My name is Everette Hatcher III. I am a businessman in Little Rock and have been living in Bryant since 1993. My wife Jill and I have four kids (Rett 24, Hunter 22, Murphey 16, and Wilson 14).
Will Rogers has a great quote that I love. He noted, “Lord, the money we do spend on Government and it’s not one bit better than the government we got for one-third the money twenty years ago”(Paula McSpadden Love, The Will Rogers Book, (1972) p. 20.)
We need to slash defense spending and make other wealthy allies pay for their own defense!!!!
It’s Tax Day, and for millions of Americans that means ponying up to the IRS. The federal government does many things these days—most of which would be more efficiently carried out at the local level, or in the private sector. But Uncle Sam also engages in a particular form of charity that many Americans overlook: spending many tens of billions of dollars to defend wealthy, developed nations.
A new Cato infographic puts it all in perspective. It shows how much American taxpayers spend to subsidize the security, and to defend the interests, of other nations that are more than capable of defending themselves.
The average American spends $2,300 on the military, based on the latest data available. That is roughly four and a half times more than what the average person in other NATO countries spends. These countries boast a collective GDP of approximately $19 trillion, 25 percent higher than the U.S. They obviously can afford to spend more. So why don’t they? Because Uncle Sucker picks up nearly the entire tab.
Looked at another way, U.S. alliances constitute a massive wealth transfer from U.S. taxpayers (and their Chinese creditors) to bloated European welfare states and technologically-advanced Asian nations.
Despite the size and wealth of our allies, they are military dwarfs compared to the United States. The particularly galling comparison is the disparity between what the United States spends on the military as a percentage of the federal budget and what other countries spend on their military relative to total government spending.
While the United States spends 20 percent of the budget on the military, Japan spends a paltry 2.3 percent. Our NATO allies? The average is 3.6 percent. Even South Korea’s share of military spending is roughly half of our total, and they have much bigger threats to worry about. By providing for their security, we have encouraged allies to divert resources elsewhere.
The Constitution stipulates that the federal government should provide for the “common defence.” But the document never talks about providing for the defense of other nations. Their citizens are not party to our unique social contract. On this tax day, you might rest assured that wealthy citizens around the world are grateful that you are defending them, but don’t hold your breath waiting for a word of thanks.
It is time to rethink our alliances and the culture of dependency we have created among our allies. They have become wards to Uncle Sam’s dole. Only by ceasing to foot the security bill for them will we create an incentive for them to spend more.
_____________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Related posts:
Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose (1980), episode 3 – Anatomy of a Crisis. part 1
Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 5-5 How can we have personal freedom without economic freedom? That is why I don’t understand why socialists who value individual freedoms want to take away our economic freedoms. I wanted to share this info below with you from Milton Friedman who has influenced me greatly over the […]
Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 4-5 How can we have personal freedom without economic freedom? That is why I don’t understand why socialists who value individual freedoms want to take away our economic freedoms. I wanted to share this info below with you from Milton Friedman who has influenced me greatly over the […]
Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 3-5 How can we have personal freedom without economic freedom? That is why I don’t understand why socialists who value individual freedoms want to take away our economic freedoms. I wanted to share this info below with you from Milton Friedman who has influenced me greatly over the […]
Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 2-5 How can we have personal freedom without economic freedom? That is why I don’t understand why socialists who value individual freedoms want to take away our economic freedoms. I wanted to share this info below with you from Milton Friedman who has influenced me greatly over the […]
Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 1-5 How can we have personal freedom without economic freedom? That is why I don’t understand why socialists who value individual freedoms want to take away our economic freedoms. I wanted to share this info below with you from Milton Friedman who has influenced me greatly over the […]
I have said for years that the USA should not pay for the defense Germany and Japan. Yes, there were many reasons that was true in the past, but now they are two of our biggest friends and trading partners and they are on our side. Why should we limit their military now? I read […]
We got lots of problems at home with our country’s finances. Then why are we paying for Germany and Japan’s defense? Romney’s Other 47% Problem by Harvey Sapolsky and Benjamin H. Friedman Harvey Sapolsky is professor emeritus of public policy and organization at MIT. His co-author, Benjamin Friedman, is a research fellow at the Cato […]
I used to think that we must double the defense budget when we were in the cold war, but I did wonder why we were not letting Germany and Japan (who are two of our biggest trade partners) build up their defenses. I was given the old tired answer that we could not trust them […]
Over and over I have read that Hugh Hefner was a modern day King Solomonand Hefner’s search for satisfaction was attempted by adding to the number of his sexual experiences.
Chasing the Wind Ecclesiastes 1:2, 12-14; 2:18-26 August 18, 2013 “Meaningless! Meaningless!” says the Teacher. “Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless. I, the Teacher, was king over Israel in Jerusalem. I devoted myself to study and to explore by wisdom all that is done under heaven. What a heavy burden God has laid on men! I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are meaningless, a chasing after the wind. I hated all the things I had toiled for under the sun, because I must leave them to the one who comes after me. And who knows whether he will be a wise man or a fool? Yet he will have control over all the work into which I have poured my effort and skill under the sun. This too is meaningless. So my heart began to despair over all my toilsome labor under the sun. For a man may do his work with wisdom, knowledge and skill, and then he must leave all he owns to someone who has not worked for it. This too is meaningless and a great misfortune. What does a man get for all the toil and anxious striving with which he labors under the sun? All his days his work is pain and grief; even at night his mind does not rest. This too is meaningless. A man can do nothing better than to eat and drink and find satisfaction in his work. This too, I see, is from the hand of God, for without him, who can eat or find enjoyment? To the man who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.” As a child, did you ever try to catch the wind? You ran, you grabbed, you might even have tried to sneak up on it, but you never succeeded. In the book of Ecclesiastes, Solomon tells us that if we approach life without God, our efforts to find joy and meaning in life are nothing more than chasing after the wind. Solomon tried to achieve joy, happiness, and meaning through every avenue available to him, but in the end he concluded that, without God in his life, he would never find what he was after. Worn to a frazzle and throughly frustrated, Solomon concludes: “Meaningless! Meaningless! Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless” (Ec 1:2 NIV). People chase many different winds in their search for fulfillment in this life. However, in the end, life without God is meaningless. Some people learn this and find, in God, everything they’ve been looking for. Others go to their graves with the answer to life still beyond their grasp. There are those people who believe satisfaction lies in one’s occupation, but Solomon warns: “What does a man get for all the toil and anxious striving with which he labors under the sun? All his days his work is pain and grief; even at night his mind does not rest. This too is meaningless” (Ec 2:22-23 NIV). Do you understand what Solomon is saying? Work, work, work. Compete, strategize, plan, sacrifice, travel, worry, lose sleep, skip vacations, add hours, increase responsibility, scratch the right backs, invest, save, risk, work, work, work! After all of that, your life will have meaning and fulfillment, right? Don’t count on it. Scripture tells us it doesn’t work. Solomon says that all the money he had, all the hours, all the plans, all the years of study, and all the investments of time and energy made no difference in the end. Without God at the center of his life, his life was empty and meaningless. Dennis Barnhart was the president of an aggressive company called Eagle Computers, Inc. The company grew incredibly fast from its meager beginning. Barnhart became a multi-millionaire on the day of his company’s public stock offering. While driving his red Ferrari home that day, he lost control of the car, drove through 20 feet of guardrail into a ravine and died. The newspaper account of the accident read: Until about 4:30 Wednesday afternoon, it had been the best of days for Barnhart and his thriving young company. Barnhart’s ownership of 592,000 shares in his little company made him worth nine million dollars. That same afternoon he died in an auto accident. Wealth, ambition, hard word, fame, and status are all just shadows in this life. Like a vapor they are all blown away. The only thing you can take from this life is your relationship with God. Some folks pursue the wind of pleasure. Solomon writes: “A man can do nothing better than to eat and drink and find satisfaction … this too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind” (Ec 2:24, 26 NIV). How could Solomon be so sure about this? He speaks from personal experience. Earlier in chapter two, Solomon writes: “I denied myself nothing my eyes desired; I refused my heart no pleasure. My heart took delight in all my work, and this was the reward for all my labor. Yet when I surveyed all that my hands had done and what I had toiled to achieve, everything was meaningless, a chasing after the wind; nothing was gained under the sun” (Ec 2:10-11 NIV). Many people would agree that if hard work isn’t the key to a meaningful life, then why not sit back, relax, and enjoy the pleasures of life. The Epicureans of ancient Greece lived by the motto “Eat, drink, and be merry.” The Greeks called it “eros” from which we get our work “erotic.” The hedonistic, Hugh Hefner philosophy of personal pleasure above all else is very attractive to many people. But, in the end, does it work? That lifestyle is contrary to what God wants from us, therefore, it can’t succeed. It, too, is just a chasing after the wind. This brings us to the wind of wealth. What about all the things that money can buy to make our lives meaningful and enjoyable? Solomon tried that, too. “I undertook great projects: I built houses for myself and planted vineyards. I made gardens and parks and planted all kinds of fruit trees in them. I made reservoirs to water groves of flourishing trees. I bought male and female slaves and had other slaves who were born in my house. I also owned more herds and flocks than anyone in Jerusalem before me. I amassed silver and gold for myself, and the treasure of kings and provinces. I acquired men and women singers, and a harem as well – the delights of the heart of man. I became greater by far than anyone in Jerusalem before me” (Ec 2:4-9 NIV). Sadly, all of this left Solomon empty. It was all meaningless. His boredom was beyond description. He was like the man in the Gospel lesson. In the end, these things added nothing to his soul. To the lie that says, “If only I can earn enough, buy this or have that, I will be happy,” Solomon says, “Don’t bother, it doesn’t work.” Have you ever known anyone who earns enough, is beautiful enough, has clothes enough, has a house that is furnished enough, has food that is fancy enough, has relationships that are satisfying enough, or a life that is always full enough? Solomon says: “Whoever loves money never has money enough; whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with his income. This too is meaningless” (Ec 5:10 NIV). E. Stanley Jones, in his book Growing Spiritually, talks about a fictional character who lived a fantasy life. All he had to do was think of it and – poof! – it happened! So the man leans back and imagines a mansion and – Poof! – he has a 15 bedroom mansion with servants to wait on his every need. But the place needed several fine cars, so again he closes his eyes and – poof! – there they were. He continues the same lifestyle with travel and fine foods and women and entertainment. And yet, there was something missing. He wasn’t happy. Finally, he grows so terribly bored and unchallenged that he whispers to one of his attendants, “I really want to get out of this. I want to get my old life back again. I’d rather be in hell than be here.” To which one of the servants replies quietly, “Sir, where do you think you are?” Living the life of this world, chasing the winds of self-fulfillment, is useless. There is nothing on this earth that can fill the need in an empty soul. But God offers us a better way. In spite of our selfish and sinful attempts to be our own answer, God graciously gives us a new way of life. God goes beyond our horizontal direction of life and gives us a vertical direction that points to our Savior. In the final chapter of Ecclesiastes, Solomon points us to that vertical direction: Remember your Creator in the days of your youth, before the days of trouble come and the years approach when you will say, “I find no pleasure in them” (Ec 12:1 NIV). This is an ultimate truth: You cannot go through life without the Lord, because it simply doesn’t work. Left to our own resources, life will be meaningless. It can be nothing else. True meaning and direction can only be found in God. The only source for a meaningful life is Jesus Christ. When the human race decided to turn away from God and seek meaning on its own, God didn’t turn away from us. When God had every right to let us suffer the consequences of our own choices, he chose to come to us in the person of Jesus. He came to take the punishment of our sins upon himself so we might see the path to real life. Jesus came to take away our horizontal direction; our lives of frustration and despair and chasing after the wind. He came to save us from false hopes and false dreams; from the lies of Satan, the world, and our own sinful flesh. When Jesus died and rose, he restored our vertical orientation; he restored our relationship with our heavenly Father. Jesus opened the door to real life both in the here and now and in the hereafter. Neither you nor I will ever be able to catch the wind. We will never find true meaning living the life of this world, and that’s okay, because God has given his Son so that we might find our meaning in him.
Many of the sermons that I heard or read that inspired me to write Hugh Hefner were from this list of gentlemen: Daniel Akin, Brandon Barnard, Alistair Begg, Matt Chandler, George Critchley, Darryl Dash, Steve DeWitt, Steve Gaines, Norman L. Geisler, Greg Gillbert, Billy Graham, Mark Henry, Dan Jarrell, Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., R. G. Lee, C.S. Lewis Chris Lewis, Kerry Livgren, Robert Lewis, Bill Parkinson, Ben Parkinson,Vance Pitman, Nelson Price, Ethan Renoe, Adrian Rogers, Philip Graham Ryken, Francis Schaeffer, Lee Strobel, Bill Wellons, Kirk Wetsell, Ken Whitten, Ed Young , Ravi Zacharias, Tom Zobrist, and Richard Zowie.
In the next few weeks I will be posting some letters that I sent to Hugh Hefner that were based primarily on the sermon series BETTER THAN which is a study in the BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES done by our pastors at FELLOWSHIP BIBLE CHURCH in Little Rock in 2016. Our teaching pastors here are Mark Henry,
Ben Parkinson
and Brandon Barnard.
Today’s letter is based on a sermon by Brandon Barnard.
February 21, 2016
Hugh Hefner Playboy Mansion 10236 Charing Cross Road Los Angeles, CA 90024-1815
Dear Mr. Hefner,
In the entry HUGH M. HEFNER, Encyclopedia of World Biography | 2004, are the following words:
Hugh Hefner (born 1926), founder and publisher of Playboy magazine, helped usher in a new era of openness in American Culture.
The immediate success of the magazine prompted Hefner to establish a proper office and staff for the magazine, and as of the fourth issue the Playboy empire was officially under way. Hefner’s devotion to the magazine in its early years precipitated the breakup of his marriage: Hefner and his wife Millie were separated in 1957 and divorced in 1959. As he and his wife became increasingly estranged, Hefner and his associates began to embody the life-style about which they wrote, having almost weekly parties at the Playboy editorial offices. When the success of the magazine came to the attention of the mainstream public, Hefner was happy to portray himself as the playboy his magazine described. In 1959 he even hosted the television series “Playboy’s Penthouse,” a weekly talk show set in a bachelor pad, featuring plenty of the magazine’s “playmates” and celebrities such as comedian Lenny Bruce and singers Ella Fitzgerald and Nat King Cole.
Pursuit of Pleasure
For Hefner, his magazine and image were responses to the new mood of the country. He felt that the puritan ethic was eroding and that the pursuit of pleasureand material gain was the way of life for many Americans. As Hefner has been quoted, “If you had to sum up the idea of Playboy, it is antipuritanism. Not just in regard to sex, but the whole range of play and pleasure.” For many the Playboy philosophy proved to be a welcome antidote from the repressive atmosphere of the 1950s. Over the years it has continued to have its followers, and Hefner’s small magazine for men has become an empire extending well beyond magazine publishing.It may be ironic but on 2-14-16 our teaching pastor at FELLOWSHIP BIBLE CHURCH Brandon Barnard named his sermon IS THERE VANITY IN PLEASURE? (Valentine’s Day!!!!).If there was one word to describe your life the word PLEASURE is probably that word. As you know I have written you every week since October of 2015 in the hope that you will be willing to reflect back on your life of pleasure UNDER THE SUN like King Solomon did and see what proper reflections your life has rendered. Francis Schaeffer has rightly noted concerning you that your goal with the “playboy mentality is just to smash the puritanical ethnic.” In fact, in your own personal life you definitely have gone the opposite direction of Puritanism.(Francis and Edith Schaeffer pictured below)
Here are just a few points from Brandon’s sermon today from Ecclesiastes chapter 2:Solomon said to his heart PURSUE PLEASURE AND DON’T WITHHOLD ANYTHING. This passage talks about LAUGHTER, WINE, GARDENS, ART and all the things he consumed that would bring him pleasure and indeed they did bring pleasure to him for a season, but in the end it was all VANITY, EMPTINESS, and MEANINGLESS. Ecclesiastes 2:1-11 The Message (MSG)
2 1-3 I said to myself, “Let’s go for it—experiment with pleasure, have a good time!” But there was nothing to it, nothing but smoke.
What do I think of the fun-filled life? Insane! Inane! My verdict on the pursuit of happiness? Who needs it? With the help of a bottle of wine and all the wisdom I could muster, I tried my level best to penetrate the absurdity of life. I wanted to get a handle on anything useful we mortals might do during the years we spend on this earth.
I Never Said No to Myself
4-8 Oh, I did great things:
built houses, planted vineyards, designed gardens and parks and planted a variety of fruit trees in them, made pools of water to irrigate the groves of trees. I bought slaves, male and female, who had children, giving me even more slaves; then I acquired large herds and flocks, larger than any before me in Jerusalem. I piled up silver and gold, loot from kings and kingdoms. I gathered a chorus of singers to entertain me with song, and—most exquisite of all pleasures— voluptuous maidens for my bed.
9-10 Oh, how I prospered! I left all my predecessors in Jerusalem far behind, left them behind in the dust. What’s more, I kept a clear head through it all. Everything I wanted I took—I never said no to myself. I gave in to every impulse, held back nothing. I sucked the marrow of pleasure out of every task—my reward to myself for a hard day’s work!
I Hate Life
11 Then I took a good look at everything I’d done, looked at all the sweat and hard work. But when I looked, I saw nothing but smoke. Smoke and spitting into the wind. There was nothing to any of it. Nothing.YOU AND I WERE HARDWIRED TO PURSUE OUR OWN PLEASURE. That is interesting because some people in the church feel a little bit guilty about this and they think that our lives should be only about suffering and surrendering when it comes to following Christ, but that statement shouldn’t take you by surprise. Solomon said he didn’t deny himself anything. People are looking for pleasure in their relationships and in food and in their cars, clothes, houses and travel. Pleasure is a gift from God. 1 Corinthians 10:31English Standard Version (ESV)
31 So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
Whether it is beauty such as gardens or art or if it is sex in the confines of marriage, whether it is hobbies like golf or hunting. Yet if you make these things the point of life and the goal then ultimately it doesn’t lead to joy but to destruction. These are things that are meant to point us to the pleasure of knowing Christ.
Blaise Pascal said, “All men seek happiness, this without exception. Whatever different means they employ, they all tend to this end.”
Proverbs 14:13English Standard Version (ESV)
13 Even in laughter the heart may ache, and the end of joy may be grief.
If pleasure doesn’t find it’s end in Christ then it will not ultimately satisfy.
Saint Augustine observed, “Our hearts are restless until they find their rest in Thee.”
PS: This is the 19th letter I have written to you and again I have taken an aspect of your life and responded with what the Bible has to say on that subject. Today we looked at your quote “If you had to sum up the idea of Playboy, it is antipuritanism. Not just in regard to sex, but the whole range of play and pleasure.” Solomon tried your lifestyle and your ANTIPURITANISM and he concluded “I saw nothing but smoke. Smoke and spitting into the wind. There was nothing to any of it. Nothing.”
Lari Pittman was born in Los Angeles, California, in 1952. Pittman received both a BFA (1974) and an MFA (1976) from California Institute of the Arts, Valencia. Inspired by commercial advertising, folk art, and decorative traditions, his meticulously layered paintings transform pattern and signage into luxurious scenes fraught with complexity, difference, and desire. In a manner both visually gripping and psychologically strange, Pittman’s hallucinatory works reference myriad aesthetic styles, from Victorian silhouettes to social realist murals to Mexican “retablos.”
Pittman uses anthropomorphic depictions of furniture, weapons, and animals—loaded with symbolism—to convey themes of romantic love, violence, and mortality. His paintings and drawings are a personal rebellion against rigid, puritanical dichotomies. They demonstrate the complementary nature of beauty and suffering, pain and pleasure—and direct the viewer’s attention to bittersweet experiences and the value of sentimentality in art. Despite subject matter that changes from series to series, Pittman’s deployment of simultaneously occurring narratives and opulent imagery reflects the rich heterogeneity of American society, the artist’s Colombian heritage, and the distorting effects of hyper-capitalism on everyday life.
Pittman has received many awards, including a Pacific Design Center Stars of Design Award (2004); the Skowhegan Medal (2002); and three fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts (1987, 1989, 1993). He has had major exhibitions at Institute of Contemporary Arts, London (1998); Los Angeles County Museum of Art (1996); and Contemporary Arts Museum, Houston (1996). He has participated in the Venice Biennale (2003); Documenta × (1997); and three Whitney Biennial exhibitions (1993, 1995, 1997). Pittman lives and works in Los Angeles.
I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were short and from one of Hef’s favorite […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)
I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were short and from one of Hef’s favorite […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)
I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were short and from one of Hef’s favorite […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)
I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were short and from one of Hef’s […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)
_ I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were short and from one of […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)
_____ I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were short and from one of Hef’s […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)
_____ I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)
_____ I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Atheists Confronted | Edit | Comments (0)
|I saw this on the internet on June 20, 2017 _ Playboy’s Hugh Hefner on board a boat with Barbi Benton and friends sporting a striped navy shirt and a pipe in mouth and a real catch in hand during the 70s. ____________________________________ Below is the last letter I ever wrote to Hugh Hefner. […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Atheists Confronted, Francis Schaeffer | Edit |Comments (0)
I learned yesterday that Hugh Hefner had passed away. Just last year I visited Chicago and drove by his Chicago Playboy Mansion pictured below. ___ Playboy after dark filmed in Chicago Playboy Mansion During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Atheists Confronted, Francis Schaeffer, Milton Friedman | Edit| Comments (0)By Everette Hatcher III, on November 15, 2017 at 5:20 am
Office of Barack and Michelle Obama P.O. Box 91000 Washington, DC 20066
Dear President Obama,
I wrote you over 700 letters while you were President and I mailed them to the White House and also published them on my blog http://www.thedailyhatch.org .I received several letters back from your staff and I wanted to thank you for those letters.
I have been reading your autobiography A PROMISED LAND and I have been enjoying it.
As an evangelical believer I am encouraged by your references to spiritual hymns, but your intellectual views seem to place you in the secular humanist school of thought.
Former President Barack Obama’s new book, “A Promised Land,” mentions only four pages in its index under the category “faith and.”
But the title of the book by the 44th U.S. president invokes biblical imagery — a land promised by God to his people — and Obama includes the role of religious institutions, faith leaders and personal traditions throughout the 750-page book. On the page after his dedication of the tome to his wife and daughters, Obama features the words from an African American spiritual:
“Fly and never tire
There’s a great camp-meeting in the Promised Land.”
While friends and strangers have told him they believe God engineered his road to the White House, Obama says he didn’t view his political path as a call from the Almighty.
(Pari Dukovic/Random House via AP) This photo provided by Random House shows the cover of “A Promised Land.” The first volume of former President Barack Obama’s memoir came out Nov. 17.
“I suspect that God’s plan, whatever it is, works on a scale too large to admit our mortal tribulations; that in a single lifetime, accidents and happenstance determine more than we care to admit,” he writes, “and that the best we can do is to try to align ourselves with what we feel is right and construct some meaning out of our confusion, and with grace and nerve play at each moment the hand that we’re dealt.”
Here are five faith facts about Obama from his highly anticipated book released Tuesday:
He’d rephrase his ‘guns or religion’ remark.
Obama was asked at a 2008 California fundraising event for wealthy donors why he thought working-class Pennsylvania voters opted for Republicans. His response included the words “they cling to guns or religion,” referring to frustration over job losses in their region.
The former president calls that response “my biggest mistake of the campaign,” one that he said could have been due to fatigue or impatience.
“Even today, I want to take that sentence back and make a few simple edits,” Obama writes. “I would say in my revised version: ‘and they look to the traditions and way of life that have been constants in their lives, whether it’s their faith, or hunting, or blue-collar work, or more traditional notions of family and community.’”
He said “the best policies in the world don’t matter to them” when Republicans tell working-class people that Democrats oppose traditions they may cherish. He later notes that Sarah Palin, Republican opponent John McCain’s running mate, included his original words during her 2008 Republican National Convention speech.
—-
When you examine the words “they cling to guns or religion” it leads one to believe that you don’t value clinging to your Christian beliefs?
President Obama your views are more in line with those of atheistic evolutionists than those scientists such as Isaac Newton who believed in creationism. I had the unique opportunity from 2015 to 2020 to correspond with a famous Harvard educated British scientist named Professor Horace Barlow of Cambridge. Barlow was named after his grandfather Horace Darwin. Most of the correspondence between Dr. Barlow and myself dealt with the views of Barlow’s famous great grandfather Charles Darwin.
—-
—
In his letter on November 22, 2017 Dr. Barlow asserted:
One reason I am interested in this topic is the selfish one that I have never been able to decide how to describe my own religious beliefs. If I declare my an atheist, I cannot help asking myself “Who am I to set at naught a concept that has guided the life of so many people, some of whom I hold the very deepest respect?”
On the other hand, if I am pressed to say whether I think belief in God helps people to make wise and beneficial decisions I am bound to say (and I fear this will cause you pain) No, it is often very disastrous, leading to violence, death and vile behaviour, as with the current quarrel with Muslim terrorists, and as has been shown by inter-sectal violence within the Christian Church itself. Furthermore, I feel that many religious doctrines, such as Papal Infallibility, are absolutely appalling, and the same goes for many political policies supported by many different religions.
This prompted later to send Dr. Barlow this letter below on March 2, 2019, (Steven Weinberg, what is meant by God?)
Charles Darwin
220 × 289Images may be subject to copyright. Learn More
Steven Weinberg
496 × 744Images may be subject to copyright. Learn MoreFrancis Schaeffer
200 × 238Images may be subject to copyright. Learn More
_____________________
March 2, 2019
Dr. Horace Barlow, Department of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Downing Street,Physiological Laboratory, Cambridge United Kingdom,
Dear Dr. Barlow,
Have you wondered why so many people throw out the word “God” so much? Your great grandfather Charles Darwin saw it as silly too. So many people were using the word God to mean something much different than the traditional Biblical view.InSteven Weinberg’s book DREAMS OF A FINAL THEORY he asserted:
And coming to that point which I think we will come to, some would say, well, then the explanation is God made it so. And I suppose that’s a natural reaction to this dilemma. Unfortunately to me it seems quite unsatisfactory. Either by God you mean something definite or you don’t mean something definite. If by God you mean a personality who is concerned about human beings, who did all this out of love for human beings, who watches us and who intervenes, then I would have to say in the first place how do you know, what makes you think so?And in the second place, is that really an explanation? If that’s true, what explains that? Why is there such a God? It isn’t the end of the chain of whys, it just is another step, and you have to take the step beyond that.I think much more often, however, when a physicist says, “Well, then the explanation is God,” they don’t mean anything particular by it. That’s just the word they apply. Einstein said that he didn’t believe in a God who was concerned with human affairs, who intervenes in human life, but a God who was simply an abstract principle of harmony and order.
And so then I rather grieve that they use the word “God,” because I do think one should have some loyalty to the way words are used historically, and that’s not what people have historically meant by “God” – not an abstract principle of harmony and order. If that’s all you mean by it, if God is practically synonymous with the laws of nature, then we don’t need the word. Why not just say the laws of nature? It isn’t that it’s wrong, because after all G-O-D is just a set of letters of the alphabet, and you can let it mean anything you like. But if language is to be of any use to us, we ought to try to preserve the meanings of words, and “God” historically has not meant the laws of nature. It has meant an interested personality. And that’s not something we’re finding scientifically. It’s not something for which I see any evidence.
I totally agree with you that these scientists have twisted the word GOD unfairly. It reminds of what Charles Darwin had to say about this issue.
“Mr. Darwin begs me to say that he receives so many letters, that he cannot answer them all.
“He considers that the theory of Evolution is quite compatible with the belief in a God; but that you must remember that different persons have different definitions of what they mean by God.”
Francis Schaeffer commented on Darwin’s autobiography:
You find a great confusion in his writings although there is a general structure in them. Here he says the word “God” is alright but you find later what he doesn’t take is a personal God. Of course, what you open is the whole modern linguistics concerning the word “God.” is God a pantheistic God? What kind of God is God? Darwin says there is nothing incompatible with the word “God.”
Steven Weinberg said of the the personal God of the Bible, “It’s not something for which I see any evidence.” Let me give you some.
TRUTH AND HISTORY (chapter 5 of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?)
In the previous chapter we saw that the Bible gives us the explanation for the existence of the universe and its form and for the mannishness of man. Or, to reverse this, we came to see that the universe and its form and the mannishness of man are a testimony to the truth of the Bible. In this chapter we will consider a third testimony: the Bible’s openness to verification by historical study.
Christianity involves history. To say only that is already to have said something remarkable, because it separates the Judeo-Christian world-view from almost all other religious thought. It is rooted in history.
The Bible tells us how God communicated with man in history. For example, God revealed Himself to Abraham at a point in time and at a particular geographical place. He did likewise with Moses, David, Isaiah, Daniel and so on. The implications of this are extremely important to us. Because the truth God communicated in the Bible is so tied up with the flow of human events, it is possible by historical study to confirm some of the historical details.
It is remarkable that this possibility exists. Compare the information we have from other continents of that period. We know comparatively little about what happened in Africa or South America or China or Russia or even Europe. We see beautiful remains of temples and burial places, cult figures, utensils, and so forth, but there is not much actual “history” that can be reconstructed, at least not much when compared to that which is possible in the Middle East.
When we look at the material which has been discovered from the Nile to the Euphrates that derives from the 2500-year span before Christ, we are in a completely different situation from that in regard to South America or Asia. The kings of Egypt and Assyria built thousands of monuments commemorating their victories and recounting their different exploits. Whole libraries have been discovered from places like Nuzu and Mari and most recently at Elba, which give hundreds of thousands of texts relating to the historical details of their time. It is within this geographical area that the Bible is set. So it is possible to find material which bears upon what the Bible tells us.
The Bible purports to give us information on history. Is the history accurate? The more we understand about the Middle East between 2500 B.C. and A.D. 100, the more confident we can be that the information in the Bible is reliable, even when it speaks about the simple things of time and place.
Debating from 2015-2020 Darwin’s great grandson (Horace Barlow) about Francis Schaeffer’s 1968 critique of Darwinism!
The autobiography of Charles Darwin read by Francis Schaeffer in 1968 was not the same one originally released in 1892 because that one omitted the religious statements of Charles Darwin.
pictured below with his eldest child William:
Notice this statement below from the Freedom from Religion Foundation:
(Nora Barlow pictured below)
Charles Darwin wrote the Rev. J. Fordyce on July 7, 1879, that “an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind.” Darwin penned his memoirs between the ages of 67 and 73, finishing the main text in 1876. These memoirs were published posthumously in 1887 by his family under the title Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, with his hardest-hitting views on religion excised. Only in 1958 did Darwin’s granddaughter Nora Barlow publish his Autobiography with original omissions restored D. 1882. ——-
Charles Robert Darwin (1809 – 1882) had 10 children and 7 of them survived to adulthood.
Sir Horace Darwin, KBE, FRS (13 May 1851 – 22 September 1928), the fifth son and ninth child of the British naturalist Charles Darwin and his wife Emma, the youngest of their seven children who survived to adulthood.
(Horace Darwin pictured below)
Emma Nora Barlow, Lady Barlow (née Darwin; 22 December 1885 – 29 May 1989) Nora, as she was known, was the daughter of the civil engineer Sir Horace Darwin and his wife The Hon. Lady Ida Darwin (née Farrer),
Horace Darwin married Emma Cecilia “Ida” Farrer (1854–1946) pictured below.
—-
Francis Schaeffer
Horace Barlow was the son of Nora Barlow. From February 11, 2015 to July 1, 2017, I wrote 7 letters to Dr. Horace Barlow because I wanted to discuss primarily the views of his grandfather CharlesDarwin and Francis Schaeffer’s 1968 critique of Darwinism!
In December of 2017, I received a two page typed letter from Dr. Barlow reacting to several of the points made in the previous letters and emails. Over the next few weeks I will be posting the 32 letters I wrote to Dr. Barlow from February 11, 2015 to April 18, 2020 one per week every Tuesday and below is a list of those letters. Sadly Dr. Barlow passed away on July 5, 2020 at age 98. However, I want to summarize some the issues we discussed in the next few days.
Franicis Schaeffer
If you wish to hear Francis Schaeffer’s 1968 talk on Darwin’s autobiography then you can access part 1 at this link and part 2 at this link.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733 everettehatcher@gmail.com
President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. There have […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers, President Obama | Edit |Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
President Obama Speaks at The Ohio State University Commencement Ceremony Published on May 5, 2013 President Obama delivers the commencement address at The Ohio State University. May 5, 2013. You can learn a lot about what President Obama thinks the founding fathers were all about from his recent speech at Ohio State. May 7, 2013, […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)
Dr. C. Everett Koop with Bill Graham. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit |Comments (1)
America’s Founding Fathers Deist or Christian? – David Barton 4/6 There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Tagged governor of connecticut, john witherspoon, jonathan trumbull | Edit | Comments (1)
3 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton There were 55 gentlemen who put together the constitution and their church affliation is of public record. Greg Koukl notes: Members of the Constitutional Convention, the most influential group of men shaping the political foundations of our nation, were […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
I do not think that John Quincy Adams was a founding father in the same sense that his father was. However, I do think he was involved in the early days of our government working with many of the founding fathers. Michele Bachmann got into another history-related tussle on ABC’s “Good Morning America” today, standing […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit |Comments (0)
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ____________ The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book really helped develop my political […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)
Last week, I reported on a coordinated and completely illegal votes-for-cash scheme in tribal areas of Nevada, spearheaded by a group called the Nevada Native Vote Project, which is part of a larger effort called Native Votefunded by the National Congress of American Indians, or NCAI.
Under the guise of a get-out-the-vote campaign, these nonprofit groups were bribing tribal members to vote, offering them gift cards, electronics, and other “prizes” in exchange for proof that they voted. They documented these efforts through their own social media channels, either unaware or unconcerned that what they were doing directly violates federal election laws.
But it turns out the Nevada Native Vote Project is just one of many supposedly nonpartisan organizations engaged in vote-bribing and illegal electioneering, all under the thin guise of GOTV campaigns. Similar efforts in as many as a half-dozen other states, including every major battleground state, were undertaken by groups that worked hand in hand with the Biden campaign to deliver votes for Democrats.
These GOTV Campaigns Are Openly Partisan
One of these groups is called Radicalize the Vote, a “GOTV campaign, led by indigenous womxn, that is building a unique, centralized indigenous registration list to get out the vote in record number during the COVID-10.” The campaign is a partnership between NCAI-funded Native Vote and an organization called Seeding Sovereignty, which describes itself as “an Indigenous-led collective,” that “works to radicalize and disrupt colonized spaces through land, body, and food sovereignty work, community building, and cultural preservation.” Seeding Sovereignty and Radicalize the Vote appear to sharestaff.
Although claiming to be a nonpartisan group, Radicalize the Vote was remarkably open about its opposition to President Trump, posting a photo on its official Instagram pagethat read: “Every Trump sign is a desperate plea for toxic white supremacy to be seen and validated. It should remind you how fragile and threatened colonizers feel knowing their beliefs are dying an unremarkable and pitiful death.”
Another Radicalize the Vote post showed a photo of Ivanka Trump and law enforcement officers with the comment, “Halloween was scary. #vote #vote #vote #vote.”
In another post, a member of the group’s “digital youth street team” explains why she’s voting: “I’m voting for Breonna Taylor, who doesn’t have the opportunity to vote this year but whose voice needs to be heard. I’m voting for the babies in cages at the border. I’m voting so that our lands and waters will be protected for generations to come.”
Radicalize the Vote also posted an interviewwith Rep. Deb Haaland, in which the New Mexico congresswoman goes on at length about the importance of electing Biden and how great the Biden campaign’s policies are on things like climate change and health care. As Haaland talks, two Radicalize the Vote staffers nod along in agreement.
It also appears that Seeding Sovereignty is sympathetic to the goals of anarchist and Antifa groups, in one case giving a shout out on its Instagram page to a group called the Black Rose Anarchist Federation: “Social Movements have a long history of success and Empires have fallen before. All of us carry valuable tools for revolution. Plug in where you are needed! Thank you blackrosefed.org”
This Was A Coordinated Effort Nationwide
The creation and funding of groups like Radicalize the Vote seems to be just one part of a larger, highly coordinated effort to deliver Native votes for the Democratic Party and the Biden campaign. In some cases, these efforts received indirect assistance from state lawmakers and election officials.
In Nevada, the state legislature not only expanded voting by mail, sending ballots to every eligible voter whether he or she requested one or not, it also passed a law in August that allowed for nearly unrestricted ballot-harvesting of absentee ballots. The new law allowed non-family members, community health representatives, political parties, community organizers, and groups like Radicalize the Vote and the Nevada Native Vote Project to pick up absentee ballots from voters in tribal areas.
In Arizona, which Trump lost by three-tenths of a percentage point, Secretary of State Kate Hobbs’ office set up special online voter registration URLs for select nonprofit groups back in May. The stated goal was to increase voter registration, but the online registrations were heavily promoted by left-wing groups like Native Vote. The special URLs were only given out to a handful of nonpartisan groups, including the Phoenix Indian Center, which in turn amplified GOTV messaging from Native Vote on its Facebook page.
These kind of interlacing efforts were ubiquitous in the months leading up to the election. Official Democratic Party events in Arizona routinely featured the same Democrat speakers as Radicalize the Vote teleconferences—namely, Haaland and actor Mark Ruffalo, but also official Democratic candidates like Paulette Jordan, a member of the Coeur d’Alene Tribe and a former Idaho state legislator who ran and lost against GOP incumbent Sen. Jim Risch.
The Biden campaign also worked closely with Native Vote and Radicalize the Vote, promoting the latter through its “Natives for Biden” social media account and often showing up to distribute campaign swag at polling precincts in cooperation with Native Vote and the Nevada Native Project.
These efforts were part of a concerted outreach strategy by the Biden camp, which in July hired Clara Pratte, former chief of staff for Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye, as “tribal engagement director” for the campaign.
The effects of all these efforts are hard to quantify and, like voter fraud itself, harder still to prove. But it’s obvious that an entire network of Native advocacy organizations, together with left-wing activists groups and the Democratic Party, worked together to deliver votes for Biden under the pretext of running GOTV campaigns.
And it appears to have helped, especially in swing states like Arizona where voter turnout on tribal lands surged compared to 2016. Pratte told the Associated Press that Biden’s razor-thin victory in Arizona couldn’t have happened without the Native vote, and as a reporter for the Arizona Republic noted on Twitter, a side-by-side comparison of tribal areas and election results shows that Native communities across the state overlay almost perfectly with areas that voted Democrat.
It’s the same story in Wisconsin, another key battleground state that Biden won by less than 21,000 votes. Native Americans make up about 1.2 percent of the state’s population, or about 70,000 people, so their votes really matter—and might have been decisive.
Although there isn’t accurate exit polling of tribal areas statewide, places like Menominee County can be seen as a bellwether. The border of the county traces the Menominee reservation, whose inhabitants are 90 percent Native. Biden took Menominee County 82-13. In fact, Biden won all seven Wisconsin counties with large Native American populations.
This Is A Crisis That Can’t Be Ignored
It’s undeniable that groups like Native Vote and Radicalize the Vote, supported with funding from the NCAI, have had an outsized effect on the presidential election. It’s also undeniable that they were flagrantly violating federal election laws and acting not as nonpartisan organizations just trying to increase voter turnout, but arms of the Biden campaign and the Democratic Party.
Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of True the Vote, a group that’s been advocating for accountability and transparency in elections for a decade, told me that this sort of illegal activity has been going on for years. The difference is that drastic changes to mail-in voting, enacted in the name of the pandemic, caused “the dam to burst in 2020.”
The groups that pushed for mass mail-in voting this year, Engelbrecht added, are the same groups that have been suing states for years to prevent them from updating voter rolls. Once you expand mail-in voting with corrupted voter rolls, and then allow ballot-harvesting on a mass scale, it’s like “harvesting fog,” says Engelbrecht. “The fraud has been institutionalized, and we’ve been desensitized to it.”
At a time Trump’s legal team is distracting the country with exotic and implausible theories that Dominion and other shadowy forces stole the election though high-tech vote switching, not enough attention is being paid to the very quotidian and all-too-familiar forms of illegal electioneering and ballot fraud that are right in front of us.
These things happen every election season, of course. The only difference is that this time they happened on a mass scale, in broad daylight, sometimes with the cooperation of state officials. It doesn’t necessarily mean the election was stolen from Trump, but it does means something perhaps worse: unless we fix this, Americans will never trust our elections again.
John is the Political Editor at The Federalist. Follow him on Twitter.
Biden Won Despite Losing Most Bellwether Counties
Biden is set to become the first president in 60 years to lose the states of Ohio and Florida on his way to election. For a century, these states have consistently predicted the national outcome, and they have been considered roughly representative of the American melting pot as a whole. Despite national polling giving Biden a lead in both states, he lost Ohio by eight points and Florida by more than three.
For Biden to lose these key bellwethers by notable margins and still win the national election is newsworthy. Not since the Mafia allegedly aided John F. Kennedy in winning Illinois over Richard Nixon in 1960 has an American president pulled off this neat trick.
Even more unbelievably, Biden is on his way to winning the White House after having lost almost every historic bellwether county across the country. The Wall Street Journal and The Epoch Times independently analyzed the results of 19 counties around the United States that have nearly perfect presidential voting records over the last 40 years. President Trump won every single bellwether county, except Clallam County in Washington.
Whereas the former VP picked up Clallam by about three points, President Trump’s margin of victory in the other 18 counties averaged over 16 points. In a larger list of 58 bellwether counties that have correctly picked the president since 2000, Trump won 51 of them by an average of 15 points, while the other seven went to Biden by around four points. Bellwether counties overwhelmingly chose President Trump, but Biden found a path to victory anyway.
Joe Biden achieved the impossible. It’s interesting that many more journalists aren’t pointing that out.
J.B. Shurk is a proud American from Daniel Boone country
Documents show financial ties between ERLC & left-wing George Soros Open Society Foundations, Pierre Omidyar of the Democracy Fund, and Paul Singer of the American Unity Fund.
A report from Enemies within the Church, printed below, contains documents obtained by the filmmakers that link grants and funding from leftist billionaires to the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) of the Southern Baptist Convention and its head Russell Moore. The documents include grant data showing the Democracy Fund provided $50,000 to the controversial ERLC’s and The Gospel Coalition’s MLK50 Conference
Other documents in the report include Dr. Moore’s name in the Podesta emails published in 2016 by Wikileaks.
On Friday, November 6, the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Commission (ERLC) posted a statement on its website:
“Currently, there has been no evidence that voter fraud has been occurring…
“There are numerous reasons why widespread election fraud is difficult, if not impossible, to pull off at the presidential level… Extensive research has shown that voter fraud is exceeding rare, that voter impersonation is virtually nonexistent, and that many instances of alleged fraud are merely mistakes by voters or election administrators.”
The article is attributed to the “ERLC Staff,” and the statement is date-stamped November 6, 2020, at which point a number of states had not fully resolved allegations of balloting improprieties: most notably Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. It is difficult not to assume that the ERLC (Ethics and Religious Leadership Council) is purposefully seeking to influence the election outcome for primarily two reasons: (1) Dr. Russell Moore, the president of the ERLC, has consistently and publicly opposed Donald Trump and actively sought to undermine his evangelical reach, and (2) the ERLC seems to have financial ties to at least three progressive billionaire activists: left-wing George Soros of Open Society Foundations, Pierre Omidyar of the Democracy Fund, and Paul Singer of the American Unity Fund.
Who are these donors? Are they influencing the ERLC?
Behind Billionaire Door #1: George Soros
Dr. Moore’s ties to George Soros have been the subject of heated debate. At various times, those sympathetic to Dr. Moore have denied that he receives funds from Soros. Denials have hinged on arguments about whether the National Immigration Forum (NIF) and the Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) – both progressive organizations – are actually the same thing. EWTC was able to obtain what appear to be authentic internal documents from a 2015 meeting in New York of the Open Society U.S. Programs Board;
These should put debate to rest.
George Soros’ Open Society Foundations have been clear that they hope to infuse left-wing ideology into every community of discourse that exists. To broaden the influence of his radical agenda, he has made a point to fund “rent-an-evangelical” schemes like the kind underscored in a cautionary article by Stream writer John Zmirak four years ago:
Joining “faith” fronts, Soros also funds thousands of … collaborators and projects that suggest his goal is to demoralize America (and Europe)… In the ironic rhetoric of compassion, Soros and friends also fund mass immigration followed by voting “rights” and redistricting schemes, while financing the campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. (Soros is a major donor to the Democratic Party and co-chairman of Ready for Hillary PAC.)
Earlier this year, Baptist Standard ran an article disputing “rumors” that Russell Moore received funding from Soros’ foundations. Dr. Moore and the ERLC have found themselves in the crosshairs of Soros-related debates because of Moore’s active involvement with the EIT. A document from November 13, 2012, addressed to President Obama clearly lists the ERLC alongside nine other groups as the groups comprising the EIT: World Relief Corporation, Sojourners, Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, Bread for the World, Liberty Counsel, National Association of Evangelicals, National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, National Latino Evangelical Coalition, World Vision, and G92.
In 2013, spokespeople for the EIT had already admitted to Breitbart News that their group “does not exist as its own non-profit” and “sought a neutral third-party institution, the NIF, to help facilitate our work.” Despite the strenuous denials that Mr. Soros’ money was involved, it is clear that the “facilitation” of the EIT depends on a structure financed by Mr. Soros, the NIF. Any doubt of separation between the initiatives now hold no weight since Dr. Moore is prominently listed as a speaker for the 2020 convention of the NIF and has his own webpage on the NIF website.
EWTC obtained meeting notes from “OPEN SOCIETY US PROGRAMS BOARD MEETING,” hosted by Open Society Foundations in New York City on October 1-2, 2015. One section of the meeting notes states the following:
“In part, our active role reflects our observation that the refugee advocacy community while long-standing and sophisticated in the inner workings of refugee policy, does not have a strong advocacy capacity or deep grassroots ties. In the course of our work, we were able to generate engagement by a group of mayors through Emma Lazarus II Fund grantee Cities United for Immigration Action… and some conservative voices such as evangelical Christians and Southern Baptists through grantee NIF. In the face of this pressure, the Obama administration announced Sept. 20 that by 2017, it would raise to 100,000 the total number of refugees the US takes worldwide each year. “
The bolded section above makes clear that the Open Society Foundations earmarked a grant to the NIF, specifically so funds could be channeled to the Southern Baptist Convention in exchange for the SBC’s help in putting “pressure” on officials to raise the number of refugees the US could take in.
EWTC obtained the following three documents showing the undeniable purpose of a significant funding stream earmarked by Open Society Foundations for Dr. Moore’s clique at the ERLC:
ERLC:
As more refugee resettlement means more grants to faith-based organizations to resettle refugees a great potential for corruption exists. The North American Mission Boardoversees the SEND Network, which plants churches. These plants stand to gain if they can pitch their efforts as community revitalization; something that pairs neatly with refugee resettlement. One vice president of the SEND Network is Dhati Lewis, whose ties to the ERLC are evident by his appearance on their website. Dhati Lewis also takes the stage prominently with Kevin Ezell, leader of the SBC’s North American Mission Board. Kevin Ezell’s leadership of NAMB has been fraught with controversy, as one can see quite clearly by following the website of Will McRaney, a Southern Baptist who has spent years documenting the corruption at NAMB online.
Dr. Moore has tied ostensible gospel efforts to a political lobby funded by George Soros, a man who opposes Biblical doctrine on ethics, life, sexuality, etc., and who openly says he wishes to invest large amounts of money in any willing evangelical that can spin his left-wing politics into a “Christian” endeavor.
Behind Billionaire Door #2: Pierre Omidyar
Russell Moore survived the 2017 post election push-back, becoming emboldened even further the following year during a conference marking the fiftieth anniversary of the death of Martin Luther King, Jr. The “MLK 50” Conference brought out rhetoric that was not merely liberal or Democratic, but overtly steeped in critical race theory.
What does the billionaire founder of e-Bay, have to do with a Southern Baptist conference? As Omidyar has a philanthropist streak that delights some progressives and dismays others, it’s not difficult to identify his stake in the conference. In an interview with EWTC, progressive musician Michelle Shocked (who happens to be Christian) explained that Mr. Omidyar has a hybrid philosophy of philanthropy, believing that a charity without a profit motive would be suspect. Therefore Omidyar liked to cast his social-justice pursuits as “charity on a for-profit model.” Pando writer Mark Ames explained this laid this philosophy: He says, “Perhaps no other figure embodies the disconnect between his progressive anti-state image, and his factual collaboration with the American national security state and the global neoliberal agenda, than Pierre Omidyar.”
To clarify this, Ms. Shocked provided several articles by left-wing Yasha Levine. Mr. Levine has flagged the relationship between Pierre Omidyar and Brazil-based journalist Glenn Greenwald as problematic. Mr. Omidyar funded the creation of the Intercept by Glenn Greenwald. Mr. Greenwald built the Intercept into a vibrant online news and commentary source but then ran afoul of management (and presumably, Omidyar), when Intercept principals told him he could not publish anything critical of Joe Biden. Yasha Levine explains the deceptive nature of Omidyar’s political involvement:
“Pierre’s surprising generousness — combined with the fact that he seemed to be on the Good Side, on the side of Edward Snowden and his NSA leaks — brought the man a huge amount of good will… Even now, while Silicon Valley’s leadership — from Zuck to Bezos — have been getting knocked about and criticized from every angle, Pierre has been able to skate by with no critical attention thrown his way, despite his involvement in funding far-right regime change ops, global surveillance projects, and the trail of impoverished bodies he’s left behind in the wake of his various colonial investment initiatives.”
If this unflattering assessment of Mr. Omidyar’s philanthropy is honest, we can see the obvious attraction of Omidyar’s non-profit to the ERLC. The SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, with roughly 46,000 churches. This is a massive client base.
As to Russell Moore’s interest in Pierre Omidyar, given the extent of Baptist tithes that flow into the ERLC, why would Dr. Moore take upon himself such an unfavorable business connection? The lavish scale of the MLK 50 event seems rather exaggerated since Dr. Moore could have put on a simple conference with speakers drawn from churches across the SBC rather than booking bigger names like Karen Swallow Prior, Matt Chandler, and John Piper. The oversized scale entangled Dr. Moore in the funds of a man described even by left-wing activists as “a rapacious tech oligarch.”
A likely draw was Mr. Omidyar’s anti-Trump fervor and his profit-driven charity model. Mr. Omidyar has funded all kinds of anti-Trump activities, including projects to bring evangelical Christians into his sphere of influence. It seems that Dr. Moore likes the money that comes with Christian causes, except that he wants to shift away from abortion and gay marriage to more consumer-friendly causes.
Pierre Omidyar funds the Trinity Forum as well. This organization recently hosted an event billed as a symposium to ask, “how do Christians discern ways of engaging culturally and politically that pursues justice, the common good, and love of neighbor?” Coming just before the heated 2020 election, this overtly socialist reading of the gospel fit in perfectly with Omidyar’s anti-Trump political goals as well as the crass “for-profit charity” model that progressives despise. The main speakers for the Trinity Forum event were Justin Giboney, the president of the AND Campaign, and the “co-chair of Obama for America’s Gen44-Atlanta initiative”; and Shirley Hoogstra, president of the “Council for Christian Colleges and Universities.” Hoogstra states in her press release that she “focused on expanding diversity and inclusion on CCCU campuses,” which refers, at least partly, to the movement to force Christian colleges to water down their stance on LGBTs.
EWTC was able to obtain what appears to be a February 3, 2012, memo from “Bill Vandenberg, Program Director, Democracy Fund” to “U.S. Programs Board.” In this memo, Vandenburg states the group’s goals: (1) investing “in faith-based advocacy and the engagement of the faith community,” (2) “public opinion research…of faith demography,” (3) “strategic communications work”, (4) “field meetings,” and (5) “fellowships to faith-based thinkers.”
That Russell Moore intertwined the Southern Baptist Convention with these cynical efforts to manufacture and disseminate liberal Christian dogma raises serious concerns.
Behind Billionaire Door #3: Paul Singer
Finally, Dr. Moore remains tied through mutual partnerships to the funding of Paul Singer, arguably the most pernicious of the three billionaires. Unlike Omidyar and Soros, Mr. Singer does not present himself as a leftist in any way, rather funding Republican and conservative organizations. He was a major backer of Marco Rubio, the candidate that Dr. Moore seemed to favor in the 2016 Republican primaries.
On this issue Tom Littleton once again offers a bank of invaluable information. In a broadside posted in late 2019, Mr. Littleton spells out how Paul Singer’s longstanding quest to normalize homosexuality in conservative circles left a trail of bread crumbs to an effort called Fairness for All (as well as the typically connected AND Campaign). The American Unity Fund, Paul Singer’s organization, funds the Alliance for Lasting Liberty, which is tied to the Fairness for All Movement. Like a merry-go-round of funding, these groups then contribute to the AND Campaign, which features leaders Justin Giboney and Michael Wear. These men all travel in the same circles, as Mr. Littleton documents at Thirty Pieces of Silver.
Conclusion
A man as intelligent as Dr. Moore must know that there is a mountain of evidence pointing to significant voter fraud in the 2020 election. Since Dr. Moore is neither foolish nor crazy, it’s difficult not to come to the somewhat obvious conclusion: those who wanted Donald Trump defeated have been financing Dr. Moore’s friends, associates, and partners for years. This has clearly influenced him and the SBC.
We are fighting the corruption of the true gospel by those who would replace it with the gospel of social justice – we need your help! Donate today to help us complete the film, Enemies within the Church!
——
It pays to remember history. Today I am going to go through some of it and give an outline and quotes from the great Southern Baptist leader Adrian Rogers (1931-2005).
Somehow Newt Gingrich’s righteous indignation over CNN’s debate moderator John King’s questioning Gingrich over his ex-wife’s allegations that Newt Gingrich wanted an “open marriage” with both his then wife, Marianne Gingrich and Gingrich’s present wife Callista, appears to be a simple little temper tantrum by the seemingly cry-baby ex-Speaker.
Gingrich came off a whiner having a hissy fit over what is more than likely “the truth”..
One only need go back to the nineties when Gingrich was outraged over the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal. The press and Gingrich went full throttle to paint President Clinton as the lowest form of life possible.
Gingrich had no problem with the Press and cable TV’s trial by media events that took place in what could be described as an incessant level of coverage back then.
Now all of a sudden he chooses to castigate the “elite media” and the debate moderator for reporting the story and in King’s case, for asking about the story. Newt Gingrich appears to be a victim all the time.
Would you like some cheese with that whine Mr. Gingrich?
___________________________
My former pastor Adrian Rogers summed this up best in 1998 during the Clinton scandal (“Does Character Count? A Biblical Treatment,” SBC Life, November 1998, 1):
[Rogers] suggests the comfort of the middle class has larger implications for American society. His concern in the recent presidential intern scandal was with the large number of people who were not particularly upset. “My concern is with the people whose response to a lack of character in our leaders is a roaring, “SO WHAT? LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL!” As long as there are people in this country who believe that a leader’s personal character makes no difference in any way, then I tell you that we are in the throes of crisis!”
Does Character Count? A Biblical Treatment by Adrian Rogers
“Vice is a monster of such awful mien, that to be hated needs but to be seen, but seen too oft, familiar with her face, we first endure, then pity, then embrace.”
Our nation is in crisis and as a minister of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, I feel I must address this matter!
We cannot, we dare not, we must not, and we shall not ignore what is happening in America today. Some terrible and shocking accusations have been made against the President of our beloved republic. It is our duty as Americans and as Christians to pray that truth will be revealed and justice administered.
In this article I want to address not so much the crisis at the highest levels of our government, but the bigger and even more disturbing crisis at the level of everyday American life where most of us live. Let me explain what I mean…
(Some will believe the charges against the President and some will not).
Then there is a third response to serious moral and ethical charges against a person in high office. This is the group I want to talk about, because it is here that America’s shocking, degrading moral crisis rears its ugly head.
This third group of people are those who, instead of saying the accused is guilty or innocent, say, “SO WHAT? Who cares? Guilty, innocent – what difference does it really make so long as he is doing a good job?”
These people argue that there is no connection between a man’s personal life and his political abilities. And according to all indications, this response to scandal and serious charges is the most common response among Americans!
A recent editorial in U.S. News & World Report said: “A majority seem to believe in the President’s programs and politics even if they don’t believe in him. They care far more about the good times. As one wag put it, ‘People say they vote Dow Jones, not Paula Jones.'”
Another editorial writer argued that in the case of the President, “We elected him knowing his propensities. The economy is strong and he has a promising agenda. Tossing him out to keep up appearances would merely match the President’s destructive self-indulgence with our own.”
This man assumes the President has done wrong. But he’s saying that the economy is good and the President’s programs are so good. Why mess up a good thing?
In a newspaper article, a sociologist made this observation: “Character has been slowly bred out of many Americans, especially baby boomers and their children.” He argued that decades of pampering and organized activities and “feel-good” approaches in which participants do not have to take personal responsibility have made character almost passé.
Is character passé in America? A Newsweek magazine poll said that voters tend to believe the President is lying about his adulterous affairs, yet he is enjoying his highest approval rating ever. These sentiments sum up the attitude of this third group and indicate that we are in deep trouble as a nation!
I want you to understand that no matter what has been revealed or what action has been taken by the time this is read, the crisis I want to address will not just go away. My concern is with the people whose response to a lack of character in our leaders is a roaring, “SO WHAT? LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL!”
As long as there are people in this country who believe that a leader’s personal character makes no difference in any way, then I tell you that we are in the throes of crisis!
But make no mistake. It makes every difference what a person in leadership believes and does in his personal life. Character counts with God, and it must count with us if we want to stay the judgment of God on this great nation.
The Character God Requires
What does God say about the kind of leadership a nation needs? I want to give you four principles I have ferreted out from the Word of God. Let’s think first of all about the character God requires. The Bible says in Proverbs 29:2, “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.”
One argument we are hearing these days is that national leaders are like airplane pilots. “We don’t care about a pilot’s morals,” this line goes, “as long as he can fly the airplane. His character doesn’t matter as long as he can get us from point A to point B. We want a safe take-off, a safe trip, and a safe landing. What the pilot does in his personal life behind closed doors is none of our concern.”
This argument about a leader’s character might hold water if we did not need the BLESSING OF GOD on this country. If we are going to say, “God, we don’t need You to bless our leaders or our people,” then this argument may be valid.
But let me use another analogy. Suppose you were going to have open-heart surgery. Would you want the surgeon to come from the restroom and into the operating room without even washing his hands? Would you want him to hold your heart in his hands if they were not sanitary? I want the hands of those who hold the heart of this nation to be clean. Clean hands and a pure heart are necessary for godly leadership and godly leadership is a prerequisite to blessing.
The fact is that America desperately needs the blessing of God! We are ruined without it. But God says, “If you want My blessings, here are some things that are necessary.” Let me give you six biblical characteristics that God requires of leaders before His blessing can rest on a nation.
Below are the verses that should describe our leaders:
“It is an abomination to kings to commit wickedness: for the throne is established by righteousness” (Prov. 16:12).
“I wisdom dwell with prudence. … By me [wisdom] kings reign and, princes decree justice. By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth” (Prov. 8:12, 15-16).
Proverbs 17:7 tells us, “Excellent speech becometh not a fool: much less do lying lips a prince.” According to Proverbs 20:28, “Mercy and truth preserve the king.”
(Avoid bad counselors) Proverbs 29:12 says, “If a ruler hearken to lies, all his servants are wicked.”
“The words of king Lemuel, the prophecy that his mother taught him. What, my son? and what, the son of my womb? and what, the son of my vows? Give not thy strength unto women, nor thy ways to that which destroyeth kings” (Prov. 31:1-3).
A Leader Must Be a Man Who Protects the Weak
Here’s a final trait of leadership that God requires. A leader must protect the weak and the helpless.
In Proverbs 31:8-9, God says to King Lemuel, “Open thy mouth for the dumb in the cause of all such as are appointed to destruction. Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.”
A president, or any leader, must speak up for those who can’t speak up for themselves, those who are about to be destroyed. When a president is inaugurated, he takes a pledge to defend the nation. There are many defenseless people in America today, and they’re depending on the government to defend them. The President should be standing up for the unborn, the most defenseless of all those who cannot speak for themselves.
I once testified in Washington before a Senate committee dealing with abortion. After I left the room there at the Capitol, a female lawyer met me in the hall. “You don’t understand,” she said. “You’re a man, so you don’t understand what a trauma it is to have an unwanted pregnancy.”
I said to her, “Do I understand you to say that if somebody traumatizes you, you can eliminate them? Because you’re traumatizing me right now. What if I were to put both my thumbs on your windpipe and strangle you right now? At least you could scream or run. But a baby in its mother’s womb can’t do either.”
She just turned and walked off. I’m sure she told someone, “That Baptist preacher said he was going to strangle me!” But I only said, “What if?”
It’s the job of a ruler to speak up for the unborn! “Open thy mouth for the dumb in the cause of all such as are appointed to destruction,” God commands the one in authority. Someone may say, “But Pastor Rogers, abortion is legal.” Then hear these verses: “Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law? They gather themselves together against the soul of the righteous, and condemn the innocent blood” (Ps. 94:20-21).
If a throne of iniquity is one that uses the law to commit evil, then what we have in America today is a throne of iniquity! Laws are passed to shed innocent blood. But NOTHING IS POLITICALLY RIGHT THAT IS MORALLY WRONG.
Jeremiah said concerning evil King Jehoiakim, “Thine eyes and thine heart are not but for thy covetousness, and for to shed innocent blood, and for oppression, and for violence, to do it” (22:17). The prophet Habakkuk warned, “Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and stablisheth a city by iniquity!” (2:12).
The king, the prince, the president, must be the protector of the helpless. This is the character that God requires.
Does character count? It does if there is a God in glory – a God who helped our founders establish this nation, and who has sustained this nation and brought us thus far.
But if our people are willing to say, “God, we don’t need You anymore. We don’t want Your rule anymore. We know what we are doing. Our skill and ingenuity will see us through,” then I say God help America! Because God will say, “You don’t need Me? That’s fine. But then don’t call on Me when judgment falls.”
Do you remember what happened when Peter preached his great sermon on the Day of Pentecost? The people of Israel “were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37).
This is the question God’s people need to ask today.
________
Newt should have had a steadfast love for his wife!!! Take a look at this clip below:
Some Southern Baptist leaders defended Newt Gingrich’s past moral failings and attempted to explain why the former Speaker of the House could be supported as the Republican standard-bearer. (Photo: Gage Skidmore)
Last year, I shared this video from the Competitive Enterprise Institute to help explain how government bureaucrats are making it harder for Americans to clean their plates, bowls, and silverware.
Washington’s dishwasher mandate is just one example of how red tape diminishes the quality of life.
Bureaucrats have concocted other ways of spreading misery and frustration.
Call me crazy, but I don’t like spending extra time in the shower, flushing more than once, and risking self-immolation when I refill my lawnmower.
But there is a bit of good news. The Trump Administration wants to make it easier for us to clean up after dinner.
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial is a good summary of the issue.
For years American homes have been stuck with dishwashers that take forever and still don’t get the job done. A new Department of Energy rule…will help change that. …Regulations on energy and water usage—tightened in 2013 by the Obama Administration—mean that dishwashers now take at least two hours to complete a full wash cycle.Dishes may still emerge with pieces of last night’s lasagna baked on. …CEI petitioned the Energy Department to allow dishwashers that would reduce the average cycle to one hour from two, while also giving better performance. CEI argued that if the aim of the regulation was to conserve water and energy, it’s unlikely they achieved their purpose. People responded to poor dishwasher performance by pre-rinsing each dish before putting it through their washers, wasting more water… The revised DOE rule is…an example of how common-sense deregulation can deliver real benefits for the public.
And Sam Rutzick of Reason explains this latest development in the battle for clean dishes.
Trump’s Department of Energy finalized a rule establishing a new product class for residential dishwashers that will have a normal cycle time of up to one hour and that can use five gallons of water per cycle. Those rules effectively roll back an Obama-era rule limiting standard dishwashers to use no more than 3.1 gallons of water per cycle.That limit forced dishwasher companies to adjust their products’ cycle lengths. And the supposedly more efficient but less useful dishwashers have been a punchline…the average dishwasher cycle time has jumped from the one-hour cycle that was common a decade ago to more than two hours today. The tighter rules didn’t lead to energy savings for customers. …they actually increased water consumption by 63 billion gallons, as households would have to run their dishwashers multiple cycles, or pre-rinse their dishes by hand, in order to get dishes actually clean.
But Rutzick’s column contains a very important caveat.
Joe Biden may reverse this important bit of deregulation.
Unfortunately, the new rules may not last. While the incoming administration has been vague about which deregulatory efforts they intend to undo, they have spoken in favor of tightening environmental regulations—and the new dishwasher rules could be a casualty. If so, that’ll be bad news for consumers.
But I fear environmentalism is an area where he will push policy significantly to the left.
So I’m not overly optimistic that we’ll have better dishwashers in the future.
The only good news is that Americans, every time they do the dishes, will have an irritating reminder that government is the problem rather than the solution.
P.S. Yes, I realize better dishwashers are not as important as better tax policy (or as important as worse trade policy), but I don’t think politicians should be undermining our quality of life.
Open letter to President Obama (Part 549)
(Emailed to White House on 6-25-13.)
President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
But the regulatory burden goes way beyond these odd anecdotes. We’re talking about a huge cost to the economy, and it’s been getting worse for the past 12 years.
Team Obama is now the red tape record holder. …pages in the Code of Federal Regulations hit an all-time high of 174,545 in 2012, an increase of more than 21% during the last decade.…the cost of federal rules exceeded $1.8 trillion, roughly equal to the GDP of Canada. These costs are embedded in nearly everything Americans buy…at $14,768 per household, meaning that red tape is now the second largest item in the typical family budget after housing. Last year 4,062 regulations were at various stages of implementation inside the Beltway. The government completed work on 1,172, an increase of 16% over the 1,010 that the feds imposed in 2011, which was a 40% increase over 722 in 2010. …the Obama Administration did not break the all-time record of 81,405 pages it set in 2010. But the 78,961 pages it churned out in 2012 mean that the President has posted three of the four greatest paperwork years on record. And to be fair, if Mr. Obama were ever to acknowledge that this is a problem, he could reasonably blame George W. Bush for setting a lousy example. Despite the Obama myth that the Bush years were an era of deregulation, the Bush Administration routinely generated more than 70,000 pages a year in the Federal Register.
If those numbers don’t make you sit up and take notice, how about these ones?
Today’s Byzantine system is good fortax lawyers, accountants, and bureaucrats, but it’s bad news for America. We need to wipe the slate clean and get rid of this corrupt mess. And you knowhow to make that happen.
_____________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com
Dan Mitchell Talking about China, Regulation, and Wealth with Cavuto These posts are all dealing with issues that President Obama did not help on in his first term. I am hopeful that he will continue to respond to my letters that I have written him and that he will especially reconsider his view on the […]
I wondered why President Obama was claiming that he was not increasing regulations as much as Bush did. However, the real truth coming out in this article below: Chart of the Week: Obama Tops Bush With More, Costlier Major Regulations Alison Meyer March 18, 2012 at 2:40 pm President Obama famously declared in this year’s […]
In this article below you will see that the American people do not want Obamacare but yet it is being crammed down their throats and all the regulations that go with that too. Sickening Regulation by Michael D. Tanner Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of Leviathan on the […]
The Heritage Foundation website does it again. Take a look. CAFE Standards: Fleet-Wide Regulations Costly and Unwarranted By Diane Katz November 28, 2011 Automakers would be required to double current fleet-wide fuel economy by 2025 under regulations proposed last week by the Obama Administration. Advocates contend that this crackdown on the internal combustion engine would […]
Arkansas a model for other states on Medicaid expansion, I hope not!!!! This is a great article and I am sad that many of the Republicans in Arkansas are actually trusting the Obama administration to keep their word. Currently we have 3 scandals with this administration and that speaks volumes about their integrity. Think Again: […]
I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism, Greece, welfare state or on gun control. Reagan inherited a sluggish economy like President Obama did but he cut taxes and regulations and got the […]
I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism, Greece, welfare state or on gun control. The sad truth is Obama is wrong about the mean rich people keeping this county down. The Grinch […]
Obama is condemned by his own words from 2008 by encouraging housing loans to unworthy credit borrowers. Housing Finance Nominee: Expect Big Government Housing Policies Doomed to Fail John Ligon May 3, 2013 at 10:00 am Polaris/Newscom President Obama nominated Representative Mel Watt (D–NC) as new chief regulator to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), […]
Biden is set to become the first president in 60 years to lose the states of Ohio and Florida on his way to election. For a century, these states have consistently predicted the national outcome, and they have been considered roughly representative of the American melting pot as a whole. Despite national polling giving Biden a lead in both states, he lost Ohio by eight points and Florida by more than three.
For Biden to lose these key bellwethers by notable margins and still win the national election is newsworthy. Not since the Mafia allegedly aided John F. Kennedy in winning Illinois over Richard Nixon in 1960 has an American president pulled off this neat trick.
Even more unbelievably, Biden is on his way to winning the White House after having lost almost every historic bellwether county across the country. The Wall Street Journal and The Epoch Times independently analyzed the results of 19 counties around the United States that have nearly perfect presidential voting records over the last 40 years. President Trump won every single bellwether county, except Clallam County in Washington.
Whereas the former VP picked up Clallam by about three points, President Trump’s margin of victory in the other 18 counties averaged over 16 points. In a larger list of 58 bellwether counties that have correctly picked the president since 2000, Trump won 51 of them by an average of 15 points, while the other seven went to Biden by around four points. Bellwether counties overwhelmingly chose President Trump, but Biden found a path to victory anyway.
Joe Biden achieved the impossible. It’s interesting that many more journalists aren’t pointing that out.
J.B. Shurk is a proud American from Daniel Boone country
Documents show financial ties between ERLC & left-wing George Soros Open Society Foundations, Pierre Omidyar of the Democracy Fund, and Paul Singer of the American Unity Fund.
A report from Enemies within the Church, printed below, contains documents obtained by the filmmakers that link grants and funding from leftist billionaires to the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) of the Southern Baptist Convention and its head Russell Moore. The documents include grant data showing the Democracy Fund provided $50,000 to the controversial ERLC’s and The Gospel Coalition’s MLK50 Conference
Other documents in the report include Dr. Moore’s name in the Podesta emails published in 2016 by Wikileaks.
On Friday, November 6, the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Commission (ERLC) posted a statement on its website:
“Currently, there has been no evidence that voter fraud has been occurring…
“There are numerous reasons why widespread election fraud is difficult, if not impossible, to pull off at the presidential level… Extensive research has shown that voter fraud is exceeding rare, that voter impersonation is virtually nonexistent, and that many instances of alleged fraud are merely mistakes by voters or election administrators.”
The article is attributed to the “ERLC Staff,” and the statement is date-stamped November 6, 2020, at which point a number of states had not fully resolved allegations of balloting improprieties: most notably Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. It is difficult not to assume that the ERLC (Ethics and Religious Leadership Council) is purposefully seeking to influence the election outcome for primarily two reasons: (1) Dr. Russell Moore, the president of the ERLC, has consistently and publicly opposed Donald Trump and actively sought to undermine his evangelical reach, and (2) the ERLC seems to have financial ties to at least three progressive billionaire activists: left-wing George Soros of Open Society Foundations, Pierre Omidyar of the Democracy Fund, and Paul Singer of the American Unity Fund.
Who are these donors? Are they influencing the ERLC?
Behind Billionaire Door #1: George Soros
Dr. Moore’s ties to George Soros have been the subject of heated debate. At various times, those sympathetic to Dr. Moore have denied that he receives funds from Soros. Denials have hinged on arguments about whether the National Immigration Forum (NIF) and the Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) – both progressive organizations – are actually the same thing. EWTC was able to obtain what appear to be authentic internal documents from a 2015 meeting in New York of the Open Society U.S. Programs Board;
These should put debate to rest.
George Soros’ Open Society Foundations have been clear that they hope to infuse left-wing ideology into every community of discourse that exists. To broaden the influence of his radical agenda, he has made a point to fund “rent-an-evangelical” schemes like the kind underscored in a cautionary article by Stream writer John Zmirak four years ago:
Joining “faith” fronts, Soros also funds thousands of … collaborators and projects that suggest his goal is to demoralize America (and Europe)… In the ironic rhetoric of compassion, Soros and friends also fund mass immigration followed by voting “rights” and redistricting schemes, while financing the campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. (Soros is a major donor to the Democratic Party and co-chairman of Ready for Hillary PAC.)
Earlier this year, Baptist Standard ran an article disputing “rumors” that Russell Moore received funding from Soros’ foundations. Dr. Moore and the ERLC have found themselves in the crosshairs of Soros-related debates because of Moore’s active involvement with the EIT. A document from November 13, 2012, addressed to President Obama clearly lists the ERLC alongside nine other groups as the groups comprising the EIT: World Relief Corporation, Sojourners, Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, Bread for the World, Liberty Counsel, National Association of Evangelicals, National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, National Latino Evangelical Coalition, World Vision, and G92.
In 2013, spokespeople for the EIT had already admitted to Breitbart News that their group “does not exist as its own non-profit” and “sought a neutral third-party institution, the NIF, to help facilitate our work.” Despite the strenuous denials that Mr. Soros’ money was involved, it is clear that the “facilitation” of the EIT depends on a structure financed by Mr. Soros, the NIF. Any doubt of separation between the initiatives now hold no weight since Dr. Moore is prominently listed as a speaker for the 2020 convention of the NIF and has his own webpage on the NIF website.
EWTC obtained meeting notes from “OPEN SOCIETY US PROGRAMS BOARD MEETING,” hosted by Open Society Foundations in New York City on October 1-2, 2015. One section of the meeting notes states the following:
“In part, our active role reflects our observation that the refugee advocacy community while long-standing and sophisticated in the inner workings of refugee policy, does not have a strong advocacy capacity or deep grassroots ties. In the course of our work, we were able to generate engagement by a group of mayors through Emma Lazarus II Fund grantee Cities United for Immigration Action… and some conservative voices such as evangelical Christians and Southern Baptists through grantee NIF. In the face of this pressure, the Obama administration announced Sept. 20 that by 2017, it would raise to 100,000 the total number of refugees the US takes worldwide each year. “
The bolded section above makes clear that the Open Society Foundations earmarked a grant to the NIF, specifically so funds could be channeled to the Southern Baptist Convention in exchange for the SBC’s help in putting “pressure” on officials to raise the number of refugees the US could take in.
EWTC obtained the following three documents showing the undeniable purpose of a significant funding stream earmarked by Open Society Foundations for Dr. Moore’s clique at the ERLC:
ERLC:
As more refugee resettlement means more grants to faith-based organizations to resettle refugees a great potential for corruption exists. The North American Mission Boardoversees the SEND Network, which plants churches. These plants stand to gain if they can pitch their efforts as community revitalization; something that pairs neatly with refugee resettlement. One vice president of the SEND Network is Dhati Lewis, whose ties to the ERLC are evident by his appearance on their website. Dhati Lewis also takes the stage prominently with Kevin Ezell, leader of the SBC’s North American Mission Board. Kevin Ezell’s leadership of NAMB has been fraught with controversy, as one can see quite clearly by following the website of Will McRaney, a Southern Baptist who has spent years documenting the corruption at NAMB online.
Dr. Moore has tied ostensible gospel efforts to a political lobby funded by George Soros, a man who opposes Biblical doctrine on ethics, life, sexuality, etc., and who openly says he wishes to invest large amounts of money in any willing evangelical that can spin his left-wing politics into a “Christian” endeavor.
Behind Billionaire Door #2: Pierre Omidyar
Russell Moore survived the 2017 post election push-back, becoming emboldened even further the following year during a conference marking the fiftieth anniversary of the death of Martin Luther King, Jr. The “MLK 50” Conference brought out rhetoric that was not merely liberal or Democratic, but overtly steeped in critical race theory.
What does the billionaire founder of e-Bay, have to do with a Southern Baptist conference? As Omidyar has a philanthropist streak that delights some progressives and dismays others, it’s not difficult to identify his stake in the conference. In an interview with EWTC, progressive musician Michelle Shocked (who happens to be Christian) explained that Mr. Omidyar has a hybrid philosophy of philanthropy, believing that a charity without a profit motive would be suspect. Therefore Omidyar liked to cast his social-justice pursuits as “charity on a for-profit model.” Pando writer Mark Ames explained this laid this philosophy: He says, “Perhaps no other figure embodies the disconnect between his progressive anti-state image, and his factual collaboration with the American national security state and the global neoliberal agenda, than Pierre Omidyar.”
To clarify this, Ms. Shocked provided several articles by left-wing Yasha Levine. Mr. Levine has flagged the relationship between Pierre Omidyar and Brazil-based journalist Glenn Greenwald as problematic. Mr. Omidyar funded the creation of the Intercept by Glenn Greenwald. Mr. Greenwald built the Intercept into a vibrant online news and commentary source but then ran afoul of management (and presumably, Omidyar), when Intercept principals told him he could not publish anything critical of Joe Biden. Yasha Levine explains the deceptive nature of Omidyar’s political involvement:
“Pierre’s surprising generousness — combined with the fact that he seemed to be on the Good Side, on the side of Edward Snowden and his NSA leaks — brought the man a huge amount of good will… Even now, while Silicon Valley’s leadership — from Zuck to Bezos — have been getting knocked about and criticized from every angle, Pierre has been able to skate by with no critical attention thrown his way, despite his involvement in funding far-right regime change ops, global surveillance projects, and the trail of impoverished bodies he’s left behind in the wake of his various colonial investment initiatives.”
If this unflattering assessment of Mr. Omidyar’s philanthropy is honest, we can see the obvious attraction of Omidyar’s non-profit to the ERLC. The SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, with roughly 46,000 churches. This is a massive client base.
As to Russell Moore’s interest in Pierre Omidyar, given the extent of Baptist tithes that flow into the ERLC, why would Dr. Moore take upon himself such an unfavorable business connection? The lavish scale of the MLK 50 event seems rather exaggerated since Dr. Moore could have put on a simple conference with speakers drawn from churches across the SBC rather than booking bigger names like Karen Swallow Prior, Matt Chandler, and John Piper. The oversized scale entangled Dr. Moore in the funds of a man described even by left-wing activists as “a rapacious tech oligarch.”
A likely draw was Mr. Omidyar’s anti-Trump fervor and his profit-driven charity model. Mr. Omidyar has funded all kinds of anti-Trump activities, including projects to bring evangelical Christians into his sphere of influence. It seems that Dr. Moore likes the money that comes with Christian causes, except that he wants to shift away from abortion and gay marriage to more consumer-friendly causes.
Pierre Omidyar funds the Trinity Forum as well. This organization recently hosted an event billed as a symposium to ask, “how do Christians discern ways of engaging culturally and politically that pursues justice, the common good, and love of neighbor?” Coming just before the heated 2020 election, this overtly socialist reading of the gospel fit in perfectly with Omidyar’s anti-Trump political goals as well as the crass “for-profit charity” model that progressives despise. The main speakers for the Trinity Forum event were Justin Giboney, the president of the AND Campaign, and the “co-chair of Obama for America’s Gen44-Atlanta initiative”; and Shirley Hoogstra, president of the “Council for Christian Colleges and Universities.” Hoogstra states in her press release that she “focused on expanding diversity and inclusion on CCCU campuses,” which refers, at least partly, to the movement to force Christian colleges to water down their stance on LGBTs.
EWTC was able to obtain what appears to be a February 3, 2012, memo from “Bill Vandenberg, Program Director, Democracy Fund” to “U.S. Programs Board.” In this memo, Vandenburg states the group’s goals: (1) investing “in faith-based advocacy and the engagement of the faith community,” (2) “public opinion research…of faith demography,” (3) “strategic communications work”, (4) “field meetings,” and (5) “fellowships to faith-based thinkers.”
That Russell Moore intertwined the Southern Baptist Convention with these cynical efforts to manufacture and disseminate liberal Christian dogma raises serious concerns.
Behind Billionaire Door #3: Paul Singer
Finally, Dr. Moore remains tied through mutual partnerships to the funding of Paul Singer, arguably the most pernicious of the three billionaires. Unlike Omidyar and Soros, Mr. Singer does not present himself as a leftist in any way, rather funding Republican and conservative organizations. He was a major backer of Marco Rubio, the candidate that Dr. Moore seemed to favor in the 2016 Republican primaries.
On this issue Tom Littleton once again offers a bank of invaluable information. In a broadside posted in late 2019, Mr. Littleton spells out how Paul Singer’s longstanding quest to normalize homosexuality in conservative circles left a trail of bread crumbs to an effort called Fairness for All (as well as the typically connected AND Campaign). The American Unity Fund, Paul Singer’s organization, funds the Alliance for Lasting Liberty, which is tied to the Fairness for All Movement. Like a merry-go-round of funding, these groups then contribute to the AND Campaign, which features leaders Justin Giboney and Michael Wear. These men all travel in the same circles, as Mr. Littleton documents at Thirty Pieces of Silver.
Conclusion
A man as intelligent as Dr. Moore must know that there is a mountain of evidence pointing to significant voter fraud in the 2020 election. Since Dr. Moore is neither foolish nor crazy, it’s difficult not to come to the somewhat obvious conclusion: those who wanted Donald Trump defeated have been financing Dr. Moore’s friends, associates, and partners for years. This has clearly influenced him and the SBC.
We are fighting the corruption of the true gospel by those who would replace it with the gospel of social justice – we need your help! Donate today to help us complete the film, Enemies within the Church!
——
It pays to remember history. Today I am going to go through some of it and give an outline and quotes from the great Southern Baptist leader Adrian Rogers (1931-2005).
Somehow Newt Gingrich’s righteous indignation over CNN’s debate moderator John King’s questioning Gingrich over his ex-wife’s allegations that Newt Gingrich wanted an “open marriage” with both his then wife, Marianne Gingrich and Gingrich’s present wife Callista, appears to be a simple little temper tantrum by the seemingly cry-baby ex-Speaker.
Gingrich came off a whiner having a hissy fit over what is more than likely “the truth”..
One only need go back to the nineties when Gingrich was outraged over the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal. The press and Gingrich went full throttle to paint President Clinton as the lowest form of life possible.
Gingrich had no problem with the Press and cable TV’s trial by media events that took place in what could be described as an incessant level of coverage back then.
Now all of a sudden he chooses to castigate the “elite media” and the debate moderator for reporting the story and in King’s case, for asking about the story. Newt Gingrich appears to be a victim all the time.
Would you like some cheese with that whine Mr. Gingrich?
___________________________
My former pastor Adrian Rogers summed this up best in 1998 during the Clinton scandal (“Does Character Count? A Biblical Treatment,” SBC Life, November 1998, 1):
[Rogers] suggests the comfort of the middle class has larger implications for American society. His concern in the recent presidential intern scandal was with the large number of people who were not particularly upset. “My concern is with the people whose response to a lack of character in our leaders is a roaring, “SO WHAT? LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL!” As long as there are people in this country who believe that a leader’s personal character makes no difference in any way, then I tell you that we are in the throes of crisis!”
Does Character Count? A Biblical Treatment by Adrian Rogers
“Vice is a monster of such awful mien, that to be hated needs but to be seen, but seen too oft, familiar with her face, we first endure, then pity, then embrace.”
Our nation is in crisis and as a minister of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, I feel I must address this matter!
We cannot, we dare not, we must not, and we shall not ignore what is happening in America today. Some terrible and shocking accusations have been made against the President of our beloved republic. It is our duty as Americans and as Christians to pray that truth will be revealed and justice administered.
In this article I want to address not so much the crisis at the highest levels of our government, but the bigger and even more disturbing crisis at the level of everyday American life where most of us live. Let me explain what I mean…
(Some will believe the charges against the President and some will not).
Then there is a third response to serious moral and ethical charges against a person in high office. This is the group I want to talk about, because it is here that America’s shocking, degrading moral crisis rears its ugly head.
This third group of people are those who, instead of saying the accused is guilty or innocent, say, “SO WHAT? Who cares? Guilty, innocent – what difference does it really make so long as he is doing a good job?”
These people argue that there is no connection between a man’s personal life and his political abilities. And according to all indications, this response to scandal and serious charges is the most common response among Americans!
A recent editorial in U.S. News & World Report said: “A majority seem to believe in the President’s programs and politics even if they don’t believe in him. They care far more about the good times. As one wag put it, ‘People say they vote Dow Jones, not Paula Jones.'”
Another editorial writer argued that in the case of the President, “We elected him knowing his propensities. The economy is strong and he has a promising agenda. Tossing him out to keep up appearances would merely match the President’s destructive self-indulgence with our own.”
This man assumes the President has done wrong. But he’s saying that the economy is good and the President’s programs are so good. Why mess up a good thing?
In a newspaper article, a sociologist made this observation: “Character has been slowly bred out of many Americans, especially baby boomers and their children.” He argued that decades of pampering and organized activities and “feel-good” approaches in which participants do not have to take personal responsibility have made character almost passé.
Is character passé in America? A Newsweek magazine poll said that voters tend to believe the President is lying about his adulterous affairs, yet he is enjoying his highest approval rating ever. These sentiments sum up the attitude of this third group and indicate that we are in deep trouble as a nation!
I want you to understand that no matter what has been revealed or what action has been taken by the time this is read, the crisis I want to address will not just go away. My concern is with the people whose response to a lack of character in our leaders is a roaring, “SO WHAT? LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL!”
As long as there are people in this country who believe that a leader’s personal character makes no difference in any way, then I tell you that we are in the throes of crisis!
But make no mistake. It makes every difference what a person in leadership believes and does in his personal life. Character counts with God, and it must count with us if we want to stay the judgment of God on this great nation.
The Character God Requires
What does God say about the kind of leadership a nation needs? I want to give you four principles I have ferreted out from the Word of God. Let’s think first of all about the character God requires. The Bible says in Proverbs 29:2, “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.”
One argument we are hearing these days is that national leaders are like airplane pilots. “We don’t care about a pilot’s morals,” this line goes, “as long as he can fly the airplane. His character doesn’t matter as long as he can get us from point A to point B. We want a safe take-off, a safe trip, and a safe landing. What the pilot does in his personal life behind closed doors is none of our concern.”
This argument about a leader’s character might hold water if we did not need the BLESSING OF GOD on this country. If we are going to say, “God, we don’t need You to bless our leaders or our people,” then this argument may be valid.
But let me use another analogy. Suppose you were going to have open-heart surgery. Would you want the surgeon to come from the restroom and into the operating room without even washing his hands? Would you want him to hold your heart in his hands if they were not sanitary? I want the hands of those who hold the heart of this nation to be clean. Clean hands and a pure heart are necessary for godly leadership and godly leadership is a prerequisite to blessing.
The fact is that America desperately needs the blessing of God! We are ruined without it. But God says, “If you want My blessings, here are some things that are necessary.” Let me give you six biblical characteristics that God requires of leaders before His blessing can rest on a nation.
Below are the verses that should describe our leaders:
“It is an abomination to kings to commit wickedness: for the throne is established by righteousness” (Prov. 16:12).
“I wisdom dwell with prudence. … By me [wisdom] kings reign and, princes decree justice. By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth” (Prov. 8:12, 15-16).
Proverbs 17:7 tells us, “Excellent speech becometh not a fool: much less do lying lips a prince.” According to Proverbs 20:28, “Mercy and truth preserve the king.”
(Avoid bad counselors) Proverbs 29:12 says, “If a ruler hearken to lies, all his servants are wicked.”
“The words of king Lemuel, the prophecy that his mother taught him. What, my son? and what, the son of my womb? and what, the son of my vows? Give not thy strength unto women, nor thy ways to that which destroyeth kings” (Prov. 31:1-3).
A Leader Must Be a Man Who Protects the Weak
Here’s a final trait of leadership that God requires. A leader must protect the weak and the helpless.
In Proverbs 31:8-9, God says to King Lemuel, “Open thy mouth for the dumb in the cause of all such as are appointed to destruction. Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.”
A president, or any leader, must speak up for those who can’t speak up for themselves, those who are about to be destroyed. When a president is inaugurated, he takes a pledge to defend the nation. There are many defenseless people in America today, and they’re depending on the government to defend them. The President should be standing up for the unborn, the most defenseless of all those who cannot speak for themselves.
I once testified in Washington before a Senate committee dealing with abortion. After I left the room there at the Capitol, a female lawyer met me in the hall. “You don’t understand,” she said. “You’re a man, so you don’t understand what a trauma it is to have an unwanted pregnancy.”
I said to her, “Do I understand you to say that if somebody traumatizes you, you can eliminate them? Because you’re traumatizing me right now. What if I were to put both my thumbs on your windpipe and strangle you right now? At least you could scream or run. But a baby in its mother’s womb can’t do either.”
She just turned and walked off. I’m sure she told someone, “That Baptist preacher said he was going to strangle me!” But I only said, “What if?”
It’s the job of a ruler to speak up for the unborn! “Open thy mouth for the dumb in the cause of all such as are appointed to destruction,” God commands the one in authority. Someone may say, “But Pastor Rogers, abortion is legal.” Then hear these verses: “Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law? They gather themselves together against the soul of the righteous, and condemn the innocent blood” (Ps. 94:20-21).
If a throne of iniquity is one that uses the law to commit evil, then what we have in America today is a throne of iniquity! Laws are passed to shed innocent blood. But NOTHING IS POLITICALLY RIGHT THAT IS MORALLY WRONG.
Jeremiah said concerning evil King Jehoiakim, “Thine eyes and thine heart are not but for thy covetousness, and for to shed innocent blood, and for oppression, and for violence, to do it” (22:17). The prophet Habakkuk warned, “Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and stablisheth a city by iniquity!” (2:12).
The king, the prince, the president, must be the protector of the helpless. This is the character that God requires.
Does character count? It does if there is a God in glory – a God who helped our founders establish this nation, and who has sustained this nation and brought us thus far.
But if our people are willing to say, “God, we don’t need You anymore. We don’t want Your rule anymore. We know what we are doing. Our skill and ingenuity will see us through,” then I say God help America! Because God will say, “You don’t need Me? That’s fine. But then don’t call on Me when judgment falls.”
Do you remember what happened when Peter preached his great sermon on the Day of Pentecost? The people of Israel “were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37).
This is the question God’s people need to ask today.
________
Newt should have had a steadfast love for his wife!!! Take a look at this clip below:
Some Southern Baptist leaders defended Newt Gingrich’s past moral failings and attempted to explain why the former Speaker of the House could be supported as the Republican standard-bearer. (Photo: Gage Skidmore)
Randy DeSoto noted in The Western Journal that “Donald Trump was pretty much the only incumbent president in U.S. history to lose his re-election while his own party gained seats in the House of Representatives.” Now that’s a Biden miracle!
In 2020, The Cook Political Report and The New York Times rated 27 House seats as toss-ups going into Election Day. Right now, Republicans appear to have won all 27. Democrats failed to flip a single state house chamber, while Republicans flipped both the House and Senate in New Hampshire and expanded their dominance of state legislatures across the country.
Christina Polizzi, a spokesperson for the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, went so far as to state: “It’s clear that Trump isn’t an anchor for the Republican legislative candidates. He’s a buoy.” Amazingly, Biden beat the guy who lifted all other Republicans to victory. Now that’s historic!
Joe Biden achieved the impossible. It’s interesting that many more journalists aren’t pointing that out.
J.B. Shurk is a proud American from Daniel Boone country
President Donald Trump’s campaign has paid $3 million to Wisconsin to cover the cost of vote recounts in two of the state’s counties. (Photo: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images)
The Trump campaign announced Wednesday that it’s filing a petition seeking election recounts in two Wisconsin counties.
The campaign said it paid $3 million to the state to cover the cost of the recounts.
In a statement, the Trump campaign said that the petition calls for recounts in Milwaukee and Dane counties, citing what it says are “illegally altered absentee ballots, illegally issued absentee ballots, and illegal advice given by government officials allowing Wisconsin’s voter-ID laws to be circumvented.”
The website for the Milwaukee Election Commission reported that former Vice President Joe Biden received 194,661 votes in heavily Democratic Milwaukee, while President Donald Trump drew 48,414.
The left is actively working to undermine the integrity of our elections. Read the plan to stop them now. Learn more now >>
In Dane County—which includes Madison, the state capital and home to the flagship campus of the state university system—Biden drew 260,157 votes, while Trump received 78,789 votes, according to the county clerk’s website.
“The people of Wisconsin deserve to know whether their election processes worked in a legal and transparent way,” Jim Troupis, counsel to the campaign, said in the Wednesday statement.
“Regrettably, the integrity of the election resultscannot be trusted without a recount in these two counties and uniform enforcement of Wisconsin absentee-ballot requirements. We will not know the true results of the election until only the legal ballots cast are counted.”
According to the Trump campaign, “municipal clerks across Wisconsin issued absentee ballots to voters without requiring an application, in direct conflict with Wisconsin’s absentee-voting safeguards.”
The campaign maintains that “Wisconsin law expressly requires that absentee ballots may not be issued without receiving a written application requesting the ballot,” adding:
Despite this clear mandatory requirement, clerks uniformly issued absentee ballots without collecting a written application from persons who requested absentee ballots in person during the two-week in-person absentee-voting period that ran from October 20, 2020, through November 1, 2020.
The campaign added that “[i]n clear abuse of Wisconsin’s provision to issue ballots to indefinitely confined voters without requiring them to present voter identification, some Democrat county clerks illegally advised voters to illegally mischaracterize that they were indefinitely confined to circumvent Wisconsin voter-ID law,” adding:
Those claiming to be “indefinitely confined” rose from 72,000 in 2019 to more than 240,000 at the time of the November 3, 2020, election. A substantial number of those claiming that status were sent and then returned ballots without proper identification and without otherwise meeting the requirements for that status.
In a statement Wednesday, Meagan Wolfe of the Wisconsin Elections Commission said that the recount request “appears, upon facial review, to meet all of the requirements in pairing with the payment that was received late yesterday.”
“We understand the eyes of the world will be on these Wisconsin counties over the next few weeks,” she said. “We remain committed to providing information about the process and assisting our county clerks by providing facts on the mechanics of a recount and status updates.”
The Biden campaign dismissed the likelihood that the partial recount would change the outcome in Wisconsin. “A cherry-picked and selective recounting of Milwaukee and Dane County will not change these results,” Biden campaign spokesman Nate Evans said in a statement.
But Troupis said the Trump campaign won’t relent on its demand for clarity on what occurred in Wisconsin.
“We will not stop fighting for transparency and integrity in our electoral process to ensure that all Americans can trust the results of a free and fair election in Wisconsin and across the country,” he said.
John Fund
Voter Fraud is real and can affect the outcome of close elections!!!
A guilty plea in a Kansas City, Missouri, voter fraud case this week illustrates something the U.S. Supreme Court pointed out when it upheld Indiana’s voter ID law in 2008:
[F]lagrant examples of [voter] fraud…have been documented throughout this Nation’s history [and] occasional examples have surfaced in recent years that…demonstrate that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it could affect the outcome of a close election.
On Monday, John C. Moretina pleaded guilty to a federal felony count of voter fraud in the August 2010 Democratic primary in Missouri’s 40th legislative district. Moretina falsely claimed he was living in the 40th district just so he could vote in the primary. This is a Democratic district where the winner of the primary, John J. Rizzo, was highly likely to become the district representative in the state house and, in fact, was elected. But Rizzo beat his Democratic opponent, Will Royster, by only one vote: 664 to 663.
Moretina did not inform the court whom he voted for, but since he is Rizzo’s uncle, it is not too much of a stretch to guess that he gave his nephew the winning margin of victory. Moreover, there were also allegations that Moretina’s wife fraudulently voted in this primary election as well, although she was not charged.
What is undeniable is that, as the Kansas City Star says, “the wrong candidate was declared [the] winner of the 2010 Democratic primary.”
Some opponents of voter ID mistakenly claim that this fraud shows that “stricter voter ID” requirements are not needed because voter ID would not have stopped this fraud. While no one claims that voter ID is a solution to all types of voter fraud, it is one of the critical steps that should be taken by states to improve the integrity of the election process.
As John Fund and I outlined in our book Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Riskand as the Supreme Court said,voter fraud is real, and it can change the outcome of a close election. It certainly changed the outcome of this state legislative race in Missouri.
I got a chance to visit with John Fund the last time he came to Little Rock to speak and he made a great case that there is voter fraud happening in recent times and something has to be done about it. Here is an article that shows how liberals are denying reality when they […]
Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund discusses the stimulus bill during Missouri Chamber Day at the Capitol Part 2 Last week I got to attend the first ever “Conservative Lunch Series” presented by KARN and Americans for Prosperity Foundation at the Little Rock Hilton on University Avenue. This monthly luncheon will be held the fourth […]
John Fund at Chamber Day, Part 1 Last week I got to attend the first ever “Conservative Lunch Series” presented by KARN and Americans for Prosperity Foundation at the Little Rock Hilton on University Avenue. This monthly luncheon will be held the fourth Wednesday of every month. The speaker for today’s luncheon was John Fund. John […]
Ep. 7 – Who Protects the Consumer [1/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose (1980) Milton Friedman served as economic advisor for two American Presidents – Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. Although Friedman was inevitably drawn into the national political spotlight, he never held public office. In the clip above you can see Milton Friedman […]
Ep. 8 – Who Protects the Worker [1/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose (1980) Speakers at the First Richmond Tea Party, October 8-9, 2010 John Fund John Fund is a columnist for The Wall Street Journal and its OpinionJournal.com and an on-air contributor to 24-hour cable news networks CNBC and MSNBC. He is the […]
Today I got to attend the first ever “Conservative Lunch Series” presented by KARN and Americans for Prosperity Foundation at the Little Rock Hilton on University Avenue. This monthly luncheon will be held the fourth Wednesday of every month. The speaker for today’s luncheon was John Fund. John Fund writes the weekly “On the Trail” column […]
1 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton
2 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton
barton videos
4 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton
February 6, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life.
“Most of the founding fathers of this nation … built the worldview of this nation on the authority of the Word of God,” Ken Ham said. “Because of that, there have been reminders in this culture concerning God’s Word, the God of creation.”
In the advertisement from the Freedom from Religion Foundation you have a quote from Benjamin Franklin but these quotes below were omitted.
Benjamin Franklin
Signer of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence
[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.
(Source: Benjamin Franklin, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, editor (Boston: Tappan, Whittemore and Mason, 1840), Vol. X, p. 297, April 17, 1787. )
I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that “except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service.
(Source: James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, Max Farrand, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. I, pp. 450-452, June 28, 1787.)
* For more details on this quote check out this link
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733
President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. There have […]
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]
President Obama Speaks at The Ohio State University Commencement Ceremony Published on May 5, 2013 President Obama delivers the commencement address at The Ohio State University. May 5, 2013. You can learn a lot about what President Obama thinks the founding fathers were all about from his recent speech at Ohio State. May 7, 2013, […]
Dr. C. Everett Koop with Bill Graham. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This […]
America’s Founding Fathers Deist or Christian? – David Barton 4/6 There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at […]
3 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton There were 55 gentlemen who put together the constitution and their church affliation is of public record. Greg Koukl notes: Members of the Constitutional Convention, the most influential group of men shaping the political foundations of our nation, were […]
I do not think that John Quincy Adams was a founding father in the same sense that his father was. However, I do think he was involved in the early days of our government working with many of the founding fathers. Michele Bachmann got into another history-related tussle on ABC’s “Good Morning America” today, standing […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the […]
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ____________ The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book really helped develop my political […]
Office of Barack and Michelle Obama P.O. Box 91000 Washington, DC 20066
Dear President Obama,
I wrote you over 700 letters while you were President and I mailed them to the White House and also published them on my blog http://www.thedailyhatch.org .I received several letters back from your staff and I wanted to thank you for those letters.
I have been reading your autobiography A PROMISED LAND and I have been enjoying it. I noticed this quote from your book:
“I suspect that God’s plan, whatever it is, works on a scale too large to admit our mortal tribulations; that in a single lifetime, accidents and happenstance determine more than we care to admit…and that the best we can do is to try to align ourselves with what we feel is right and construct some meaning out of our confusion, and with grace and nerve play at each moment the hand that we’re dealt.”
It sounds like you believe that we are at the mercy of time and chance?
As an evangelical believer I am encouraged by your references to spiritual hymns, but your intellectual views seem to place you in the secular humanist school of thought.
Former President Barack Obama’s new book, “A Promised Land,” mentions only four pages in its index under the category “faith and.”
But the title of the book by the 44th U.S. president invokes biblical imagery — a land promised by God to his people — and Obama includes the role of religious institutions, faith leaders and personal traditions throughout the 750-page book. On the page after his dedication of the tome to his wife and daughters, Obama features the words from an African American spiritual:
“Fly and never tire
There’s a great camp-meeting in the Promised Land.”
While friends and strangers have told him they believe God engineered his road to the White House, Obama says he didn’t view his political path as a call from the Almighty.
(Pari Dukovic/Random House via AP) This photo provided by Random House shows the cover of “A Promised Land.” The first volume of former President Barack Obama’s memoir came out Nov. 17.
“I suspect that God’s plan, whatever it is, works on a scale too large to admit our mortal tribulations; that in a single lifetime, accidents and happenstance determine more than we care to admit,” he writes, “and that the best we can do is to try to align ourselves with what we feel is right and construct some meaning out of our confusion, and with grace and nerve play at each moment the hand that we’re dealt.”
THIS SEEMS TO ME THAT YOU THINK OUR FUTURE IS TIED MORE TO ACCIDENTS AND CHANCE THAN TO A DIVINE PURPOSE.
President Obama your views are more in line with those of atheistic evolutionists than those scientists such as Isaac Newton who believed in creationism. I had the unique opportunity from 2015 to 2020 to correspond with a famous Harvard educated British scientist named Professor Horace Barlow of Cambridge. Barlow was named after his grandfather Horace Darwin. Most of the correspondence between Dr. Barlow and myself dealt with the views of Barlow’s famous great grandfather Charles Darwin.
In my February 11, 2015 Letter to Dr. Barlow I made the following points about Charles Darwin and the subject of CHANCE and Dr. Barlow responded to many of these points in his November 22, 2017 letter:
“It is impossible to answer your question briefly; and I am not sure that I could do so, even if I wrote at some length. But I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God; but whether this is an argument of real value, I have never been able to decide.”
Francis Schaeffer observed:
So he sees here exactly the same that I would labor and what Paul gives in Romans chapter one, and that is first this tremendous universe [and it’s form] and the second thing, the mannishness of man and the concept of this arising from chance is very difficult for him to come to accept and he is forced to leap into this, his own kind of Kierkegaardian leap, but he is forced to leap into this because of his presuppositions but when in reality the real world troubles him. He sees there is no third alternative. If you do not have the existence of God then you only have chance. In my own lectures I am constantly pointing out there are only two possibilities, either a personal God or this concept of the impersonal plus time plus chance and Darwin understood this . You will notice that he divides it into the same exact two points that Paul does in Romans chapter one into and that Carl Gustav Jung (1875-1961) will in the problem of existence, the external universe, and man and his consciousness. Paul points out there are these two steps that man is confronted with, what I would call two things in the real world. The universe and it’s form and I usually quote Jean Paul Sartre here, and Sartre says the basic philosophic problem is that something is there rather than nothing is there and I then I add at the point the very thing that Darwin feels and that is it isn’t a bare universe that is out there, it is an universe in a specific form. I always bring in Einstein and the uniformity of the form of the universe and that it is constructed as a well formulated word puzzle or you have Carl Gustav Jung who says two things cut across a man’s will that he can not truly be autonomous, the external world and what Carl Gustav Jung would call his “collected unconsciousness.” It is the thing that churns up out of man, the mannishness of man. Darwin understood way back here this is a real problem. So he says “the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe,” part one, the real world, the external universe, and part two “with our conscious selves arose through chance” and then he goes on and says this is not “an argument of real value.” This only thing he has to put in its place is his faith in his own theory.
______________
Here below is the Romans passage that Schaeffer is referring to and verse 19 refers to what Schaeffer calls “the mannishness of man” and verse 20 refers to Schaeffer’s other point which is “the universe and it’s form.”Romans 1:18-22Amplified Bible (AMP) 18 For God’s [holy] wrath and indignation are revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who in their wickedness repress and hinder the truth andmake it inoperative. 19 For that which is known about God is evident to them and made plain in their inner consciousness,because God [Himself] has shown it to them. 20 For ever since the creation of the world His invisible nature and attributes, that is, His eternal power and divinity, have been made intelligible and clearly discernible in and through the things that have been made (His handiworks). So [men] are without excuse [altogether without any defense or justification], 21 Because when they knew and recognized Him as God, they did not honor andglorify Him as God or give Him thanks. But instead they became futile andgodless in their thinking [with vain imaginings, foolish reasoning, and stupid speculations] and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools [professing to be smart, they made simpletons of themselves].
Francis Schaeffer noted that in Darwin’s 1876 Autobiography that Darwin he is going to set forth two arguments for God in this and again you will find when he comes to the end of this that he is in tremendous tension. Darwin wrote,
At the present day the most usual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from the deep inward conviction and feelings which are experienced by most persons.Formerly I was led by feelings such as those just referred to (although I do not think that the religious sentiment was ever strongly developed in me), to the firm conviction of the existence of God and of the immortality of the soul. In my Journal I wrote that whilst standing in the midst of the grandeur of a Brazilian forest, ‘it is not possible to give an adequate idea of the higher feelings of wonder, admiration, and devotion which fill and elevate the mind.’ I well remember my conviction that there is more in man than the mere breath of his body; but now the grandest scenes would not cause any such convictions and feelings to rise in my mind. It may be truly said that I am like a man who has become colour-blind.
Francis Schaeffer remarked:
Now Darwin says when I look back and when I look at nature I came to the conclusion that man can not be just a fly! But now Darwin has moved from being a younger man to an older man and he has allowed his presuppositions to enter in to block his logic. These things at the end of his life he had no intellectual answer for. To block them out in favor of his theory. Remember the letter of his that said he had lost all aesthetic senses when he had got older and he had become a clod himself. Now interesting he says just the same thing, but not in relation to the arts, namely music, pictures, etc, but to nature itself. Darwin said, “But now the grandest scenes would not cause any such convictions and feelings to rise in my mind. It may be truly said that I am like a man who has become colour-blind…” So now you see that Darwin’s presuppositions have not only robbed him of the beauty of man’s creation in art, but now the universe. He can’t look at it now and see the beauty. The reason he can’t see the beauty is for a very, very , very simple reason: THE BEAUTY DRIVES HIM TO DISTRACTION. THIS IS WHERE MODERN MAN IS AND IT IS HELL. The art is hell because it reminds him of man and how great man is, and where does it fit in his system? It doesn’t. When he looks at nature and it’s beauty he is driven to the same distraction and so consequently you find what has built up inside him is a real death, not only the beauty of the artistic but the beauty of nature. He has no answer in his logic and he is left in tension. He dies and has become less than human because these two great things (such as any kind of art and the beauty of nature) that would make him human stand against his theory
My Fourth letter dated 2-1-17 was an Email on first cause! And if creation was done by expression of a mind?
“It is impossible to answer your question briefly; and I am not sure that I could do so, even if I wrote at some length. But I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God; but whether this is an argument of real value, I have never been able to decide…Nor can I overlook the difficulty from the immense amount of suffering through the world. I am aware that if we admit a First Cause, the mind still craves to know whence it came, and how it arose.”
Jan Constantijn Costerus and Nicolaas Dirk Doedes pictured below:
—
Francis Schaeffer noted:
What he is saying is if you say there is a first cause, then the mind says, “Where did this come from?” I think this is a bit old fashioned, with some of the modern thinkers, this would not have carry as much weight today as it did when Darwin expressed it. Jean Paul Sartre said it as well as anyone could possibly say it. The philosophic problem is that something is there and not nothing being there. No one has the luxury of beginning with nothing. Nobody I have ever read has put forth that everything came from nothing. I have never met such a person in all my reading,or all my discussion. If you are going to begin with nothing being there, it has to be nothing nothing, and it can’t be something nothing. When someone says they believe nothing is there, in reality they have already built in something there. The only question is do you begin with an impersonal something or a personal something. All human thought is shut up to these two possibilities. Either you begin with an impersonal and then have Darwin’s own dilemma which impersonal plus chance, now he didn’t bring in the amount of time that modern man would though. Modern man has brought in huge amounts of time into the equation as though that would make a difference because I have said many times that time can’t make a qualitative difference but only a quantitative difference. The dilemma is it is either God or chance. Now you find this intriguing thing in Darwin’s own situation, he can’t understand how chance could have produced these two great factors of the universe and its form and the mannishness of man.
“Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting, I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as I can remember, when I wrote the Origin of Species, and it is since that time that it has very gradually, with many fluctuations, become weaker. But then arises the doubt…”
Francis Schaeffer commented:
On the basis of his reason he has to say there must be an intelligent mind, someone analogous to man. You couldn’t describe the God of the Bible better. That is man is made in God’s image and therefore, you know a great deal about God when you know something about man. What he is really saying here is that everything in my experience tells me it must be so, and my mind demands it is so. Not just these feelings he talked about earlier but his MIND demands it is so, but now how does he counter this? How does he escape this? Here is how he does it!!!
Charles Darwin went on to observe: “—can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions?”
1024 × 682Images may be subject to copyright. Learn More
Francis Schaeffe
Francis Schaeffer asserted:
So he says my mind can only come to one conclusion, and that is there is a mind behind it all. However, the doubt comes because his mind has come from the lowest form of earthworm, so how can I trust my mind. But this is a joker isn’t it? Then how can you trust his mind to support such a theory as this? He proved too much. The fact that Darwin found it necessary to take such an escape shows the tremendous weight of Romans 1, that the only escape he can make is to say how can I trust my mind when I come from the lowest animal the earthworm? Obviously think of the grandeur of his concept, I don’t think it is true, but the grandeur of his concept, so what you find is that Darwin is presenting something here that is wrong I feel, but it is not nothing. It is a tremendously grand concept that he has put forward. So he is accepting the dictates of his mind to put forth a grand concept which he later can’t accept in this basic area with his reason, but he rejects what he could accept with his reason on this escape. It really doesn’t make sense. This is a tremendous demonstration of the weakness of his own position.
Dr. Barlow responds to the points I made in earlier letters in his November 22, 2017 letter:
You may ask, “What is to take the place of Religious Belief in helping to understand the world around us? It has order and purpose, which cannot be explained by Blind chance as evolution teaches.” I agree it cannot be explained by Blind chance alone, but Darwin did not claim that this happens, and modern evolutionists agree. We say that chance variations (mutations) occur in the substances (called genes nowadays) that control development and cause son and daughter to resemble father and mother. These genes control the development of the offspring, and and influence their success in life, and in particular they influence the types of mutated genes that are passed on to the next generation. Chance, together with “Survival of the fittest,” thus causes the appearance of apparently purposeful adaptations of the population of genes in a species.
—
These points made by Dr. Barlow seemed to be contradicted by the following quote from the Nobel Prize winner Jacques Monod:
It necessarily follows that chance alone is at the source of every innovation, and of all creation in the biosphere.Pure chance, absolutely free but blind, at the very root of the stupendous edifice of evolution: this central concept of modern biology is no longer one among many other possible or even conceivable hypotheses. It is today the sole conceivable hypothesis, the only one that squares with observed and tested fact. And nothing warrants the supposition – or the hope – that on this score our position is ever likely to be revised. There is no scientific concept, in any of the sciences, more destructive of anthropocentrism than this one.
In my letter to Dr. Barlow on November 2, 2018 I responded to some of Dr. Barlow’s points and I tried to make the point that Darwin never did get comfortable with the idea that chance was responsible for all of the creation and Randal Keynes actually makes the point that Darwin was at times despondent about the possibility that evidence would appear showing that a species had been designed:
Many thanks for your copious and charmingly expressed correspondence about Charles Darwin’s religious views, and about his descriptions of losing his sense of reverence, awe, and beauty in his old age. Notice, however, that he clearly did not lose his sense of the value of truth, and of the importance of forever searching it out.
Darwin may have been searching for truth, but he never did come to a complete satisfaction that he had found it with his theory of evolution. Notice that your relative Randal Keynes makes this very point on Richard Dawkins special “The Genius of Darwin”:
(Richard Dawkins words below)
Back in England at Down Housenow 20 years after his voyage on the Beagle,Darwin had worked out the answers to the biggest questions ever asked.But he was strangely reluctant to go public with his idea.Darwin himself said that he’d become a kind of machinefor grinding theories out of huge assemblages of facts.I think that wasn’t really what it was like at all.He was an extraordinarily imaginative, deep thinker.He had a prodigiously curious mind as well.He was drawn to facts that didn’t fit.He once said, “I cannot bear to be beaten.”Darwin’s theory explained how the diversity of life from the planethad evolved spontaneously without interference from any god.But he was acutely aware of how upsettingthis flat contradiction of the religious story would be.He hesitated to publish.Then, in June 1858, Darwin received a letterfrom a naturalist travelling in the Far East, Alfred Russel Wallace,which set our similar ideas.Darwin was in despair about being scooped.He was even ready to drop his life’s work.But he was persuaded by Charles Lyell and othersto present his unpublished work alongside Wallace’s notes,and then complete his masterpiece for publication.
I’ve come to meet Randal Keynes, Darwin’s great-great-grandsonto try to understand Darwin’s frame of mindas he finished his book.This is a book about geology by Mr Greenough.It has this wonderful inscription –“Charles Darwin, Buenos Aires, October 1832.”So he’s on the Beagle,really getting into his stride as a geologist.This is a scrapbook, a children’s scrapbookthat belonged to Darwin’s daughter Annie. ‘Darwin was no aggressive polemicist.‘He didn’t take to the stage to publicize his work,‘but sought to influence leading thinkers behind the scenes,‘by sending them proof copies of the book with apologetic letters attached.’He would write things like, “This vile rag of a theory of mine.”Was that genuine modesty or was there an element of false modesty about it? It was entirely real, um, and this is a very strange point about him.Through the years when he was steeling himself for publication,um, he was, at different times, enormously confident in it,and at other times, he was utterly uncertain.He had a deep fear, I think,that one species would be discoveredthat had some element of its make-upthat could only have been designed. Doubts may have lingered in Darwin’s mind,but finally, 150 years ago, he set out his ideas on evolutionand how it worked in The Origin Of Species.
“I am glad you were at the Messiah, it is the one thing that I should like to hear again, but I dare say I should find my soul too dried up to appreciate it as in old days; and then I should feel very flat, for it is a horrid bore to feel as I constantly do, that I am a withered leaf for every subject except Science. It sometimes makes me hate Science, though God knows I ought to be thankful for such a perennial interest, which makes me forget for some hours every day my accursed stomach.’
Francis Schaeffer summarized Darwin’s statement:
So he is glad for science because his stomach bothers him, but on the other hand when I think of what it costs me I almost hate science. You can almost hear young Jean-Jacques Rousseau speaking here, he sees what the machine is going to do and he hates the machine and Darwin is constructing the machine and it leads as we have seen to his own loss of human values in the area of aesthetics, the area of art and also in the area of nature. This is what it has cost him. His theory has led him to this place. When you come to this then it seems to me that you understand man’s dilemma very, very well, to think of the origin of the theory of mechanical evolution bringing Darwin himself to the place of this titanic tension.
Schaeffer discusses further Darwin’s doubts about evolution:
Darwin in his autobiography ( Darwin, Francis ed. 1892. Charles Darwin: his life told in an autobiographical chapter, and in a selected series of his published letters [abridged edition]. London: John Murray. ) and in his letters Darwin showed that all through his life he never really came to a quietness concerning the possibility that chance really explained the situation of the biological world. You will find there is much material on this [from Darwin] extended over many many years that constantly he was wrestling with this problem. Darwin never came to a place of satisfaction. You have philosophically only two possible beginnings. The first would be a personal beginning and the other would be an impersonal beginning plus time plus chance. There is no other possible alternative except the alternative that everything comes out of nothing and that has to be a total nothing and that has to be a total nothing without mass, energy or motion existing. No one holds this last view because it is unthinkable. Darwin understood this and therefore until his death he was uncomfortable with the idea of chance producing the biological variation.
On May 15, 1994, the 10th anniversary of the passing of Francis Schaeffer, I mailed a letter to about 250 of the world top skeptics and I have posted this letter on my blog ( [Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4] ). In that letter were these quotes:
J.W.Burrow – “Nature, according to Darwin, was the product of blind chance and a blind struggle, and man a lonely, intelligent mutation, scrambling with the brutes for his sustenance. To some the sense of loss was irrevocable; It was as if an umbilical cord had been cut, and men found themselves part of a cold passionless universe.”
William B. Provine in “The End of Ethics?” article in HARD CHOICES (a magazine companion to the television series HARD CHOICES) wrote:Even though it is often asserted that science is fully compatible with our Judeo-Christian tradition, in fact it is not… To be sure, even in antiquity, the mechanistic view of life–that chance was responsible for the shape of the world– had a few adherents. But belief in overarching order was dominant; it can be seen as easily in such scientists as Newton, Harvey, and Einstein as in the theologians Augustine, Luther, and Tillich. But beginning with Darwin, biology has undermined that tradition. Darwin in effect asserted that all living organisms had been created by a combination of CHANCE and necessity–natural selection.In the twentieth century, this view of life has been reinforced by a whole series of discoveries…Mind is the only remaining frontier, but it would be shortsighted to doubt that it can, one day, be duplicated in the form of thinking robots or analyzed in terms of the chemistry and electricity of the brain. The extreme mechanic view of life, which every new discovery in biology tends to confirm, has certain implications. First, God has no role in the physical world…Second, except for the laws of probability and cause and effect, there is no organizing principle in the world, and NO PURPOSE.
Bertrand Russell – “That Man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of Man’s achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the débris of a universe in ruins—all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul’s habitation henceforth be safely built.”(Bertrand Russell, Free Man’s Worship)
—-
It is either a personal God who created it all or evolution by chance. Take a look at this statement by George Wald:
George Wald in 1987
“When it comes to the origin of life, we have only two possibilities as to how life arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to evolution; the other is a supernatural creative act of God. There is NO THIRD possibility…Spontaneous generation was scientifically disproved one hundred years ago by Louis Pasteur, Spellanzani, Reddy and others. That leads us scientifically to only one possible conclusion — that life arose as a supernatural creative act of God…I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God. Therefore, I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generationarising to evolution.” – Scientific American, August, 1954.
“Understand, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall He not hear? He that formed the eye, shall He not see?” (Psalm 94:8,9)
The concept of evolution, according to this verse, is nothing but brute-like foolishness. If an automobile presupposes an auto-maker, and a clock implies a clock-maker, surely the infinitely more intricate and complex eyes and ears of living creatures require an ear-maker and an eye-maker! “The hearing ear, and the seeing eye, the LORD hath made even both of them” (Proverbs 20:12).
The most basic of all scientific laws—the law of cause and effect (no effect greater than its cause)—becomes utmost nonsense if the cosmos is the product of chaos and the universe evolved by chance. “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1).
Every creature, from the single-celled amoebae to the amazing human body, bears the impress of intricate planning and construction. The notion that such complex structures could evolve by random mutations and natural selection is simply a measure of the audacity of human rebellion and the absurdity of humanistic reasoning. Such things never happen in the real world, and there is no real scientific evidence whatever for “vertical” evolution from one kind to a higher kind. The only genuine evidence for evolution is the fact that the leaders of intellectualism believe it, and the only reason they believe it is their frantic desire to escape God. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 1:22).
The ear did not “evolve;” it was planted. The eye did not “happen by chance;” it was formed. Every wise man and woman will say with the psalmist, “I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well” (Psalm 139:14). HMM
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733 everettehatcher@gmail.com
President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. There have […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers, President Obama | Edit |Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
President Obama Speaks at The Ohio State University Commencement Ceremony Published on May 5, 2013 President Obama delivers the commencement address at The Ohio State University. May 5, 2013. You can learn a lot about what President Obama thinks the founding fathers were all about from his recent speech at Ohio State. May 7, 2013, […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)
Dr. C. Everett Koop with Bill Graham. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit |Comments (1)
America’s Founding Fathers Deist or Christian? – David Barton 4/6 There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Tagged governor of connecticut, john witherspoon, jonathan trumbull | Edit | Comments (1)
3 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton There were 55 gentlemen who put together the constitution and their church affliation is of public record. Greg Koukl notes: Members of the Constitutional Convention, the most influential group of men shaping the political foundations of our nation, were […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
I do not think that John Quincy Adams was a founding father in the same sense that his father was. However, I do think he was involved in the early days of our government working with many of the founding fathers. Michele Bachmann got into another history-related tussle on ABC’s “Good Morning America” today, standing […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit |Comments (0)
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ____________ The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book really helped develop my political […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)
Voting booths await users in Flint, Michigan, at a polling place on Nov. 3. Michigan was one of the hotly contested swing states. (Photo: Seth Herald/Agence France-Presse/GettyImages)
Noncitizens likely voted at a high enough rate to alter the 2020 Electoral College tally, potentially flipping the states of Arizona and Georgia in the presidential election, according to an analysis by Just Facts, a research group.
That’s significant, and while it wouldn’t be enough to hand the election to President Donald Trump, it potentially could have made a difference. Only U.S. citizens are legally allowed to vote in federal elections.
The revised estimate, as of Monday, shows that Trump could have won 259 electoral votes if noncitizen votes were not counted. But that would likely still leave former Vice President Joe Biden with 279 electoral votes, nine votes more than the 270 needed to win.
The current electoral vote tally stands at 306 for Biden, 232 for Trump. Arizona has 11 Electoral College votes, while Georgia gets 16.
The left is actively working to undermine the integrity of our elections. Read the plan to stop them now. Learn more now >>
Just Facts first released an analysis on Nov. 8, five days after the election, that calculated a lower and upper estimate of the extent of noncitizen voting. That analysis determined that Trump could have won as few as 259 electoral votes—or as many as 285. The latter would have secured a second term.
However, as more mail-in votes were counted, Biden’s lead widened in states such Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Nevada.
Several major media outlets have projected Bidenas the president-elect, but the Trump campaign is still litigating in several battleground states. The Trump team has not made noncitizen voting a significant part of its allegations of voter fraud.
The revised study estimated the number of noncitizen votes cast in the states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania—all of which were closely contested on election night.
It estimated that 234,570 noncitizen votes benefited Biden across seven battleground states. That estimate did not change as more votes were counted.
“Based on the latest vote counts and the upper and lower bounds of the study results, Georgia and Arizona would flip to Trump, leaving him with 259 Electoral College votes,” James Agresti, president of Just Facts, told The Daily Signal. “Under the upper bound, Nevada gets really close, with Trump down by 3,858 votes.”
With the exception of Arizona, each of the states in question appeared to be favoring Trump until the early-morning hours of Nov. 4, but began to shift to Biden over several days. North Carolina is the only state of the seven that appears likely to go to Trump.
The Electoral College will cast its vote in 50 states and the District of Columbia on Dec. 14.
The estimate is based on the percentages of noncitizens that voted in previous elections, predicated on a 2014 study by researchers at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, that evaluated rates of noncitizen voting in 2008 and 2010, Agresti said, applied only to the seven battleground states.
The Old Dominion study determined 6.4% of noncitizens voted in the 2008 presidential election and 3% in the 2010 congressional midterm elections, with 81% voting Democrat.
The rate was high enough to change the Electoral College vote count in 2008 (although not enough to swing the presidential election) and actually change the outcome of some congressional races, particularly the Senate race in Minnesota that year.
That race was decided in favor of Democrat Al Franken over Republican Norm Coleman by just 312 votes out of more than 2.86 million votes cast.
Agresti noted that illegal noncitizen voting is just “one type of fraud” that could have occurred in the 2020 election.
Asked about the proliferation of mail-in voting and ballot harvesting, he said, “That could certainly make it easier, with fewer checks and balances,” for a larger number of noncitizens to vote.
Last week, USA Today criticized the initial study claiming in a “fact check” column that rated the study as “missing context,” and arguing that it “relies on unverifiable estimates.”
Just Facts issued a rebuttal on Tuesday to what it called a “slanderous ‘fact check’” of its study:
The Just Facts study doesn’t claim to have the precise 2020 numbers, and is clear in its reliance on the Old Dominion study and other sources, such as a 2008 Harvard/YouGov survey, the Government Accountability Office, and the Social Security Administration, to apply data from past elections as the basis for the assumptions of the numbers this year.
Agresti noted that as many as 15% of noncitizens said they were registered to vote, based on survey data cited in the Old Dominion report.
The full extent of noncitizen voting is a problem, as demonstrated in past years in Pennsylvania, said Hans von Spakovsky, the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation.
Part of the problem is that when states register to vote people obtaining a driver’s license, officials don’t ask about citizenship.
“We don’t know the full extent of the problem, but we know it is a problem,” von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission, told The Daily Signal. “We need to require proof of citizenship from people registering to vote.”
I got a chance to visit with John Fund the last time he came to Little Rock to speak and he made a great case that there is voter fraud happening in recent times and something has to be done about it. Here is an article that shows how liberals are denying reality when they say we don’t need better voter ID laws.
We are constantly told by liberals that there is no voter fraud — or at least not any that involves voting at the polls.
Well, the son of Representative Jim Moran, the Democrat who represents Virginia’s Washington suburbs, has just resigned as field director for his father’s campaign for essentially proving them wrong. Moran was caught by videographer James O’Keefe’s camera advising an undercover reporter on how to commit in-person voter fraud. The scheme involved forging utility bills that would satisfy Virginia’s voter-ID law and then rely on the assistance of Democratic lawyers stationed at the polls to make sure the votes were counted.
A leading Virginia liberal blog called “Not Larry Sabato” minced no words about Patrick Moran’s behavior: “No reason to sugarcoat this in any way, it is totally unacceptable,” was his conclusion. He then went on to say “it’s time for his dad to retire.”
Representative Moran, who has been in office for 22 years, is a rough-and-ready politician who has frequently embarrassed himself with politically incorrect comments and controversial positions. It will be interesting to see if his fellow Democrats stand with him now that his campaign has made it more difficult for them to repeat the tired claim that “there is no voter fraud.”
The 26-minute O’Keefe video begins with the undercover reporter approaching Moran at a Cosi restaurant in Arlington. The reporter tells Moran, whom he has never met, that he has a friend who has found a list of 100 Virginia residents who haven’t voted in the last three elections but are registered to vote.
After Moran finally understands that the goal is to use the list to cast fraudulent votes in the names of those non-voters, he explains how that could be done. He suggests creating fake utility bills, which would serve as a form of acceptable identification for voters. He warns that the state’s new voter-ID law will mean poll workers will be “cracking down” on possible voter fraud, but there is a way around the law.
“So, if they just have the utility bill or bank statement — bank statement would obviously be tough . . . but faking a utility bill would be easy enough,” Moran says. The two men then discuss how Microsoft Word can be used to manufacture a fake utility bill.
If there’s any trouble, Moran then advises, an Obama for America lawyer, or another Democratic lawyer working the polling place would be available to help:
“You’ll have somebody in house, that if they feel that what you have is legitimate, they’ll argue for you.”
Moran then helpfully invites the O’Keefe associate into the Arlington County Democratic Party’s office where he tells him he should contact the registered voters on his list to make sure they won’t be voting. One method he suggests is to impersonate a pollster and ask if they plan to vote.
Last April, a 22-year-old O’Keefe associate showed how easy it is to vote in the name of someone else at a polling place that doesn’t require ID by simply mentioning the name of attorney general Eric Holder, and then being offered his ballot. Now O’Keefe has shown just how easy it could be to commit in-person voter fraud, even with some form of ID law, by simply using Microsoft Word and manufacturing a utility bill.
Here’s hoping against hope that O’Keefe’s latest video will stir some in the media to engage in the kind of investigative journalism that is so lacking on voting issues.
Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund discusses the stimulus bill during Missouri Chamber Day at the Capitol Part 2 Last week I got to attend the first ever “Conservative Lunch Series” presented by KARN and Americans for Prosperity Foundation at the Little Rock Hilton on University Avenue. This monthly luncheon will be held the fourth […]
John Fund at Chamber Day, Part 1 Last week I got to attend the first ever “Conservative Lunch Series” presented by KARN and Americans for Prosperity Foundation at the Little Rock Hilton on University Avenue. This monthly luncheon will be held the fourth Wednesday of every month. The speaker for today’s luncheon was John Fund. John […]
Ep. 7 – Who Protects the Consumer [1/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose (1980) Milton Friedman served as economic advisor for two American Presidents – Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. Although Friedman was inevitably drawn into the national political spotlight, he never held public office. In the clip above you can see Milton Friedman […]
Ep. 8 – Who Protects the Worker [1/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose (1980) Speakers at the First Richmond Tea Party, October 8-9, 2010 John Fund John Fund is a columnist for The Wall Street Journal and its OpinionJournal.com and an on-air contributor to 24-hour cable news networks CNBC and MSNBC. He is the […]
Today I got to attend the first ever “Conservative Lunch Series” presented by KARN and Americans for Prosperity Foundation at the Little Rock Hilton on University Avenue. This monthly luncheon will be held the fourth Wednesday of every month. The speaker for today’s luncheon was John Fund. John Fund writes the weekly “On the Trail” column […]
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/sltrib/ZBFLSNID6BDV7CWC6USJQMGDXA.jpg)
/https://public-media.smithsonianmag.com/filer/Charles-Darwin-1880-631.jpg)
“Vice is a monster of such awful mien, that to be hated needs but to be seen, but seen too oft, familiar with her face, we first endure, then pity, then embrace.”
