ErikRush.com

‘Great Satan’ Americans pay for pro-Islam elites

erush — Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:13:25 +0000

I very seldom watch major network television, but last week I had the extreme displeasure of viewing an installment of ABC News’ “What Would You Do?” The show is hosted by news veteran John Quinones, and features what might be considered staged moral dilemmas played out in a public setting.

Segments consist of actors playing out morally ambivalent vignettes in public places (like restaurants, laundromats, etc.), challenging bystanders to intervene, or not to intervene, based on their level of mortification and I suppose, their courage. One past segment featured an actor making disparaging remarks about homosexual unions in a restaurant, directly challenging other individuals present who supported same. The confrontations end with John Quinones revealing himself à la “Candid Camera,” and interviewing the bystander participants. The show clearly if insidiously conveys an uber-liberal worldview, if you hadn’t guessed already. I also can’t help but wondering if the title is a subtle mockery of the popular “What Would Jesus Do” adage, but I digress.

The segment of which I speak depicted a young white male (actor) refusing service in an establishment wherein he was to be waited on by a young Muslim man. Using language and behavior befitting someone with a severely sloping forehead, he was blatantly rude and offensive, finally inciting others around him to suggest he take his business elsewhere.

The objective of “What Would You Do” is twofold, of course: To engender widespread sympathy for those with whom the left wishes Americans to sympathize, and to portray people of a more traditional worldview as possessing severely sloping foreheads.

Liberals killed Trayvon Martin, and Jamiel Shaw, and…

erush — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 01:06:36 +0000

What we do know for sure about the night of February 26, 2012 is that George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin to death in Sanford, Florida, later claiming self-defense. Despite altogether too many having made up their minds about who was to blame within minutes of hearing of the incident, and the biased, tainted press reports, enough facts have subsequently shaken out that I believe a reliable determination can now be made as to why Martin died that night.

Other than the summary accusations and presumptions of racism on Zimmerman’s part, very little has come to light towards definitively affirming the mixed-race (Latino-Caucasian) neighborhood watch participant as a racist individual. Quite the opposite, in fact: Zimmerman’s actions and activities in the weeks and years prior suggest that he was anything but racially-biased.

Given the statutes governing those possessing concealed carry permits for firearms (as did Zimmerman), the names of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman would have been long forgotten by now were it not for the ensuing politicization surrounding the racial component here. Typically, these statutes do not demand that one waits to be physically overpowered before discharging their weapon.

Discerning evil: Look to forest, not trees

erush — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 00:55:50 +0000

This will appear self-evident to some, but I find it necessary to articulate the imperative that we do not fall into the trap of even considering the entreaties of the president, his administration and other agencies who contend that recently revealed activities of the National Security Agency were restricted to terror-related investigations. “Nobody is listening to your calls,” as President Obama said, is a lie – or a gross misrepresentation, if government officials happen to be relegated to reading transcripts, as opposed to examining the digital media itself.

I would imagine it’s probably about as accurate as “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan,” and plays to nothing less than sheer gullibility.

It is also evident that despite “bumps in the road” presented by the Benghazi, Internal Revenue Service, Associated Press, NSA and other scandals and the widespread suspicion they have generated, this administration intends to forge ahead as though none were the wiser. This was punctuated last week when Obama appointed Susan Rice as his new national security adviser, and White House aide Samantha Power as his nomination to replace Rice. As the serial liar in the Benghazi aftermath and a hardened communist respectively, these two women are among the worst representatives for the U.S. interests imaginable, in any venue.

This flagrant rewarding of criminality with a coveted political appointment (in the case of Rice) was also seen by Americans as Obama casting a huge middle finger in our direction.

America at the Crossroads of Chaos

erush — Sat, 08 Jun 2013 02:55:30 +0000

Whether you’re a Bible-believing Christian, you’ve been reading Doug Hagmann’s DHS Insider columns, listening to Glenn Beck, or just listening to your gut, you know that America is at the most tenuous and potentially volatile juncture of her history since the Cuban Missile Crisis. That carried the blessing of being speedily resolved. I’m not sure I can say the same about what America now faces.

The things coming to light over the last few weeks, and more specifically within the last few days about the Obama administration, speak to an organization that is intent upon executing a coup of historic proportions. What observers such as myself have been saying for many months based on research, history, and intuition, has now been revealed as fact. Things for which we have been ridiculed are being revealed as truth.

Rest assured that what we are now witnessing is just the tip of the iceberg.

In characteristic fashion, President Obama and his minions are taking great pains to advance a narrative that the President (I use the title loosely) has been removed from such things as the Benghazi scandal, the IRS scandal, the investigation of members of the press, and finally, the electronic surveillance of millions of American citizens.

At this point, you have no more reason to believe this than anything else that has come out of this White House since 2009.

When in 2007, I began speaking to Obama being of a political persuasion that could lead to the things that have recently been revealed, I was ridiculed and disparaged as a conspiracy theorist, among other things. This being the case, you might want to pay attention to what follows.

Whether you have been ensconced in the choir listening to us preach for the last five years, or if you are someone who is just becoming aware of these things, know this: Barack Hussein Obama (and I have good reason to believe this is not the name given him at birth) is a villain beyond the comprehension of most Americans; indeed, he has the potential to be counted with Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. He is a devil.

While being compared to the aforementioned tyrants might actually appeal to Obama, if he succeeds in his designs, it will mean the death of our republic and millions of Americans. He and a handful of leftist elites (some in his cabinet, as well as others) are now in a position to finalize Marxists’ century-long wet dream of a totalitarian collective in America hangs in the balance. This is now being threatened, and they know that if they do not succeed, they will never get another chance.

A cornered animal is the most dangerous, particularly when that animal is a megalomaniacal, narcissistic sociopath with his hands on every dangerous trigger one can imagine, and others one cannot imagine.

Be vigilant, listen – and pray.

Whence cometh the revolution?

erush — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 01:40:52 +0000

Why is Justice blindfolded?

I am speaking of the allegorical Justice, also known as “Lady Justice.” She is usually represented holding a balance and sword, the former symbolizing fairness and the latter, her power. Altogether, she represents the moral authority of law, or rather, that the law ought to observe morality.

She is also blindfolded. The blindfold represents the impartiality of Justice, that she is subject neither to prejudice nor influence. The second one – influence – is most significant in terms of our discussion.

It has been pointed out that the Boston Tea Party was carried out over confiscatory taxation on a scale far lower than that to which the average American is now obligated. Similarly, recent revelations concerning the egregious and illegal deeds of the Obama administration have given rise to the question of just how much our current situation parallels that of the men who founded this nation.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

- The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America

Our founders were predominantly Englishmen, most of whom held a love for their country and their heritage, so the decision to risk their lives, property, and the future of their progeny was not taken lightly. I believe that the most difficult question they had to consider concerning the impending struggle against the British crown was this: When? When is enough… enough? When, or at what point, was it appropriate in their estimation to seriously discuss revolution? There could be no ambivalence as to their moral right to engage in war with Britain.

Will media awaken enough to help stem tyranny?

erush — Thu, 30 May 2013 01:52:55 +0000

Under President Obama, Americans’ liberties are being neutralized at a mind-blowing pace, and thanks largely to the establishment press, most Americans are still too addled to see that tyranny is coming to America. The methods the Obama administration has been using to bring this about appear pretty transparent to some of us, but practically imperceptible to others.

Since 2009, some have maintained that Obama has dangerously compromised, sabotaged and subverted this nation on more levels than I have room to list here. Those of us who were aware that Obama and his cronies are in fact actualizing the century-long dream of Marxist radicals’ for a totalitarian America said so – and we were ridiculed. We described it as it began to take shape under our noses – and we were ridiculed. We pointed out the Marxist character of countless Obama policy maneuvers, Democrat-sponsored bills, regulations, recess appointments and executive orders – and we were ridiculed even more. Each and every example we brought to light also brought the ridicule of the press and mincing liberal twerps at large.

Now the Obama administration finds itself embroiled in a record number of scandals, at least one of which makes Nixon and Watergate look like jaywalking. The administration has seen scandals before – but all foregoing ones were effectively quashed by the press and the administration itself.

Then came the attack on the Libyan embassy in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012. Although the administration was able to forestall scrutiny until after Obama’s re-election, for once there appeared to be people willing to come forward with the truth and a handful in Congress willing to pursue the same. So many Americans had reason to be optimistic, if guardedly so.

Islamists on the march? Move along; nothing to see here…

erush — Fri, 24 May 2013 16:31:01 +0000

The gruesome killing of a British soldier in London this week by Islamists and the attendant reactions by the press and politicians make clear two things: One, that Islam cannot be treated as a legitimate faith in the American tradition and in the context of the First Amendment, and two, Americans must wrest control of our country from liberal-progressives with all due speed, and by any means necessary.

I borrow the phrase “by any means necessary” from 1960s civil rights leader Malcolm X (who ironically, was a Muslim) for the same reason he did. While he knew a call for armed insurgence by blacks would have brought down the wrath of the entire law enforcement machine upon him and his colleagues, he also knew it was important to impart a sense of relational gravity to the struggle. Hadn’t those who initiated the American Revolution done so over less injustice than blacks had suffered under segregation and Jim Crow laws?

It has also been pointed out that those who initiated the American Revolution did so over far less than that which the Federal government currently practices across many fronts – but I digress…

Bringing Obama down: Race remains a factor

erush — Thu, 23 May 2013 00:36:22 +0000

Among many things I discuss in my book “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America’s Racial Obsession” is the lack of accountability imposed and expected with regard to black Americans from the lowest to the highest stations. This is a device of the political left; in its inherent racism, it was only natural that liberals impart a lack of expectations for this “culturally inferior” segment of society. It also made blacks easier to manipulate as a group. Since blacks’ socioeconomic progress had been stultified for so many years, the attendant propaganda was easier to sell to the public.

Thus, where blacks are concerned, Americans at large (and black Americans themselves) have been conditioned by politicos, activists and the media to overlook and even expect such things as high rates of poverty and crime, misfeasance in high places, nefarious tendencies, illegitimacy, and elements of general social instability and poor character. These expectations have been so thoroughly ingrained into our worldview that most Americans are not even cognizant of the fact that they have been so conditioned.

Given this prevailing perverted worldview amongst Americans, it is no surprise that one Barack Hussein Obama (or whatever his name truly is), having attained the office of president of the United States of America, expected to enjoy more latitude than his predecessors with regard to his actions. This was intensified by the fact that as the first black president, he immediately became an historic figure. Add to that the cult of inordinate deference and adulation promoted by various forms of media, and we had an individual with whom practically no one actually wanted to find fault.

Last Week’s Conspiracy Theories are This Week’s Reality

erush — Sat, 18 May 2013 16:05:29 +0000

It is now safe to say that if one cannot see the abject evil of the Obama administration as well as the endemic corruption and criminality in our federal government, it is only because they are refusing to look. Due to what some are calling a “perfect storm” of circumstances, three scandals have rocked Washington, but these are only the grossest symptoms of the systemic infection that has been festering there for decades.

Those such as myself who suspected on September 12, 2012 that the Obama administration’s narrative relative to the attack on the US embassy in Benghazi, Libya was a false one were mocked and ridiculed (as was I personally in 2008 upon claiming that a communist was in the running for the White House). We now know that not only was the narrative false, but that President Obama and his cabinet are probably guilty of criminal action surrounding their responses and subsequent coverup of the actual events in Benghazi that night.

On the heels of whistleblowers’ testimony before Congress last week, the monumentally egregious practices of the Internal Revenue Service pertaining to conservative nonprofit applicants, and the Department of Justice’s collection of communications records from reporters and editors at the Associated Press have emerged. These have given us the opportunity for an unvarnished glimpse into the machinations of the Obama administration – and into our possible future.

Sgt. Schultz goes to Washington

erush — Thu, 16 May 2013 02:33:59 +0000

So, say I’m a low-level worker at the Internal Revenue Service (I know – just bear with me for a minute), and I am directed to inordinately scrutinize or illegally target nonprofit groups with which I happen to be politically opposed, or to create materials to be used in that effort. What happens?

I’ll tell you what happens: I refuse to do it, job or no job, and I go to the press.

I can say this because I have left jobs due to moral conflicts, although I realize it may be difficult for some to criticize an individual who chooses their livelihood in such an instance.

On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that he would recuse himself from an investigation into the Department of Justice having secretly obtained the phone records of Associated Press reporters and editors, ostensibly in an effort to discover who in the DOJ had previously leaked confidential information to the AP. Holder initially claimed that this involved an issue of national security. Both the stated purpose and the methods appear dubious on their face and have raised serious questions of legality.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said that the White House had no knowledge of the investigation.

Which is convenient, if not even remotely believable.