WorldNetDaily reporter Bob Unruh is a loyalstenographer for right-wing legal groups. He proves it again in a Nov. 23 article:
A Marine veteran of the Iraq war who refused to retreat when his daughter was forced in a high-school class to affirm “Allah is the same god that is worshiped in Christianity and Judaism” hasn’t given up on his mission.
John Kevin Wood and his wife, Melissa, now are being represented by the Thomas More Law Center in a lawsuit against La Plata High School in Maryland over “Islamic indoctrination” in an 11th grade World History class.
The case drew national attention when John Wood was banned from entering school property after he objected to assignments to affirm statements such as the “Quran is the word of Allah revealed to Muhammad in the same way that Jews and Christians believe the Torah and the Gospels were revealed to Moses and the New Testament writers.”
In grand Unruh tradition, he gets the vast majority of his information from the right-wing Thomas More Law Center and makes no effort to contact the school district in question for a response. If Unruh had bothered to do some actual reporting instead of stenography, he would know that some of his information is wrong.
As Snopes points out, Wood was not "banned from entering school property" for objecting to the assignment. School officials say Wood "threatened to cause problems that would potentially disrupt the safety" of the school.
The school also points out that the lesson is not “Islamic indoctrination” but, in fact, an analysis of the culture of the Middle East, and students are not religiously indoctrinated.
Unruh is not simply acting a the Thomas More Law Center's stenographer (for which we hope they're paying him well for his abandonment of journalistic principles), he's also regurgitating the TMLC's anti-Islam propaganda, such as the baseless claim that "The assignment required her to affirm that ‘Allah is the same god that is worshiped in Christianity and Judaism’ and that the ‘Quran is the word of Allah revealed to Mohammad in the same way that Jews and Christians believe the Torah and the Gospels were revealed to Moses and the New Testament writers.’ "
NEW ARTICLE: Jesse Lee Peterson Has Issues With Women Topic: WorldNetDaily
The WorldNetDaily columnist and right-wing-endorsed commentator is quick to defend those accused of domestic violence and sexual assault -- and to blame their problems on "radical feminists." Read more >>
WND's Klein Plays Word Games To Attack GOP Benghazi Report Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've noted how WorldNetDaily ignored the release of the Republican-led House committee report on the attacks on the diplomatic facilities in Benghazi -- which just so happened to shoot down WND reporter Aaron Klein's claim that the CIA was using the Benghazi facility to ship arms from Libya to Syrian rebels.
It took three days for Klein to respond, and he's in full spin mode in a Nov. 24 WND article, which he claims is an "extensive review" of the "five major problems with the new House report." Klein tries to avoid the discrediting of his own claims by playing word-parsing:
The new report states the “CIA conducted no unauthorized activity in Benghazi and was not collecting and shipping arms to Syria.”
The report noted multiple media outlets have reported allegations the CIA collected weapons in Benghazi and facilitated weapons from Libya to Syria.
“The eyewitness testimony and thousands of pages of CIA cables and emails that the committee reviewed provide no support for this allegation,” states the report.
As evidence the CIA was not involved in weapons transfers, the report documents that “each witness reported seeing only standard CIA security weapons at the base.”
“No witness testified that non-CIA weapons were brought to the Annex.”
However, most mainstream allegations about weapons transfers did not claim any weapons were stored or transferred through the CIA annex.
But that's exactly what Klein effectively claimed. As we've noted, Klein asserted that "The U.S. special mission in Benghazi and the nearby CIA annex were utilized in part to coordinate arms shipments to the jihadist rebels fighting the Syrian regime, with Ambassador Christopher Stevens playing a central role."
Klein continues with more word-parsing:
The new report utilizes specific phraseology to deny the CIA was involved in collecting any weapons in Benghazi. It states the CIA “was not collecting and shipping arms to Syria.”
However, the use of the word “and” leaves open the possibility the intelligence community was collecting weapons that were not shipped to Syria.
The report further states: “The Benghazi Annex was not itself collecting weapons. The Committee has not seen any credible information to dispute these facts.”
This phraseology, particularly the use of the word “itself,” leaves open the possibility another facility was involved in a weapons-procurement effort.
The report hints the State Department, not the CIA, may have been leading a weapons collection effort.
Klein then tries to change the subject:
The denial of weapons transfers is at odds with numerous major news media accounts of U.S.-aided weapons transfers by Arab countries to Mideast rebels.
The New York Times reported March 25, 2013, that the covert aid to the Syrian rebels started on a small scale and continued intermittently through the fall of 2012, expanding into a steady and much heavier flow later that year, including a large procurement from Croatia.
The Times reported that from offices at “secret locations,” American intelligence officers “helped the Arab governments shop for weapons … and have vetted rebel commanders and groups to determine who should receive the weapons as they arrive.”
In March 2011, Reuters exclusively reported Obama had signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for the rebel forces in Libya seeking to oust Gaddafi, quoting U.S. government officials.
Also that month, the London Independent reported “the Americans have asked Saudi Arabia if it can supply weapons to the rebels in Benghazi.”
But the question is not whether the U.S. attempted to steer weapons to Syrian rebels, it's whether that was done through the CIA annex at Benghazi. The fact that Klein tries to broaden the subject to obscure how he's been discredited is a tacit admission that he knows the committee report is correct.
Klein loves playing word games: He also complains that "The new House Intelligence Committee report repeatedly refers to the U.S. building in Benghazi as a 'Temporary Mission Facility.' However, the State Department has carefully labeled its facility in Benghazi a 'U.S. Special Mission.'"
Klein also fails to admit that the report was issued by a Republican-led committee, though it's referenced in the headline.
If the most damning things Klein can come up with to attack the GOP-led report are word games, they're simply not as "major" as Klein wants you to believe.
The fact that Klein is sticking to his anti-Obama narrative even as credible investigators demolish the underpinnnings of his claims is just one more reason why nobody believes WND.
House GOP Shoots Down Aaron Klein's Benghazi-Syria Conspiracy Topic: WorldNetDaily
Since the attack on diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012, WorldNetDaily's Aaron Klein has pushed the (anonymously sourced) claim that the Benghazi facility was used to ship arms from Libya to Syrian rebels. That claim is a centerpiece of Klein's failed book on Benghazi, as Klein's own website describes:
The U.S. special mission in Benghazi and the nearby CIA annex were utilized in part to coordinate arms shipments to the jihadist rebels fighting the Syrian regime, with Ambassador Christopher Stevens playing a central role, documents an explosive new book released today.
The activities, which included a separate, unprecedented multi-million-dollar weapons collection effort from Libyan militias who did not want to give up their weapons, may have prompted the Sept. 11, 2012, attack, charges the new book.
The findings and more are revealed in the new work by radio host and WND reporter Aaron Klein, “The REAL Benghazi Story: What the White House and Hillary Don’t Want You to Know.”
Klein asserts the arms-to-rebels scheme that ran through Benghazi “might amount to the Fast and Furious of the Middle East, the Iran-Contra of the Obama administration.”
According to information cited by Klein, Stevens served less as a diplomat and more as an arms dealer and intelligence coordinator for assistance to the so-called Arab Spring, with particular emphasis on the Syrian rebels.
Just one problem with that narrative: The newly released Republican-led House report on Benghazi discredits the accusation:
Multiple media outlets have reported allegations about CIA collecting weapons in Benghazi and facilitating weapons from Libya to Syria. The eyewintess testimony and thousands of pages of CIA cables and emails that the Committee reviewed provide no support for this allegation.
Committee Members and staff asked all wigness what they observed at the Benghazi Annex and whether they had any informationto support allegations about weapons being collected and transported to Syria. Each witness reported seeing only standard CIA security weapons at the base. No witness testified that non-CIA weapons were brought to the Annex. Security personnel and officers testified they had complete access to the Annex and would have observed any weapons, such as MANPADs, stored at the facility. Security personnel and officers also testified that nobody told them to hide or withhold any information from the Committee. This record is consistent throughout the Committee interviews by members and staff.
According to testimony from CIA Deputy Director Morell and confirmed by other witnesses, the CIA's mission in Benghazi was to collect foreign intelligence. From the Annex in Benghazi, the CIA was collecting intelligence about foreign entities that were themselves collecting weapons in Libya and facilitating their passage to Syria. The Benghazi Annex was not itself collecting weapons. The Committee has not seen any credible information to dispute these facts.
Don't expect a correction from Klein on this, let alone WND recalling Klein's book due to the false information contained in it. Not only is that not how WND rolls -- indeed, WND has yet to acknowledge the existence of the House GOP report on Benghazi, even though it has been out for nearly two days -- Klein's book tanked badly enough that the effort is barely worth it. As of this writing, "The REAL Benghazi Story" has slid to No. 80,072 in sales at Amazon.com less than three months after its release.
When Barack Obama and his political henchmen get done with his plan to transform this country, we’ll end up being a country of one state.
He’s taking us apart bit by bit. When he’s done, we’ll no longer be the United States – 50 states with rights and obligations, with states’ rights preeminent – but one country under the thumb and rule of the federal government with no individual states rights.
We’ll not be the United States because at every level, he and his minions in legislatures, the courts and the bureaucracies are overriding state laws and enforcing federal restrictions instead.
Richard Nixon was driven from office in shame for actions that do not begin to rise to the level of this health-care fraud. Enough of the talk. We demand action on behalf of the American people. We need state attorneys general and Congress to take immediate action to have Obama punished for defrauding the American people. In fact, I would further argue that the lawyers who argued in support of Obamacare also knowingly participated in the lie and that they should be held accountable as well.
At a time when the country needs an actual leader at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the great Community Organizer in Chief comes shining through again to illuminate exactly why he’s unfit to be president of the United States.
Facts are irrelevant to Barack Obama, and it’s obvious he still harbors lingering resentment for having to hold a beer summit with his friend Henry Louis Gates and Sgt. James Crowley. In the case of Obama meeting secretly with the Ferguson protest leaders, it’s obvious who truly “acted stupidly” in once again displaying a complete aversion to being a leader interested in healing wounds instead of pouring salt on them.
But then again, Democrats nationwide attempted to utilize the unrest in Ferguson to drive black voters to the polls, filled with the type of racial resentment that must keep Obama and Holder awake at night thinking there’s a Klansman behind every door they encounter.
Obama knows that all of these options leave the GOP between a rock and a hard place, and that is exactly the way he wants it. He is daring them to try and impeach him, believing that they will suffer the same fate they did when they went after Clinton. He is betting that the American people won’t go for it and the Republicans will be ruined if they do. The White House is using impeachment as bait in the hopes that the GOP will destroy its own credibility. Why do you think most of the impeachment talk is coming from his party and not the Republicans?
When Rush Limbaugh contradicts Obama’s statement that he (Obama) is not an emperor, he tacitly accepts the ideological paradigm Obama actually professes. Of course, I’m reasonably sure he does not intend to do so. An emperor is one who commands the law by virtue of his power. So far, Obama has successfully demonstrated his power to do pretty much as he wills. So, according to his Marxist paradigm, he is an emperor.
Would-be dictators and bullies must be opposed, resisted and defeated. It will not be acceptable for Congress to sit on its hands after Obama’s usurpation. It must act not as a matter of partisan competition but on behalf of the Constitution itself and the sovereignty of the American people, which it has a sacred duty to safeguard.
Now that Obama is declaring war on the Constitution and attempting to further emasculate Congress, it must draw and use every weapon in its constitutional arsenal to nullify Obama’s action – and to deter future tyrants from following his disgraceful example.
If the president could have carried out this executive order the whole time legally, THEN WHY HASN’T HE? If it’s legal for the Executive to do this, then Congress’ action or inaction is completely irrelevant. The only possible conclusion is that this whole episode is entirely political at best, completely illegal at worst.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why many, including myself, simply don’t trust this man. He is a deceiver. I’ve said this in private, and I will say so now publicly: Whenever this president speaks, I feel like saying, “I have never heard nothing in so many words.”
One can’t resist noting that on Oct. 2, 2014, we at Freedom Watch petitioned the Department of Homeland Security to deport Barack Hussein Obama, due to his use of falsified identity documents. Perhaps Obama has a personal soft spot for not wanting the United States to deport people not legally in the country. Freedom Watch calls for all illegal aliens to be returned to their country of birth, including Obama.
WND Parrots Sheriff's Bogus Stats On Illegal Immigrants Topic: WorldNetDaily
In a Nov. 19 WorldNetDaily article, Leo Hohmann plays stenographer for a group of sheriffs who are "march on the nation’s capital, hoping to send a message to President Obama and Congress that they oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants." Hohmann uncritically quotes from a letter written by the sheriffs:
Given the fact that 25 people are killed each day by illegal immigrants, and our schools are becoming overcrowded and more costly, our public health is threatened by new diseases and ailments introduced by people living in our communities illegally, and the fact that benefits are being given and violations of the law forgiven for a select group of non-citizens, makes clear our obligation to act now before we erode the confidence and the faith citizens have in Sheriffs across the country and throughout our history.
The sheriffs are repeating a zombie lie that, as we've detailed, WND has been peddling since 2006.
The idea that "25 people are killed each day by illegal immigrants" was first promoted by anti-immigrant Republican Rep. Steve King, who claimed to have "extrapolated" this figure from a claim that 28 percent of all U.S. prison inmates are "criminal aliens" -- which itself is false, overstating the number of inmates by a factor of four.
The sheriff's claim that "our public health is threatened by new diseases and ailments introduced by people living in our communities illegally" is simply an echo of fearmongering peddled by the likes of WND's own Jerome Corsi.
Hohmann reports that this anti-immigrant effort is being spearheaded by "two sheriffs from Massachusetts – Bristol County Sheriff Thomas Hodgson and Plymouth County Sheriff Joseph McDonald." The fact that he can't be bothered to call out the sheriff's rank fearmongering and fact-check their bogus statistics is just another reason why nobody believes WND.
Molotov Mitchell Abandoned His Far-Right Principles, Still Lost NC Election Topic: WorldNetDaily
In his Nov. 18 WorldNetDaily video, Molotov Mitchell reviewed his campaign for North Carolina's legislature, in which he lost by a 2-1 margin. Mitchell unsurprisingly spun his massive loss as positively as he could, insisting that he got more votes than any previous Republican in his "ice-blue district."
Mitchell also claimed that his campaign showed that voters respect conservative candidates who stand their ground, saying that "sticking to your principles and not running from them is an effective campaign strategy."
In fact, Mitchell did run from his principles during his campaign in order to make himself appear less extreme. Indeed, he tried to renounce the two things he's arguably best known for -- his birtherism and his disdain for gays. The Raleigh News & Observer reported:
He’s been weighing in on national politics for years through his video commentaries and other films. In the videos, he’s argued that President Barack Obama wasn’t born in the United States, adding that “if I were a leader in the armed forces, I might be thinking coup d’etat right about now.” He’s called North Carolina’s Moral Monday protestors “ugly, mindless, littering, loitering hobos.” And his film “Gates of Hell” features a group of “black power assassins” who kill abortion doctors.
As a candidate, Mitchell has distanced himself from his video career. He says the commentaries were done in his role as an “entertainer.”
“It was to poke the bear on the left,” he said. “It doesn’t matter where Barack Obama was born.”
The News & Observer also noted Mitchell's attempt to distance himself from his support for anti-gay laws:
Mitchell has been called “anti-gay” because of a video he produced in 2010 supporting a Ugandan law that would impose the death penalty on homosexuals.
“What I supported was the right of Uganda to create whatever legislation it wants,” Mitchell said, adding that he doesn’t hate gay people or think they should be killed.
“I support the democratic process,” he said. “I really believe in freedom.”
That's an utterly disingenuous defense. As we've previously noted, Mitchell has called for the "abolition of homosexuality," and he defended his support for the law as something the Founding Fathers would also support. And it's unlikely Mitchell would be defending Uganda's right "to create whatever legislation it wants" if it was Christians instead of gays that faced the death penalty.
The News & Observer reported Mitchell's defense as it also noted that Mitchell ludicrously denounced a school anti-bullying policy as a “transgender kindergarten curriculum.”
In his video, Mitchell hinted that he would run for office again, even as he insulted his would-be consituents as "the most hard-core, Birkenstock-wearing, Che Guevara-loving socialists this side of Leningrad." That disdain for people who disagree with him demonstrates that Mitchell lost his election justly.
Also, Leningrad hasn't existed for decades. Mitchell might want to check out a map sometime.
WND's Peterson Defends Bill Cosby, Blames 'Feminists' For Rape Allegations Topic: WorldNetDaily
The accusations of rape by Bill Cosby demonstrates he's the victim of a conspiracy, according to Jesse Lee Peterson in his Nov. 16 WorldNetDaily column:
First, Cosby has made national news for publicly airing black America’s “dirty laundry.” And black people hate for other blacks to criticize them in front of whites.
In 2008, he told a black audience, “We’re killing ourselves. We’re making fools of ourselves.” He took black parents to task who spend more money on sneakers than they do on their kids’ education, and allow them to bring “street-corner” language into their homes.
And Cosby ripped black “leaders” who took issue with the blunt manner in which he delivered his message.
The liberal elite power brokers in the Democratic Party can’t allow Cosby’s call for responsibility to get a foothold in the black community because it threatens the powerful grip they have on black voters.
Since the professional blame merchants want to keep the focus off black failure and blame white America, Cosby has been scapegoated as a “sell-out.” But now they’ve found another issue they can use to try and discredit and destroy the man – and, therefore, the message – of black responsibility.
Radical feminists are notorious for accusing American men of supporting a “rape culture.” They automatically accuse anyone who questions or challenges a woman’s allegations as “blaming” or “shaming” the victim. Therefore, it’s almost impossible for men to discuss or effectively defend themselves against accusations of rape.
Peterson declares that "Cosby has never been charged with rape in a court of law," and slams one accuser:
Then, Barbara Bowman, a woman who claims that while she was under the tutelage of Cosby, he drugged and “raped” her, aired her unproven allegations by penning an op-ed in the Washington Post headlined: “Bill Cosby raped me. Why did it take 30 years for people to believe my story?”
Maybe it’s because you never filed a police report. Or could it be because you waited 30 years to make your allegations known?
I don’t know if the allegations against Cosby are true, but the man has never stood trial or been convicted in a court of law; therefore, he deserves the benefit of the doubt. His accuser should have brought charges against him or sued him years ago. Now she needs to move on. Instead, she’s seeking publicity and pushing for legislation that would make sure that statutes against rape allegations never expire.
Peterson might want to talk with his fellow right-wingers who believed Juanita Broaddrick's allegation of rape against Bill Clinton despite the fact that she not only didn't file a police report but also actively denied for 15 years that such an incident occurred. Would Peterson tell Broaddrick she "needs to move on"?
As we've noted, Peterson has issues with women -- he defended an ESPN commentator who suggested that women provoke men into beating them, and he attacked the NFL panel addressing domestic violence issues in the league.
WND Spreads Lies About DOJ Peacekeepers Topic: WorldNetDaily
A Nov. 13 WorldNetDaily article by Paul Bremmer (a former NewsBusters blogger) has no other purpose other than to peddle right-wing lies about the Department of Justice's Community Relations Service:
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said his organization has been tracking the CRS’ actions in Ferguson, just as they tracked the CRS’ actions in Sanford, Florida, after the 2012 Trayvon Martin shooting.
He does not believe CRS workers are impartial mediators.
“They obviously did not facilitate anything in terms of positive outcomes and community relations, and our work showing what they had done in the Trayvon Martin shooting controversy shows that they are not there as a neutral party,” Fitton said. “They go down there to advocate on behalf of the racialist point of view that the Department of Justice has.”
Fitton is lying. PolitiFact rated Judicial Watch's claims about CRS' work in Florida after the Trayvon Martin shooting to be "mostly false":
Armed with public documents, Judicial Watch said the Department of Justice sent the Community Relations Service to Sanford in the wake of Martin’s death "to help organize and manage rallies and protests against George Zimmerman."
Judicial Watch’s statement contends an element of truth: Justice Department employees were sent to Sanford, in part to deal with community uprising, including protests. But they were sent with the idea of keeping the situation peaceful and calm, not to instigate or condone protests or violence.
That’s a critical distinction being ignored in this particular claim. We rate it Mostly False.
Despire the utter lack of a factual basis for such attacks, Bremmer pushes them anyway, uncritically repeating similar comments by race-baiters like Colin Flaherty and Jack Cashill. At no point does Bremmer make an effort to contact CRS and permit them to respond to the racially charged attacks by Fitton, Flaherty and Cashill.
In fact, the CRS' record in Ferguson is that it has brought nearly all conflicting sides in Ferguson to the table to talk about their differences and try to develop a peaceful way forward.
The fact that Bremmer is peddling known lies -- or what he should know are lies, had he bothered to do even the most basic research into his subject -- is just another reason why nobody believes WND.
WND Can't Find Anyone Who Will Defend Ted Cruz On The Record Topic: WorldNetDaily
Garth Kant writes in a Nov. 12 WorldNetDaily article:
Aides to conservative senators are debunking a Politico article titled, “An army of one,” which claims Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, “is leading the charge against Obamacare but no one is following.”
The article states Cruz wants all Republicans to declare “all-out war” but portrayed his colleagues as hesitant because the downside, according to Politico, would divide the GOP and become a “PR disaster.”
“That whole story is total garbage,” one aide to a senator told WND.
An aide to another conservative senator told WND the lawmaker was looking to repeal and replace Obamacare any way that gets it done.
And an aide to Paul told WND, “Senator Paul supports repealing Obamacare fully. He supports whatever strategy would accomplish that goal including using reconciliation or funding riders on appropriations bills. Clearly, this is not an easy task, yet conservatives need to figure out how to continue a short- and long-term strategy that repeals Obamacare.”
Notice that all of these aides to conservative senators that Kant quotes in his article are anonymous. Kant does not explain why he has granted them anonymity to defend Cruz and bash Politico.
How sad is it that WND can't find anyone willing to speak on the record to defend Cruz and the conservative strategy to defend Obamacare? Consider it just another reason nobody believes WND.
Finally, the world’s most flagrant example of in-your-face dishonesty and corruption in government – the bogus “birth certificate” on the crime scene that is the White House website – must be firmly dealt with.
I know not whether Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii. But it is clear beyond reasonable doubt that the document on the White House website is not a genuine Hawaiian birth certificate. The corruption in Hawaii that created the forgery, and in Washington, D.C., that allows the forgery to continue in circulation, must be ended.
Congress must at once announce an investigation into the forgery.
-- Christopher Monckton, Nov. 9 WorldNetDaily column
Then it was revealed at the end of an interview in Forbes with pharmacologist David Kroll, about Ebola testing at Duke University Hospital, that national media have agreed not to report on suspected cases of Ebola in the United States until a positive case is documented.
In other words, pressure from above to ignore the issue unless there is a crisis.
Sounds like a cover-up to me to hide the number of suspected cases across the country. Since the administration refuses to order travel to Ebola countries stopped, every American is a risk.
The rout of the Democrats in the recent election has clearly taught Barack Obama nothing. The American people unequivocally declared to President Obama that we are on to him. And he shouted back, “Who cares?”
He has always held the American people in contempt, but now it’s official presidential policy. Now he is sending troops back to Iraq. Apparently the decision was made to send these troops back in September, but Obama held off on announcing it until after the election – in a Friday night news dump.
So now we know that for him nothing is sacred, not even human life. Under Obama, war is politics – and if it’s not politically expedient, then victims, nations and freedom be damned.
The conversion of large numbers of prisoners to Islam and their “radicalization” at the hands of Muslim chaplains with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and other jihadist and supremacist groups is not just a scandal – it’s a time bomb. Irek Hamidullin won’t be the first or the last jihadi to light the fuse.
But the principal arsonist in this case will be Barack Hussein Obama.
Instead of issuing an order that people coming from Ebola-infected countries will not be allowed to deplane in the United States (which Obama could easily do and would cost nothing), he is now asking Congress to appropriate $6 billion to combat Ebola in West Africa! That’s so offensive that it’s hard to believe he said it, but if the New York Times reported it, he must have said it.
Maybe the new Republican majority doesn’t have the power to stop nonsense announcements, but Republicans surely can refuse to appropriate any funds for Obama’s harebrained schemes such as assuming the burden of curing disease in Africa. That’s not what we elected him for.
While Obama and his cronies have been very successful at operating outside the realm of believability (in that so many remain unconvinced they’re really out to destroy America as we know it), I think that Americans are far more open to digesting the truth about them now than ever before. Investigations into the plethora of scandals in which administration officials have been implicated are a logical first step.
This is the real lesson Americans at large need to learn, and would learn given such a scenario: that a system which could propel an utterly insubstantial, 6-foot-3 bowel extrudate with less in the way of accomplishments than most grade schoolers to the highest office in the land is a system that definitely needs a major overhaul.
It is the Republican failure to counter Obama that is pushing our nation into a real constitutional crisis. The U.S. Constitution provides a clear remedy for confronting a rising dictatorship. It is the refusal to employ constitutional remedy that is provoking a crisis.
And trust me on this: When the rule of law is in retreat, the rule of force is ascendant. If dictatorship in America ever comes to be seen as our inevitable fate, there will be unpleasant consequences beyond lawsuits, third parties, and exploding gun and ammunition sales.
Is there nothing Obama could do in his remaining 26 months that would persuade even Democrats to consider impeachment? Is Congress willing – by its silence – to declare Obama immune from impeachment no matter that he does? Does anyone believe that immigration is the only area where Obama will employ his “executive action” to achieve legislative goals he cannot get through Congress? Can you spell unilateral disarmament?
The ultimate question for Republican leaders is the same question we must all ask of our elected representatives: Is America ready for an official obituary to the rule of law?
If you live in Minnesota, your high-school daughter might soon be showering next to a male after athletic practice if a “transgender” policy being considered by the Minnesota State High School League is approved next month.
And beyond Minnesota? Such a policy could be coming to other states, too, if there is not already one in place.
Critics of the controversial measure in Minnesota, which has sparked fierce opposition across the state, told WND the policy was unneeded, dangerous and part of a broader radical agenda.
Needless to say, Newman ignores evidence that experts in 12 states that have banned discrimination in public accommodations based on gender identity have reported no problems whatsoever with sexual assaults or any other crimes in connection with accom,modating transgenders.
Indeed -- echoing another Unruh tactic -- Newman interviewed only critics of nondiscrimination ordinances for his article, making no effort whatsoever to give supporters a chance to respond.
And, as per usual for WND's anti-gay agenda, Newman's article is accompanied with a picture of a screaming Janet Leigh in a still from the film "Psycho."
Jerome Corsi -- who wants us to think he's some kind of expert on Ebola, even though all he does is fearmonger about it -- plays the filthy-immigrant card in a Nov. 10 WorldNetDaily article:
The Chagas virus is a potentially lethal disease that international health authorities virtually universally agree has been brought to the United States in the flood of “unaccompanied minors” this year.
Corsi is implying that Chagas did not exist in the U.S. until this year, which is completely false. In fact, as Wired reported, Chagas was documented in New York City in the early 1980s and has been prevalent in Texas for years. Wired also warns against doing what Corsi is doing:
As I type that I can almost feel the default anti-immigrant response: “They” pose a risk to us, so if we only kept “them” on the other side of our borders, we’d be safe. The problem, of course, is that diseases and their vectors have no concept of borders — and thanks in part to climate change, there is now a competent Chagas vector on our side of the border, in Texas. A third paper, published two years ago in PLoS NTD, argues that Chagas is now endemic in Texas, traveling from Triatoma species through dogs and into people — and is going undetected because blood-donation screening is not mandatory in the state and physicians are not required to report the disease’s occurrence to health authorities.
Corsi goes on to cite Elizabeth Vliet -- a fearmongering-obsessed doctor affiliated with the fringe group Association of American Physicians and Surgeons -- blaming illegal immigrants for "bringing diseases the U.S. had controlled or virtually eradicated," including Chagas. Given the AAPS' history of falsely blaming illegal immigrants for spreading illnesses in the U.S., Vliet is simply not a credible source. Not that it will stop Corsi from citing her, of course.
(In the AAPS article by Vliet that Corsi cites, Vliet laments that "Vaccine-preventable diseases like chicken pox, measles and whooping cough spread like wildfire among unvaccinated children." She doesn't mention that the AAPS opposes mandatory vaccination of children, which probably contributes much more to the spread of such diseases.)
Corsi found another disease to blame on filthy immigrants in a Nov. 11 WND article:
Dengue hemorrhagic fever has been added to the list of diseases brought by the surge of “unaccompanied minors” who have illegally entered the U.S. this year.
“The big picture here is that we are getting all these diseases brought into the United States by the ‘imported disease people’ from Latin America,” Dr. Lee Hieb, past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, explained to WND in an interview.
Again, Corsi is falsely implying that there was no dengue fever in the U.S. before this year. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control reported cases in the U.S. in 2012.
Neither Corsi nor Hieb -- another factually challenged AAPS-linked fearmongerer -- present any actual evidence that the presence of dengue-spreading mosquitoes is the direct result of those filthy "unaccompanied minors," only mentions of "suspicion" and Hieb ranting about "the big picture." They don't mention that dengue fever is starting to become a problem in Key West, Florida, an area not known for problems with illegal immigration.
In short, these two articles are all about fearmongering and nothing about informing. He never proves that the unaccompanied minors have resulted in any actual increased risk of these diseases spreading in the U.S. Thus, he has failed in his fearmongering mission.
WND Lets Coward Attack Idea Of An Ethnically Diverse Military Topic: WorldNetDaily
A Nov. 10 WorldNetDaily article carries the byline of "Otway Burns," which WND tells us is "a pseudonym for an officer currently serving in the United States military. He is a combat veteran with tours in Iraq and Afghanistan." (It's also the real name of a military privateer during the War of 1812.)
The fact that "Otway Burns" is so cowardly as to hide behind a pseudonym tells us all we need to know about the value of what he has to say. And what is it that he has to say? He's attacking the idea of increasing the number of minority officers in the military:
The director of sociology at West Point claims the Army officer corps needs to be racially “representative” of the American public, and diversity makes the officer corps more effective.
In a recent report in USA Today, Col. Irving Smith, an African-American infantry officer who has served in Afghanistan, said, “It certainly is a problem for several reasons.”
But legal experts say both premises have serious flaws.
“Neither justification has been recognized by the courts as constitutionally adequate,” says Roger Clegg, president and general counsel for the Center for Equal Opportunity.
University of Pennsylvania law professor Amy Wax, a prominent critic of race-based employment policy, warns, “For all the supposed benefits of a diverse officer corps, it really would impose weighty risks and costs in promoting less qualified and capable people.”
Of course, the reason "Burns" is cowering behind a pseudonym is because it's against military regulations to publicly speak out on political issues while an active member of the military. That gives us a clue as to the kind of coward "Burns" is: He wants to hang onto his career and all its perks while voicing his unpopular opinions under a fake name.
The fact that "Burns" quotes only "legal experts" who have made a career of opposing affirmative action and not sociologists who would know more about the issue conveniently reflects the bias of WND, which has a longhistory of telling only the side of the story that advances its right-wing agenda.
The fact that WND let someone hide behind a fake name to deliver "news" is just another reason why nobody believes WND.
Sharyl Attkisson Gets The Coveted WND Endorsement Topic: WorldNetDaily
Joseph Farah praises his new favorite reporter in his Nov. 9 WND column:
I don’t know Sharyl Attkisson.
I’ve never met her.
But I have met a few reporters like her in my 37 years in the news business.
They are my heroes. They are my professional compatriots. They are the embodiment of why our Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, created special constitutional protections for the press for the first time in the history of the world.
Attkisson never had an ax to grind. She wasn’t motivated to pursue the truth by a political ideology. Her agenda was always the same – doing good journalism, which, at least in part, requires a determination to expose waste, fraud, abuse and corruption in government no matter who is perpetrating it or allowing it.
I love reporters like Attkisson, and I always have. It’s a privilege to work with them. It’s a privilege to see their work. It’s an honor to be in the same profession. Experience more of Joseph Farah’s no-nonsense truth-telling in his books, audio and video products, featured in the WND Superstore
It’s also unconscionable what happens to such muckrakers who do their job without fear or favor.
The fact that Farah just loves Attkisson tells you all you need to know about both of them. And this line from Farah is even more telling:
Understand that I love my profession. I never wanted to do anything else. While I don’t know Sharyl Attkisson personally, I know she is just like me in that regard. It hurts to see a worthy institution undermined by unworthy practitioners.
Of course, one of the leaders in undermining the worthy institution of journalism is Farah himself, who runs a "news" website that nobody believes. Indeed, while he was writing that column, his ace reporter, Aaron Klein, was writing an article that attacked the wrong Loretta Lynch, confusing a California lawyer who supported President Clinton with a New York prosecutor nominated as attorney general. While Klein's bogus article was ultimately deleted, WND's version of a similarly false Breitbart article that inspired Klein is still live on WND's website.
If Farah really cared about journalism, he would clear his WND payroll of all the unworthy practitioners he employs. But he won't because he's one of those unworthy practitioners he purports to despise.
Needless to say, Farah is mum about Attkisson's numerous factual errors. Also needless to say, despite all of Farah's bluster about Attkisson supposedly doing her job "without fear or favor," if Attkisson had gone after a Republican president the way she has President Obama, Farah would not be singing her praises.