ConWebWatch home
ConWebBlog: the weblog of ConWebWatch
Search and browse through the ConWebWatch archive
About ConWebWatch
Who's behind the news sites that ConWebWatch watches?
Letters to and from ConWebWatch
ConWebWatch Links
Buy books and more through ConWebWatch

Erik Rush's Rampage

If you think Rush's Obama-derangement-heavy work for WorldNetDaily is crazy, wait 'til you see what he writes for other fringe websites.

By Terry Krepel
Posted 5/16/2013

Erik Rush

Erik Rush holds back a little when he writes for WorldNetDaily.

Yeah, it's hard to believe that the guy who used his WND column to liken President Obama to a prison rapist can be accused of holding back, but it's true: WND isn't getting Rush's prime Obama derangement.

One place he takes his weapons-grade insanity is the far-right website Canada Free Press:

That's been showing up at far-right website Canada Free Press, where over the past several months, for instance, he:

  • suggested that the Founders would have hanged Obama, who has become a "veritable dictator," and that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid “deserves” to be dragged behind a truck.
  • argued that Obama is part of a communist government-media-law school conspiracy that is bringing about the End Times.
  • blamed the death of Keith Ratliff, a gun enthusiast known for his YouTube videos who was found dead in January, on Obama: "Although I have no proof, my inclination is to suspect that the Obama administration or one of its surrogates is responsible for Ratliff’s death, the first of many such executions that will take place in order to silence individuals whom the government deems a threat to their oligarchical collectivist agenda."

Rush used a Jan. 25 Canada Free Press column to rant that President Obama wants to take our guns away, just like Mao and Stalin did:

Obama, with the eager cooperation of the American press and the anti-gun lobby, are creating the perception of Second Amendment proponents as manifestly evil. Not misguided, not wrong – but evil. As such, he will set the stage for all “reasonable” Americans to support the wholesale dismantling of the Second Amendment, and if this means wholesale firearms confiscation and the bloodshed to which this will no doubt give rise, so much the better. This will give him legitimacy in his move of declaring martial law – in fact, he will have “no choice,” so it will appear.

This will be, as we’ve seen in so many other nations, the move across the threshold into totalitarian rule. We must never forget that this is a person who grew up studying and admiring Mao, Lenin, Stalin, and Castro – men who murdered hundreds of millions in their ascent to total dominion over their respective nations. Just this week, it was reported that a former senior military staffer revealed Obama’s new litmus test for top military brass: Can they give the order to fire on American citizens?

P.T. Barnum (of Barnum and Bailey Circus fame) was a practiced con artist. He taught his people well in the art of distraction; while folks were watching the right hand, the left hand was pulling the trick off right under the nose of the audience. Amazed, they would declare in wonder, “How did they do that?” The answer, of course, was that it happened right under their noses, while they were watching, and they had just been misdirected. Those who have researched the President’s multitudinous executive orders alone know that the Obama administration has mastered this technique.

There is no real discussion in America about gun ownership in America at any level that matters; Obama will confiscate them all – or at least he will attempt to do so. The question is: Will America see how it is being tricked before it is too late?
The Malcolm X conspiracy

Canada Free Press isn't the only place Rush has been dumping his extracurricular insanity of late. In 2011, he penned an article for the fringe website Terrible Truth (well, the first word's correct, anyway) declaring that a likely reason Obama purportedly removed a bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office is that "the President’s biological father was in fact Malcolm X, rather than Barack Obama Sr." and "Just three days before his father’s assassination, England had considered banning Malcolm forever from its soil." Rush added: "I suppose Obama figured that since England dissed his daddy, it was his duty to pay them back. So, he kicked England out of America the way they tried to kick Malcolm out of England."

A couple weeks later, he followed that up with an article co-written with Martha Trowbridge at the birther website The Post & Email arguing that Obama's mother was at Malcolm X's funeral. Oh, and a photo of a young Stanley Ann Dunham with a toddler Obama "was falsified to deceive us" by making her hair longer and by "futzing with the corner of her mouth, in order to widen it."

Twitter and killing Muslims

ConWebWatch has already documented how Rush tweeted in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombings about Muslims, "Yes, they're evil. Let's kill them all," then retroactively declared the tweet to be "sarcasm" when he was called on it. Rush peddled even more revisionism on the incident in his May 1 WND column in which he purported to discuss "the obvious antipathy Muslims hold for America":

I’ve had a crash course in this phenomenon, so to speak, having made a controversial comment online concerning Muslims on the day the bombing occurred. Muslims and many sympathetic (read “deluded”) Americans took great offense. What I find interesting is the fact that out of the tens of thousands of death threats, hate tweets, emails and so forth, not one person wrote to tell me that they were Muslim, but love America, and condemn Islamist terrorism.

Notice that Rush didn't explain that his "controversial comment" involved his expressed desire to kill all Muslims. That puts the "death threats, hate tweets, emails and so forth" in a little more context, doesn't it?

Later in the column, Rush wrote: "I have no wish to persecute Muslims." Apparently wanting to kill them all does not qualify as persecution in Rush's twisted, hateful little brain.

Rush's WND craziness

But never fear -- while Rush doesn't serve up his primo stuff at WND, what he does publish there is still plenty crazy, as a review of his 2013 work demonstrates.

In his Jan. 9 column, he blamed liberals for the rise of "true supernatural evil, that which the spiritual and religious readily acknowledge but which many Americans have difficulty reconciling with the material world and current events." Rush even approvingly cites Fox News' Keith Ablow, a dealer of misinformation, rabid gay-bashing and Erik Rush-level Obama derangement.

After claiming "the testimony of proven, reliable sources" back up his attacks on President Obama in his Jan. 16 column, he wrote of one who isn't proven or reliable: an anonymous source who purportedly told him that "President Obama had a mid-level U.S. official meet with a Chinese officer in 2011 to find out if the Chinese were open to a land and resource swap for debt forgiveness. The upshot of this is that the Chinese are now engaging in experimental 'farming' and 'scientific' studies in several locations in the U.S. (in various states). The personnel involved are all Chinese military, and the plan is to use these as the base for the expansion of 'land settlements' in payment of the U.S. debt to China." Of course, Rush offered no proof to back up any part of his conspiracy theory.

In his Jan. 23 column, Rush said of Obama that "it just isn’t that difficult to surmise that someone who grew up infused with a hatred for America and admiring history’s greatest serial murderers, and who is a malignant narcissist himself, might perceive it as his destiny to outdo them all."

Rush unleashed a massive anti-gay rant in his Feb. 5 column, falsely claiming it's a "dangerous fallacy" that pedophiles are not homosexuals -- in fact, pedophiles tend not to have an adult sexual orientation -- and whining that "if you watch television, you’re likely to surmise that every third person you set eyes on is homosexual" (actually, only 4.4 percent of characters on TV are gay or lesbian). Rush went on to claim that granting gay rights is "analogous to capitulating to a developmentally disabled child who wants to play with matches simply because they have been persistent in their requests to do so."

Rush bizarrely laments the end of apartheid in South Africa (thus echoing fellow WND columnist Ilana Mercer) in his Feb. 27 column:

This transformation of South Africa came about almost entirely due to international pressure rather than national referenda – but why was it done? Not so much because apartheid was an odious policy, but because it offended the sensibilities of Western liberal elites that whites held dominion in countries such as South Africa and the former Rhodesia, which were “meant for blacks” (I suppose because they happened to lie on the African continent).

This rationale would, of course, provide ample justification for Scandinavian or European nations wishing to pitch anyone darker than myself into the sea, but I digress.


They determined that white rule in South Africa, the scourge of Africa and the malignant vestige of white colonialism, must come to an end – and it did. Unfortunately, many of these hold a similar view of the United States; it is clear that this is the case regarding President Barack Obama and his partners in America’s orchestrated decline.

Rush also uncritically parroted Mercer's claim that "condemnation of the new racist South Africa is not advocacy for the racist old," despite the fact that he had just denied a few paragraphs earlier that apartheid was "odious."

Rush endorsed the armed overthrow of Obama in his March 6 column:

Why does the government (and the Obama administration in particular) want Americans’ firearms? Because they know that they are already guilty of prosecutable crimes and are planning many more. They know that they represent precisely why America’s founders put the Second Amendment in the Constitution in the first place, and that they already merit being removed by force of arms. They simply want to disarm Americans before a preponderance of us come to that realization and respond accordingly.

Rush declared immigrants to be "human garbage" in his April 24 column:

The fact is that we have far more human garbage in this country than we ever ought to have tolerated, and this has nothing to do with ethnicity or religion; it has to do with what is in people’s hearts and minds. What we haven’t imported, the left has created. Liberals and radical Marxism in particular have inculcated a sense that we somehow deserve the antipathy of those around the world (and by extension, émigrés from Third World toilets) and so should endure it. The ongoing complaint of Muslims (radical and otherwise) is very much in this vein.

Finally, Rush delivered some of the high-test insanity he'd been largely keeping from WND in his May 8 column:

Earlier this week, Fox News Channel analyst Brit Hume asserted that for the investigation of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, “to become the scandal it surely deserves to be,” it will require relentless news coverage.

Hume is quite right, of course; however, there is another requisite for definitive results to develop with regard to Benghazi, and that is the willingness of Congress to see the process through to a just conclusion.

And what would be a just conclusion?

I suppose that depends on two things: One, what is revealed in the hearings, and two, whom one asks. I have always leaned in the direction of the administration having orchestrated the attack for reasons of its own – given his connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and legendary understanding of all things Islamic, it is possible that President Obama could even have arranged for the assault on the compound without the foreknowledge of his Cabinet.

A bold charge, to be sure, but I am operating with such questions as the unresolved Trinity United murders before me. Then there are the possibilities that the tragedy came about as the result of less grave criminal action or a series of irresponsible and craven decisions.

That's right -- Rush is saying that Obama "orchestrated" the attack on the Benghazi compound because of his friends in the Muslim Brotherhood, and we know he's capable of it because of the gay men he supposedly killed.

We have nothing to add.

Send this page to:

Bookmark and Share
The latest from

In Association with
Support This Site

home | letters | archive | about | primer | links | shop
This site © Copyright 2000-2013 Terry Krepel