way America has been inadvertently re-enacting an ancient script written and played out during the fall of Israel,” Farah said.

“To Obama and most other non-Christians, this is just silly superstitious stuff – the kind of thing you make jokes about for cheap laughs at the White House Correspondents Dinner. But remember who the cheap laughs come from – people who look at what Obama has done over the last six years and see success, progress, achievement, prosperity, wisdom. If that’s what you see in Obama’s America, then you will surely think it’s funny that the nation is threatened by God’s judgment for disobedience and turning from His ways.

“Time will tell who is right – and I don’t think it will be a long time before we know,” Farah added.



“Regardless of how uncomfortable Bachmann’s comments might have made some feel, the biblical fact is that when a nation turns its back on Israel and at the same time celebrates, promotes, and legalizes homosexual marriage it is inviting end of days judgment upon itself,” Gallups added. “The Word of God is clear concerning these matters.”



“Michele Bachmann is absolutely right that the church needs to be like the sons of Issachar who had an understandings of the times so they knew what Israel ought to do,” Biltz said. He said the church needs to “wake up to the times we are in,” as 2016 “will be one of the most pivotal years in prophetic history. The blood moons of 2014 and 2015 are forewarnings of what is to come in 2016. President Obama, I believe, was only half joking when he made his comments.”

Rick Scarborough: We Need An Anti-Gay Martin Luther King, Jr.

Writing today in WorldNetDaily, conservative pastor Rick Scarborough once again compared support for gay rights to past public approval of segregation, insisting that he nonetheless believes “that the majority of Americans know in their hearts that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are morally wrong.”

Gay marriage, Scarboroguh wrote, will lead to the end of “religious freedom and freedom of speech,” if not the end of America itself.

Scarborough added that he and “millions” of other opponents of gay rights are prepared to “respectfully refuse to acknowledge” a Supreme Court ruling on marriage rights that they disagree with: “In the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King, we will view any attempt to enforce such a ruling as unjust, and our duty to the Constitution, more importantly, our duty to our God, will force us to disrespect it.”

I’m not surprised that some recent polls have shown that a majority of Americans now say they approve of same-sex marriage. We have heard a steady drumbeat for the past decade of a one-sided national discussion on the subject. But there was also a time when the majority of Americans approved of separate restrooms and classrooms for our fellow black American citizens. The majority is not always right.

When considering the outcomes of polls on this issue, one must ask, “Who wants to be labeled a bigot for declaring what their heart truly believes about sodomy and ‘alternative lifestyles’?” I believe that the majority of Americans know in their hearts that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are morally wrong.



Attempts to redefine marriage are a rejection of God and the Bible. The genius of America and religious freedom is – you don’t have to accept or believe any of what I have just written. You can choose to reject it all and make your own alternative truth.

But you cannot change what God has spoken and verified in nature. Many have tried, and history documents their folly.

In the past, stating such a position was known as practicing religious freedom and freedom of speech, both constitutionally protected rights – rights which of necessity will be sacrificed if the high court approves same-sex marriage.

To the members of the Supreme Court I say: There are tens of thousands of people of faith, in fact, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, whose faith and conscience will not allow them to respect any decision that fundamentally rejects their God, His Word and the natural order. If a majority of the court redefines marriage, thousands of Christians will respectfully refuse to acknowledge such a ruling has jurisdiction over their lives.

In the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King, we will view any attempt to enforce such a ruling as unjust, and our duty to the Constitution, more importantly, our duty to our God, will force us to disrespect it.

Tom Tancredo: Obama Might Launch Attack On Israel

In WorldNetDaily this weekend, former Rep. Tom Tancredo wondered if President Obama will soon launch a military strike against Israel in order to help Iran.

Citing a fabricated quote from Obama’s book “The Audacity of Hope,” the former Colorado Republican congressman wrote that the president may bring about “a U.S. military attack on Israel” to stop the country from “attack[ing] Iran’s nuclear facilities.”

He added that by refusing to impeach Obama, Republicans in Congress are giving Obama an opportunity to launch such an attack.

Would anyone be surprised to see this headline in the spring or summer of 2016: “Obama orders U.S. military attack on Israel / blocks Israeli strike at Iran / Iran grateful“?

Like it or not, there is an increasing likelihood we will see that kind of headline before Obama leaves office.

Why should we worry about that? Does water flow downhill?



Obama, by contrast, believes “Islam is a religion of peace” and “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.” Moreover, in his book, “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama said: “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” Well, forgive me, but nuclear missiles pointed at the United States and Tel Aviv from the foremost terrorist-sponsoring nation in the world might be construed by many as “an ugly direction.”

Who or what would stop Obama from attacking Israel? A Republicans [sic] Party that is already throwing in the towel on the Iran nuclear agreement? Republican leaders who will not even utter the word “impeachment” no matter how unconstitutional Obama’s actions? Republican presidential candidates who can’t even make a strong case for secure borders?

There is good reason why Obama does not fear the Republican-controlled Congress. Why should he? Does the snake fear the mouse?



So, it is entirely likely and predictable that if Israel decides it has no choice but to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities before Iran can produce nuclear weapons, Obama would likely act to block that military intervention by whatever means necessary, including a U.S. military attack on Israel. Why would he not do it? Who would stop him?

Rand Paul: 'No' On DREAM Act And Birthright Citizenship

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul recently sat down with the far-right outlet WorldNetDaily to discuss immigration reform, an issue about which he has been all over the map. The Republican presidential candidate, who stated in 2013 that any legal status for undocumented immigrants should “start with DREAM Act kids” but backed last year’s GOP plan to end the program that protects DREAMers from deportation, told WND that “I would’ve voted ‘no’" on the DREAM Act.

Paul also told WND’s Taylor Rose that he wants to end birthright citizenship, a key provision of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, claiming that it is turning the U.S. into “a magnet for the world” and lets “everybody come in here, have children and they all become citizens.”

Paul added that while it isn’t “fair” to send DREAMers “back to Mexico,” it also isn’t fair “to say they can stay and everybody else like them from Mexico can come also.”

“The DREAM Act alone I would’ve voted ‘no’ on because the DREAM Act didn’t fix the border,” he said. This led the senator to criticize the Motor Voter Act, saying that it has allowed for undocumented immigrants to commit voter fraud.

When Rose asked Paul about the unemployment rate in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota, the senator blamed it on immigration, adding that he “hasn’t met any farmers who say Americans will pick crops.”

“Americans are unwilling to work for $8 an hour and pick crops because they can sit at home and watch soap operas for government pay for 10 bucks an hour,” Paul said. “The problem is, we have a very generous safety net, maybe overly generous. What I say is if they look like you or look like me and they hop out of their truck, they shouldn’t be on disability.”

Referring to a “picture of a Social Security office floating around the internet,” he said that Americans won’t take low-paying jobs because it is easier to claim that they are disabled in order to collect Social Security benefits.

Return Of The Rubio Birthers

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s announcement yesterday that he will seek the Republican presidential nomination has brought back a strain of far-right birtherism that contends that Rubio is not eligible to be president because his parents were not U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.

In its write-up of Rubio’s announcement, birther outlet WorldNetDaily (which has been a big promoter of Ted Cruz’s candidacy) cites unnamed people who “contend Rubio’s not even a natural-born citizen and therefore, ineligible to seek the presidency”:

Meanwhile, others contend Rubio’s not even a natural-born citizen and therefore, ineligible to seek the presidency. Rubio’s parents, as WND previously reported on at least two occasions, were not U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.

Rubio was born in Miami, Florida, on May 28, 1971, to Mario and Oriales Rubio, who were born in Cuba, though the senator has not released his birth certificate for the world to scrutinize.

As WND reported in 2011, Rubio press secretary Alex Burgos said the senator’s parents “were permanent legal residents of the U.S.” at the time Marco was born in 1971.

Then four years after Marco was born, “Mario and Oriales Rubio became naturalized U.S. citizens on Nov. 5, 1975,” Burgos told WND.

WND links to a 2012 article by its chief birther reporter Jerome Corsi, who cited far-right attorney Larry Klayman’s argument that the Constitution “requires a person eligible to be president to be born to parents who are each U.S. citizens at the time of the birth.”

Mainstream legal scholarship — as exhaustively detailed in a 2009 Congressional Research Service memo  and a 2011 report — rejects this, finding that the Constitution merely requires that a president have been eligible for U.S. citizenship at birth. Under Klayman’s rule, not only would President Obama be ineligible for the presidency, but so would Rubio, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Cruz.

The website of Bradlee Dean, a longtime Michele Bachmann ally, also published an essay yesterday claiming that Rubio is ineligible for the presidency and calling the senator an “anchor baby.”

Suzanne Hamner writes on Dean’s “Sons of Liberty” website: “If Obama is hailed as the ‘first’ black president, one could say Rubio is the ‘first’ anchor baby contender.”

“Haven’t we, as citizens of this nation, been harmed by the current ineligible occupant of the Oval Office?” she asks.

Wikipedia, while not considered a truly reliable source, states Marco Rubio was born on May 23, 1971, to “Mario Rubio and Oria Garcia” who were Cubans that “immigrated to the United States in 1956 and were naturalized as US citizens in 1975.”

So, Sen. Marco Rubio needs to clearly establish his eligibility to hold the office of the President of the United States in order to receive the party nomination. Neither of Rubio’s parents were citizens of the United States until 1975, four years after Rubio’s birth. Under this scenario, one could acquaint it to the “anchor baby born today being elected president upon reaching the age of thirty-five and living within the US for fourteen years.” Is Marco Rubio comfortable in claiming “natural born” citizen status in order to run for president? Clearly, he is. But, Rubio is ineligible to run and hold the office of the President of the United States. If Obama is hailed as the “first” black president, one could say Rubio is the “first” anchor baby contender. If Rubio is a supporter, protector and defender of the Constitution, he needs to put his money where his mouth is.

Rubio’s supporters, along with those of Ted Cruz, will vehemently defend their candidate’s natural born citizen status regardless of the evidence to the contrary based on history indicating the framers did not subscribe to the natural-born citizen status as being anything but a child born of two citizen parents. Those who admit neither of these two candidates truly meets that all important requirement will declare that “it’s our turn,” “the Dems did it with Obama, so can we,” or “they would be better than Obama.” The problem in all of this remains consistency with the law.

The Democrats cannot protest as it would confirm that Obama would be ineligible thereby exposing the criminal, lawless, treasonous activities of the Democratic National Committee, key Democrats in Congress, such as Pelosi, the Republican National Committee, key Republicans in Congress, RINOs and complicity of the state governments in allowing Obama on the ticket, not to mention the numerous judges at every level who have upheld Obama’s eligibility. And, why would judges refuse to hear valid legal arguments opposing Obama’s eligibility if the definition of “natural born citizen” did not mean an individual born to two citizen parents?

Judges have denied hearing the case based on “standing” and “establishment of harm.” Isn’t every US citizen harmed by an individual holding the office of the President when eligibility is in question? Shouldn’t every US citizen have “standing” in a case such as this? It would mean the President has divided loyalty and would possibly not conduct business within the confines of the Constitution nor have the best interest of the country at heart. Are we not actually witness to that with Obama? Haven’t we, as citizens of this nation, been harmed by the current ineligible occupant of the Oval Office?

Alan Keyes: Obama Wants Nuclear War To Obtain A Third Term

In a WorldNetDaily column titled “Is Iran Deal Part Of Obama-3rd-Term Scheme?,” conservative activist Alan Keyes writes today that President Obama has made a secret deal with Iran that allows the country to “unleash nuclear destruction” since it would give him the justification to launch a Nazi-style “coup d’état” here at home.

Keyes, who was Obama’s GOP challenger in the 2004 U.S. Senate race in Illinois, alleges that Obama is aiding both ISIS and Iran in order to create an excuse to illegaly remain in power after his second term in office.

“What if the threat of nuclear devastation he helps to arm with this agreement (an America-hating Iran with nuclear bombs) is to be brandished, along with a related threat from ongoing terrorist uprisings on U.S. soil, to create the exigent circumstances needed to justify imposing martial law throughout the United States and a plausible excuse for demanding that Obama remain in office until the emergency passes?,” Keyes asks.

“Why is it at all inconceivable that people willing to collude with and arm our boldest enemies may be doing so for the sake of their own power? Why should we be unwilling to ponder the possibility that the Obama faction has agreed to help Iran achieve hegemony in the Middle East in order to help themselves to dictatorial control over the United States?”

A steady diet of meticulously depicted violence, served up in films and interactive video games, has probably brought some Americans to the point where they react to recorded images of beheadings and other mass atrocities from a place of emotional stupefaction. But if Americans want to think clearly about the Obama faction’s role in arming ISIS terror, or their treacherous deal with the moguls of Shiite terrorism in Iran, we must overcome this stupefaction.

The fact that Obama has come to terms with such masterminds of evil ought to produce the sort of revulsion that demands an emetic remedy, lest we die. So does the likelihood that Obama, Hilary [sic] Clinton and their friends in the Muslim Brotherhood had a hand in arming the malevolent Islamic State forces Obama’s de facto alliance with Iran now purports to fight.

The “experts” and pundits reacting with alarm to Obama’s apparently self-contradictory rapprochement with deadly evil speak of his ambition to secure a triumph for his foreign-policy legacy, or his failure to appreciate the real nature of the dangers involved in thinking that Iran can be safely installed as the stabilizing power in the Middle East. Most don’t even hint at what may be his most sinister aim, i.e., “to take America down.”

The Obama administration now appears to include people at the highest level disloyal enough to form a de facto alliance with America’s most outspoken and implacable enemies. They have agreed to look the other way while Iran finishes the work needed to construct weapons that put them in a position to force us to choose between complying with their agenda and unleashing nuclear destruction.

Who among us thinks that, like the generation fresh from the triumphs of the last World War, our current self-serving politicos have the experience, moral probity and courage to face that choice of evils? Who is honestly sure that they aren’t already preparing an exit strategy that leaves their own factional power intact, even if America is no longer free?

What if Obama isn’t looking to his “legacy”? What if the threat of nuclear devastation he helps to arm with this agreement (an America-hating Iran with nuclear bombs) is to be brandished, along with a related threat from ongoing terrorist uprisings on U.S. soil, to create the exigent circumstances needed to justify imposing martial law throughout the United States and a plausible excuse for demanding that Obama remain in office until the emergency passes?

There it is. The unthinkable scenario predicated upon the thought that Barack Obama and those who lifted him to power are precisely what they appear to be – the enemies of America’s power, its prosperity, its constitutional liberty, its moral strength, indeed of everything about America except their own boundless ambition. Why is it at all inconceivable that people willing to collude with and arm our boldest enemies may be doing so for the sake of their own power? Why should we be unwilling to ponder the possibility that the Obama faction has agreed to help Iran achieve hegemony in the Middle East in order to help themselves to dictatorial control over the United States? What certainty do we have that, in some secret, back-channel codicil, this agreement is not already in place?



You may believe a coup d’état “could never happen here.” But the danger we face is not some beer hall putsch. It’s is more like the consolidation of tyrannical power Hitler’s faction completed after he was appointed chancellor of Germany. But if such a denouement is already in view for the United States, isn’t it urgently necessary to begin doing what must be done to prevent its completion? As food for urgent thought, I will propose such a strategy in the next article to be published on my blog. Are you willing to think about it yet?

WorldNetDaily: Gay Rights Laws Will 'Outlaw' Christianity, Usher In Communist-Style Totalitarianism

The conservative conspiracy theory outlet WorldNetDaily is out with a petition today asking lawmakers throughout the country to “ensure that religious freedom in America is not crushed by rigid imposition of ‘non-discrimination’ laws based on sexual behavior and sexual identification.”

WND’s petition warns that anyone who opposes LGBT equality will soon be “prosecuted and legally driven out of their homes and businesses” as a result of gay rights laws, which the outlet believes are “strikingly reminiscent of communist totalitarian countries like Mao-era China.”

The petition goes on call gay marriage a “social experiment being forced down the throats of a once-Christian nation” that will eventually make the practice of Christianity “effectively illegal, forcing faithful believers underground – just as faithful believers are forced underground in many parts of the world under the cruel dominance of totalitarian ideologies.”

Any official who supports the “naked totalitarianism” of the LGBT rights movement, WND adds, seeks to “outlaw” Christianity and “stamp out” freedom.

Whereas, the spectacle of an innocent 21-year-old Christian girl, who, for honestly replying to a TV reporter's hypothetical question and saying her family's pizza parlor wouldn't cater a homosexual wedding, was the recipient of a mountain of obscene abuse and death threats, including threats and incitement to burn down the family's business;

Whereas, dozens of similar cases abound, where Christian business people, just wishing to live true to their faith, are being sued, criminally indicted, prosecuted, fined, forced to violate their deepest morals or close their business, and to undergo forced re-education ("sensitivity training") strikingly reminiscent of communist totalitarian countries like Mao-era China;

Whereas, rigid and inflexible enforcement of the LGBT movement's core legal dogma – namely, that "gay" is the new black – means that well-intentioned, law-abiding Americans who harbor religious reservations about homosexuality or same-sex marriage may well find themselves regarded as comparable to the most detestable racists such as Ku Klux Klansmen and neo-Nazis, and prosecuted and legally driven out of their homes and businesses;



Whereas, "same-sex marriage," which no country, culture, political establishment, ideology, religion or historical era has ever endorsed, let alone practiced, in the entire history of mankind, is suddenly now an urgent social experiment being forced down the throats of a once-Christian nation by activist judges, tireless gay activists and their enablers and fellow travelers in the news and entertainment media;

Whereas, if current trends continue, within a short time the practice of traditional Christianity – the faith that guided virtually all of America's founding fathers, as well as most major Western leaders for the past 2,000 years – will be rendered effectively illegal, forcing faithful believers underground – just as faithful believers are forced underground in many parts of the world under the cruel dominance of totalitarian ideologies;



By all accounts, the LGBT movement has overreached to the point of embracing naked totalitarianism, fomenting laws that: outlaw counseling help for minors who want to overcome unwanted same-sex attractions; decree that boys and young men must be allowed to use girls' restrooms and locker rooms if they identify with the opposite sex (and vice versa); mandate pro-homosexual indoctrination of children as young as five; integrate open homosexuals into the military; force same-sex marriage on the nation; and now, criminalize Christian businesspeople for simply disapproving of homosexuality or declining to actively participate in same-sex weddings on moral and religious grounds.

To America's leaders: Do you really believe it is good to effectively outlaw practice of the faith that formed the moral and spiritual foundation of our nation from its birth? If not, we urge you to demonstrate some genuine courage in the face of a nationwide campaign to stamp out America's most foundational liberty – freedom of religion – just to eliminate even the most respectful and conscience-driven dissent by Christians who don't want to be forced to participate in activities their faith tells them are immoral and wrong.

WND 'Expert': Lunar Eclipse Divine Warning About Iranian Nuclear Deal

Over the weekend, some parts of the world witnessed the third in a series of four total lunar eclipses — or “blood moons” — occurring in the space of about a year and a half, starting last April. And once again, as it did with the previous two eclipses in this cycle, WorldNetDaily brought in its blood moon “expert,” Mark Biltz, to comment on what the astronomical occurrence means for world events.

Biltz, reliably, tied the event to the nuclear deal with Iran, telling WND that the eclipse was a message from God likening President Obama to the biblical figure Haman, who plotted to kill all the Jews in Persia:

Pastor Mark Biltz, the discoverer of the Blood Moons phenomenon, says current events in the Middle East are “totally tied to these Blood Moons.”

“A number of rabbis have said this, that Obama comes across as a kind of Haman figure. Haman we recall was a Persian official who wanted to kill the Jews living within that empire. Of course, the modern heir of the Persian Empire is Iran, now the Islamic Republic. And we have Iranian generals openly saying that they want to destroy Israel. God is clearly sending us a sign reminding us of these parallels.”

WND also turned to End Times author Joel Richardson, who warned that the nuclear deal with Iran would bring about harsh divine judgement against American political leaders in the Last Days:

But Richardson says it is not just Israel that is at risk but the United States. Barack Obama, he suggests, has done nothing less than open the nation to the risk of divine judgment.

“More than any other name, the creator of Heaven and Earth, the God of the Bible calls Himself, the God of Israel. Through His prophets, He has repeatedly warned that a tremendous punishment awaits the vessels through which tribulation falls upon the Jewish people. (Isaiah 10:5-12).

“It is the duty of Christians throughout the earth to warn our president that such actions will result in the most severe punishment when Jesus returns. As much as we all love the various images of Jesus the Messiah gently cradling a baby lamb over his shoulders, the Scriptures also speak of the fact that when Jesus returns, ‘He will crush kings on the day of his wrath. He will judge the nations, heaping up the dead and crushing the rulers of the whole earth’ (Psalm 110:5-6).

“While the global atmosphere of increasing anti-Semitism and anti-Zionist sentiment may be make it quite fashionable and hip to treat little Israel as our president is doing, the fact remains that the day is looming where Barack Obama, along a host of leaders from Muslim nations and the UN will look into the very Jewish eyes of their creator and judge, and He will render to them the righteous punishment for how they have treated His brethren, the Jewish people,” he said.

“As a Bible believing Christian, we are called to pray for our leaders. Today my prayer for President Obama and the majority of our present government leaders is for repentance. At this point, only a genuine and deep repentance will spare them from the wrath of Jesus, who is coming back to restore the Jewish Kingdom, exactly as He promised (Matthew 19:28).”

Right-Wing Pundit: America Under 'Sodomy Law'

Conservative talk show host Jesse Lee Peterson writes in WorldNetDaily today that just as “militant Islam demands Shariah law, homosexual pressure groups demand ‘sodomy law.’”

In a column titled “What’s Wrong With Discrimination?,” Peterson claims that “gays never wanted equality,” warning that LGBT people are instead acting “like fascists” and using the schools and the media to “brainwash” children.

Welcome to the “new” America.

LGBT groups have been effective in linking their immoral cause to the noble civil rights movement. In reality, gays never wanted equality. They wanted society to accept their sinful lifestyle, or else. LGBT groups – to be blunt – act like fascists. Just like militant Islam demands Shariah law, homosexual pressure groups demand “sodomy law.”

So what’s so bad about discrimination anyway? Discrimination has always been a hallmark of freedom. The ability to discriminate is given to us by God so that we can make right choices. People discriminate all the time. We discriminate when we date, marry, pick our friends and in countless other ways, just like homosexuals do. And LGBT groups and liberals discriminate against people of faith all day long!



Christian families today are largely not modeling authentic Christianity. The proof of that is in the children. They have shallow roots that are easily pulled up by a culture that mocks traditional values.

Christian children are led into the government schools, like sheep to the slaughter. The schools use a well-developed brainwashing system: 1) Challenge the traditional beliefs, 2) Replace with new immoral beliefs, 3) Demonstrate a consensus about the new belief – “Here’s what educated, cool people think,” 4) Repetition: Keep pounding the message home, day after day, year after year, until it sticks deep.

The public-school system, the liberal news media and Hollywood also reinforce the lie that the older generation is “intolerant.” After all, they’re the descendants of slaveholders and those who denied women the vote. Oh yeah, and they “hate” gays.

Mat Staver: Gays Just Like Hamas Terrorists

In an interview with WorldNetDaily yesterday, anti-gay legal activist Mat Staver once again compared gay rights advocates to terrorists, telling WND radio host Greg Corombos that the LGBT community won’t stop until it wins a “special, protected, preferred status for homosexuality” and “then if they get that, boy are they going to come and hammer you hard with it.”

“Their agenda doesn’t stop until they are completely dominating anybody who ultimately does not not only agree but promote and affirm their lifestyle,” Staver said. “Their agenda will not stop, it will ultimately result in fines and prosecution. This is an intolerant agenda.”

He went on to liken gay rights supporters to the Hamas terrorists who control the Gaza Strip: "This is like dealing with terrorists, negotiating with people who have a zero-sum game and they don’t want you to exist. It is like the Palestinians and the Israelis: the Palestinians in Gaza don’t like the Jews to exist in the land, so no matter how much land you give them for so-called peace, it doesn’t really satisfy them. There is no satisfying this radical agenda, they don’t want you to exist. If you do exist, they want you to promote and applaud their sinful lifestyle.”

Right-Wing Pundit: 'Gov. Pence Is The Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Of 2015'

Writing today in WorldNetDaily, Liberty Counsel communications director Charla Bansley proposed that pastors and “those victimized by religious intolerance” from all around the country hold a massive rally in Indianapolis to defend Indiana’s ‘religious freedom’ law.

“Gov. Pence is the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. of 2015,” the Religious Right activist wrote.

She also made the erroneous claim that the Indiana law is just like other versions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Can conservatives responding to the recent controversy in Indiana over religious freedom learn anything from liberals about messaging? After the Michael Brown shooting, liberal leaders from the left, such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and secular progressive communities from across America seized the opportunity and flocked to Ferguson, Missouri, to take over the narrative, blaming Brown’s death on “institutional racism.” Universities as far away as George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, held diversity discussions. College students from all over the country joined the crowds walking the streets chanting “Hands up, don’t shoot.”

Today, the church must contend for the faith and the faithful in like manner. What churches and religious universities will take a page out of the liberal playbook to rally, to march, to hold candle vigils and to speak out? What pastors will go to Indianapolis to stand by Gov. Mike Pence and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act? Which organizations will help pay the way for those victimized by religious intolerance – bakers, photographers, venue owners – to make their way to Indianapolis? When will we as a church begin matching our words with action? If not now, then when?



Pence said Sunday that the new state law “is not about discrimination. This is about empowering people to confront government overreach.” Unfortunately, those words went over the heads of most people watching the interview. Homosexual activists went to the streets claiming the law would legalize discrimination, and Americans believed the false narrative. The truth is a federal RFRA was signed by President Bill Clinton in 1993, and 19 other states have passed similar laws, but not one case of discrimination exists. The real cases of discrimination are the religious businesses who have been sued for refusing to participate in a same-sex wedding: the Catholic B&B owners who didn’t want to host a same-sex wedding in Vermont, the baker in Oregon, the photographer in New Mexico, the florist in Washington and a host of others.

Gov. Pence is the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. of 2015, courageously defending the bakers, photographers, florists, ministers, county clerks, and owners of wedding venues who, after a lifetime of acquiring skills and building businesses, have seen their livelihoods destroyed, forced to pay exorbitant fines and even threatened with jail.

WND Pundit: HIV-Positive People Should Be Quarantined

Lord Christopher Monckton writes in WorldNetDaily today that liberals, in order to be consistent with their support for public health efforts, should run campaigns that highlight “the misery, disease and death that homosexuality – no less than smoking – brings to its unfortunate practitioners” and to people who are “drawn into the homosexual deathstyle.”

He claims that liberals are hypocrites for speaking out about the dangers of smoking and climate change while, at the same time, trying to “promote ‘gay’ ‘marriage.’”

In fact, Monckton goes so far to call for the “immediate, compulsory, permanent isolation of carriers” of HIV.

Life expectancy for gay and bisexual men is eight to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, it is estimated that nearly half of gay and bisexual men now aged 20 will not reach their 65th birthday.

Now, we can always hope that the development of anti-retroviral drugs has helped since 18 years ago. However, the life expectancy of a smoker is 10 years shorter than that of a non-smoker, which – even assuming a dramatic improvement in homosexual lifespans since the 1990s – makes promiscuous homosexuality no less dangerous to the health of those who practice it than smoking.

Yet leftists, instead of insisting – as they do with smoking – that public-health campaigns should warn people of the medical dangers of homosexuality, they “celebrate” it and promote “gay” “marriage.”

The facts are clear enough. But the left does not support the facts because the facts do not support the left.

What conclusion should be drawn? It is surely this: Public policy on questions from homosexuality to climate change – where the left is similarly cavalier with the facts (just read any statement from Mr. Obama about the climate) – should be determined on the basis of fact as well as fashion and sentiment.

The Church’s continuous teaching on homosexuality is not some outmoded, fuddy-duddy, far-right, redneck hate-crime. It is born of love for those who might otherwise be drawn into the homosexual deathstyle. It is intended to prevent the misery, disease and death that homosexuality – no less than smoking – brings to its unfortunate practitioners.

Thirty years ago, I pointed out in the American Spectator that in the absence of the usual public-health measure to contain a new and fatal infection – immediate, compulsory, permanent isolation of carriers – millions would die of HIV. I also pointed out that Western sensibilities would not permit the identification and isolation of carriers.

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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



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

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

We are witnessing a culture March toward Madness!
Syndicate content

WorldNetDaily Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Monday 11/23/2015, 11:20am
Excited about Donald Trump’s call for the mass deportation of the 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S., Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly told WorldNetDaily this weekend that she wants American railways to join the deportation effort, hoping to one day “see those railroad cars full of illegals going south.” Blasting President Obama’s call for the U.S. to take in Syrian refugees as “ridiculous,” she warned that “Obama wants to change the character of our country” by bringing in people who “have no comprehension of our... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Friday 11/20/2015, 11:15am
WorldNetDaily columnist Burt Prelutsky writes today that he has an ingenious but “politically incorrect suggestion” of how to defeat ISIS, namely that the U.S. “bomb Mecca off the face of the earth, not concerning ourselves in the least with collateral damage, letting the Muslims know once and for all that our God is far more powerful and, yes, vengeful than their own puny deity.” According to Prelutsky, it’s time to realize that Muslims are “savages” and there’s no way we “can re-educate Muslims or show them a better way to live.”... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Thursday 11/19/2015, 5:45pm
The conspiracy theory outlet WorldNetDaily is out with yet another just asking the question article suggesting that President Obama said he was a Muslim in a recent speech. WND reporter Bob Unruh repeatedly claims in his story, titled "Did Obama Just Say He's A Muslim (Again)?," that C-SPAN reported recently on the president’s supposed admission. The report that Unruh cites is not actually from C-SPAN but merely a comment that someone made on a C-SPAN video. This is the earth-shattering quote from the president that the C-SPAN commenter discovered and that Unruh, in turn,... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Monday 11/16/2015, 2:11pm
Leave it to conservative pundit and WorldNetDaily columnist Jesse Lee Peterson to link the protests over the treatment of students of color at the University of Missouri to the terrorist attacks that killed over 120 people in Paris on Friday. In a column for WND yesterday titled “Dear White People: Your Days Are Numbered,” Peterson contends that while “Europe has been in the process of handing their continent over to Muslims … white Americans are handing over their country to black malcontents — and Muslims.” “Somewhere along the way, whites in... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Monday 11/16/2015, 12:00pm
WorldNetDaily columnist Lord Christopher Monckton suggested yesterday that in response to the Paris terrorist attacks, the U.S. should consider prohibiting Muslims from holding public office “on grounds of a grievous and life-threatening conflict of interest.” According to Monckton, this ban will include President Obama. While the Constitution prohibits such a religious test, Monckton says that people should weigh “whether we should any long regard Islam as a religion at all.” “For while one may tolerate another’s religion, if that ‘religion’... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Friday 11/13/2015, 12:26pm
As we noted earlier this week, Phyllis Schlafly seems to have thrown her support behind Donald Trump, saying that Trump “acts like he loves America.” In an interview with WorldNetDaily today, Schlafly continued on the same theme, comparing Trump to President Reagan, who “was a real American and would stand up for America.” In contrast, she said, “I don’t think Obama ever did” love America. On Trump, she recalled a similarly turbulent time for the GOP establishment when Ronald Reagan got the nomination. “We survived that because Reagan was a... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Thursday 11/12/2015, 1:35pm
Mission America president Linda Harvey published a doozy of a column in WorldNetDaily on Tuesday, in which she insisted that gay rights groups are pushing for child abuse because they know that the “correlation between child molestation and the development of same-sex attraction for some youth is irrefutable.” (Of course, that’s not at all the case). Harvey insists that LGBT activists, whom she says themselves were likely molested as children, are out to abuse kids in hopes of turning them not only into gay people but also into gay rights activists, comparing this... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Thursday 11/12/2015, 12:05pm
WorldNetDaily pundit Erik Rush is no stranger to making genocidal statements about Muslims, so it was no surprise to see him refer to Muslim refugees as “human garbage” and “a demonstrable threat to public health and public safety” in a column yesterday. After kicking off his weekly WorldNetDaily column, titled “Islam: A Treatable Malignancy,” by saying that ISIS is “Barack Hussein’s Obama’s mercenary army,” Rush accused the president of “inundating America with Muslims” as just “one component in his grand plan of... MORE >