A Look At How Democrats And Republicans Differ

By Chuck Baldwin
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/4962

It is an absolute fact that no matter which of the two major parties in Washington, D.C., is in power, the freedoms and liberties of the American people continue to be eroded. However, this does NOT mean that there are not basic differences between the two parties. The two parties differ greatly on HOW government will take our liberties. Where they are similar is in the fact that neither of them has any interest in preserving liberty. Until the American people awaken to this reality, whatever freedoms we have left in this country are doomed.

Let me ask you a question: does it really matter whether a free man is enslaved by a socialist state or a fascist state? Are the prisons any more accommodating? Are the lashes from the whip any less painful? Is the agony of losing a loved one any less grievous? Is the persecution any less revolting? What difference does it make to a free man if his liberties are stolen by an Adolf Hitler or by a Joseph Stalin?

Do you want a quick reference to the difference between how the Democrats and Republicans in Washington, D.C., are stealing our liberties? When the Democrats control things, America gets more socialism; when the Republicans control things, America gets more corporatism, which is a polite word for fascism. Socialism requires government to own everything, while fascism requires government to control everything. And remember, too, fascists and socialists have always hated each other. Big deal! Fascists and socialists alike hate freedomists, which is why inside-the-beltway Repubs and Dems can’t stand people like Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and yours truly. (Remember the MIAC report identifying the three of us, and our supporters, as being potential “dangerous militia” members?) So who cares which of these two parties happens to be in power? Our freedoms continue to be under siege. That’s why the battle in Washington politics has nothing to do with preserving freedom, but everything to do with HOW government will take freedom. Will they take it by ownership or by control? And, unfortunately, what we have right now is the worst of both worlds: government is using a combination of both ownership and control to steal our liberties. Why? Because except for a very precious few elected civil magistrates (like Congressman Ron Paul), there is no one on Capitol Hill or the White House who remotely understands–or fights for–the principles of liberty.

Even worse is that when the Donkeys and the Elephants do agree, it almost always is in an effort to point the bayonets at the American citizenry. What does it matter whether government owns it or controls it? What does it matter whether it more resembles socialism of corporatism? What it doesn’t look anything like, is FREEDOM!

Take the Democrat/Republican debate over Obamacare. Even if Mitt Romney and the GOP prevail in the November elections, Obamacare will be replaced with Romneycare. And Romneycare will be 85% Obamacare, with a slight shift toward government control and a slight shift away from government ownership. Again, I say, BIG DEAL! What neither party is talking about is that the federal government has no business being in health care. Period! Just like the federal government has no business being in over 90% of everything it is involved in today. But who do you hear saying that in Washington, D.C., except Ron Paul?

Take the issue of the burgeoning surveillance society. What does it matter which major party is in power in Washington, D.C.? The TSA gets more and more obnoxiously tyrannical; abuses of civil liberties under the guise of fighting a “war on drugs” continues unabated; abuses of the Bill of Rights under the guise of fighting a “war on terror” continues unabated; the federal police state continues to grow exponentially; unconstitutional foreign entanglements continue to proliferate; ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

In a book that I have recommended numerous times, “Hitler’s Cross,” Erwin Lutzer writes on page 72, “Through surveillance, wiretaps, spying, and rewarding those who betrayed their friends, Hitler tried to control the citizens of Germany.” On page 73, Lutzer continues the thought saying, “But Hitler did not have the technology to bring every subject of his realm into line.” So, given the technology that is available today, what would Hitler do differently if he were running things in Washington, D.C.? I ask readers to think seriously about that question. What would Hitler do differently?

Today, the federal government monitors virtually every piece of electronic communication. The federal government monitors virtually every major banking transaction. It has spies infiltrated in even harmless organizations all over the country. It threatens people with the loss of their jobs or freedom (or both) to betray their friends. It spies on us with satellites; it spies on us with drones. On July 6, 2012, President Obama signed an Executive Order authorizing the federal government to take control of America’s entire communications industry. In 2006, under President George W. Bush, the US military began planning armed confrontation against the American citizenry. (I have the document in my possession.) And, of course, we must not overlook the Patriot Act which has been authorized and reauthorized under both Republicans and Democrats; the Military Commission Act which was signed by G.W. Bush; NDAA 2012 and 2013 which was signed by President Barack Obama, and which was passed by both Republicans and Democrats. And let’s not forget the federal attack against the Branch Davidians under Democrats Bill Clinton and Janet Reno, and the assault against the Randy Weaver household under Republican President George Herbert Walker Bush.

So, again, pick your poison. Both the socialist-leaning Democrats and the corporatist-leaning Republicans in Washington, D.C., meet together in pointing the bayonet against the American citizenry. And you really wonder why nothing significant changes in this country?

And in this regard, the platforms of the two major parties are completely meaningless! I dare say that Barack Obama has never read the Democrat platform and doesn’t care one iota what it says. I also guarantee you that Mitt Romney hasn’t read the Republican platform and doesn’t care one iota what it says either. Can anyone remember when Republican Presidential candidate, Bob Dole, in a rare moment of candor, publicly admitted that he had not read his party’s platform and didn’t care what it said? Party platforms are for the benefit of rank and file party members to make them feel like their ideas count for something to the party leadership. They don’t!

So, do the Democrats and Republicans in Washington, D.C., differ? Yes! They differ on how our freedoms will be taken from us. They differ on the degree of government ownership and control. They differ on the nuances of political tyranny. Where they are twins is in their lust and ambition for power, in their approval of stripping more and more freedoms from the American people, and in their absolute and total disregard for constitutional government.

Without some sort of “Great Awakening” both politically and spiritually, whatever is left of our liberties is doomed–and both major parties in Washington, D.C., are equally culpable.

A Story Worth Reading

In Praise of Caldwell, Clark, Houghton, And Muhlenberg
By Chuck Baldwin
February 17, 2011

Archived column
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=3091

It really wasn’t that long ago. With the way America’s clergymen
act today, however, one would think that preachers such as James
Caldwell, Jonas Clark, Joab Houghton, and John Peter Muhlenberg never
existed. But they did exist; and without them, it is this country we
call the United States of America that would not exist.

Caldwell was a Presbyterian; Muhlenberg was a Lutheran; Houghton was
a Baptist; and no one really seems to know what denomination (if any)
Jonas Clark claimed. But these men had one thing in common (besides
their faith in Jesus Christ): they were all ardent patriots who
actually participated in America’s War for Independence.

James Caldwell

James Caldwell was called “The Rebel High Priest” or “The
Fighting Chaplain.” Caldwell is most famous for the “Give ’em
Watts!” story.

During the Springfield (New Jersey) engagement, the colonial militia
ran out of wadding for their muskets. Quickly, Caldwell galloped to
the Presbyterian church, and returning with an armload of hymnals,
threw them to the ground, and hollered, “Now, boys, give ’em
Watts!” He was referring to the famous hymn writer, Isaac Watts, of
course.

The British hated Caldwell so much, they murdered his wife, Hannah,
in her own home, as she sat with her children on her bed. Later, a
fellow American who had been bribed by the British to assassinate the
preacher murdered Caldwell. Americans loyal to the Crown burned both
his house and church. No less than three cities and two public schools
in the State of New Jersey bear his name.

John Peter Muhlenberg

John Peter Muhlenberg was pastor of a Lutheran church in Woodstock,
Virginia, when hostilities erupted between Great Britain and the
American colonies. When news of Bunker Hill reached Virginia,
Muhlenberg preached a sermon from Ecclesiastes chapter 3 to his
congregation. He reminded his parishioners that there was a time to
preach and a time to fight. He said that for him the time to preach
was past and it was time to fight. He then threw off his vestments and
stood before his congregants in the uniform of a Virginia colonel.

Muhlenberg later was promoted to brigadier-general in the Continental
Army, and later, major general. He participated in the battles of
Brandywine, Germantown, Monmouth, and Yorktown. He went on to serve in
both the US House of Representatives and US Senate.

Joab Houghton

Joab Houghton was in the Hopewell (New Jersey) Baptist Meeting House
at worship when he received the first information regarding the
battles at Lexington and Concord. His great-grandson gives the
following eloquent description of the way he treated the tidings:

“ounting the great stone block in front of the meeting-house, he
beckoned the people to stop. Men and women paused to hear, curious to
know what so unusual a sequel to the service of the day could mean. At
the first, words a silence, stern as death, fell over all. The Sabbath
quiet of the hour and of the place was deepened into a terrible
solemnity. He told them all the story of the cowardly murder at
Lexington by the royal troops; the heroic vengeance following hard
upon it; the retreat of Percy; the gathering of the children of the
Pilgrims round the beleaguered hills of Boston; then pausing, and
looking over the silent throng, he said slowly, ‘Men of New Jersey,
the red coats are murdering our brethren of New England! Who follows
me to Boston?’ And every man in that audience stepped out of line,
and answered, ‘I!’ There was not a coward or a traitor in old
Hopewell Baptist Meeting-House that day.” (Cathcart, William.
Baptists and the American Revolution. Philadelphia: S.A. George, 1876,
rev. 1976. Print.)

Jonas Clark

Jonas Clark was pastor of the church in Lexington, Massachusetts, on
April 19, 1775, the day that British troops marched on Concord with
orders to arrest Sam Adams and John Hancock, and to seize a cache of
firearms. What most historians fail to acknowledge, is that it was
Pastor Clark’s male congregants who were the first ones to face-off
against the British troops as they marched through Lexington. When you
hear the story of the “Minutemen” at the Battle of Lexington,
remember those Minutemen were Pastor Jonas Clark and the men of his
congregation. Yes, it was Pastor Jonas Clark and his men who fired
that “shot heard ’round the world.”

On the One Year Anniversary of the Battle of Lexington, Clark
preached a sermon based upon his eyewitness testimony of the event. He
called his sermon, “The Fate of Blood-Thirsty Oppressors and God’s
Tender Care of His Distressed People.” His sermon has been
republished by Nordskog Publishing (www.NordskogPublishing.com) under
the title, “The Battle of Lexington, A Sermon and Eyewitness
Narrative, Jonas Clark, Pastor, Church of Lexington.”

Of course, these four brave preachers were not the only ones to
participate in America’s fight for independence. There were
Episcopalian ministers such as Dr. Samuel Provost of New York, Dr.
John Croes of New Jersey, and Robert Smith of South Carolina.
Presbyterian ministers such as Adam Boyd of North Carolina and James
Armstrong of Maryland, along with many others, also took part.

So many Baptist preachers participated in America’s War for
Independence that, at the conclusion of the war, President George
Washington wrote a personal letter to the Baptist people saying, “I
recollect with satisfaction that the religious societies of which you
are a member have been, throughout America, uniformly and almost
unanimously, the firm friends to civil liberty, and the preserving
promoters of our glorious Revolution.” It also explains how Thomas
Jefferson could write to a Baptist congregation and say, “We have
acted together from the origin to the end of a memorable
Revolution.” (McDaniel, George White. The People Called Baptists.
The Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1918.
Print.)

And although not every pastor was able to actively participate in our
fight for independence, so many pastors throughout colonial America
preached the principles of liberty and independence from their pulpits
that the Crown created a moniker for them: The Black Regiment
(referring to the long, black robes that so many colonial clergymen
wore in the pulpit). Without question, the courageous preaching and
example of colonial America’s patriot-pastors provided the colonists
with the inspiration and resolve to resist the tyranny of the Crown
and win America’s freedom and independence.

I invite readers to visit my Black Regiment web page to learn more
about my attempt to resurrect America’s Black-Robed Regiment. Go to:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=23

This is the fighting heritage of America’s pastors and preachers.
So, what has happened? What has happened to that fighting spirit that
once existed, almost universally, throughout America’s Christian
denominations? How have preachers become so timid, so shy, and so
cowardly that they will stand apathetic and mute as America faces the
destruction of its liberties? Where are the preachers to explain,
expound, and extrapolate the principles of liberty from Holy Writ?
Where are the pastors to preach the truth about Romans chapter 13?

I invite readers to watch or download my message series on “The
True Meaning of Romans 13.” I brought three messages on this subject
so far. The fourth and final message will be delivered this Sunday,
February 20, at 2:30pm (MST). To watch the first three messages on
Romans 13, which are archived online, go to:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?cat=16

To watch the fourth and final message on “The True Meaning of
Romans 13” broadcasted live this Sunday, February 20, 2011, at 2:30
pm (MST) go to:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=17

The sermons Americans frequently hear today deal with prosperity
theology, entertainment evangelism, feelgoodism, emotionalism, and
Aren’t-I-Wonderful ear tickling! This milquetoast preaching makes it
hard to find Christian men who even have control of their children,
much less the courage and resolve to stand against the onslaught of
socialism, corporatism, and, yes, fascism that is swallowing America
whole.

America cut its spiritual teeth on the powerful preaching and
exemplary examples of men such as James Caldwell, Jonas Clark, Joab
Houghton, and John Peter Muhlenberg. We need them as much now as we
did then.

Can You Take The Truth?

If you seek truth, it may cost you something. Escpecially if you act upon what you know to be true and right.

Read Chuck Baldwin's latest article here:

A Nation Of Truth-Rejecters
By Chuck Baldwin
January 6, 2011

Archived column:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=2711

A bedrock principle of Natural Law (the Law upon which Western
Civilization rests) is the primacy of truth. Without a desire for, and
appreciation of, truth, society cannot sustain itself. Lies, deceit,
duplicity, etc., are more than moral evils; they are the bane of
freedom and liberty. Take away truth, and one is left without honor,
justice, or decency. Truth is the cement that holds the bricks and
stones of a sane and civilized society together. Remove the former and
the latter will crumble.

Truth also demands courage and honesty, because sometimes it can be
very painful to look at! It takes an honest man to desire truth, as
truth will often reveal the character flaws in his own soul. It also
takes courage to appreciate truth, as truth will often demand that one
change his own opinion or conduct. Unfortunately, it does appear that
the desire for truth has been replaced with a desire for deceit.

Years ago, a great, old preacher-warrior told my former church
congregation, “People today love being lied to.” How right he was!
For the most part, even professing Christian people today love being
lied to. It would seem that many people find deceit easier to digest
than truth. Maybe it’s because these people lack the aforementioned
virtues of honesty and courage.

Truth demands the virtue of honesty, because honesty requires that
information be objectively analyzed and studied; it requires that
personal prejudices and proclivities be set aside; it requires that
humility replace pride, which allows one’s opinions and conduct to
change in the face of truth.

Truth also demands courage, as courage is the active response to
honesty. To know what is right to do is great (many people do not even
know this much), but to act upon what one knows to be right is even
greater--and also harder! Courage gives men the fortitude and
conviction to suffer personal loss in order to be faithful to their
own honesty. Courage places more value on honesty and truth than on
personal prosperity or aggrandizement. Courage propelled Daniel into
the lion’s den; it drove Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego into the
burning fiery furnace; it placed a youthful David onto the battlefield
alone against a fierce and ferocious adversary; it gathered Pastor
Jonas Clark’s congregants (mostly farmers and merchants) onto
Lexington Green to face Britain’s highly trained, professional
soldiers.

So, where are the virtues of honesty and courage in the desire for
truth today? Threaten the average pastor and church leader with some
obscure IRS tax code and they will quickly turn their backs upon
virtually every principle of truth and honor that they once professed
to believe. The mere threat of potential financial loss sends men
(excuse me, males) scurrying for cover.

In this regard, when then-Senator Lyndon Johnson created the heinous
501(c)3 IRS tax-exempt status for churches, he very cleverly (with
assistance from Hades, I might add) planted the seeds that would grow
up to intimidate the vast majority of America’s pastors and church
leaders into becoming silent slaves of the state. In fact, if one has
an opportunity to ever bore deeply into the matter, he or she will
discover that most pastors and church leaders today do not even regard
the Church as the institution of the living God, bound only to the
laws and principles of God’s Holy Word; they perceive it as a
creature of the state, bound to the subjective machinations of IRS
bureaucrats and their toadies in the law profession. And should a
choice ever have to be made between the two, God, His Word, and His
Church will be thrown under the bus in preference to the state-owned
corporation. So much for truth--or honesty, or courage, for that
matter.

The rejection of truth seems ubiquitous in America today. When did it
start? Maybe when Abraham Lincoln turned the Constitution on its head
and--at bayonet point--turned republicanism into nationalism; maybe
when Woodrow Wilson rejected thousands of years of human history and
turned America’s sound money system over to the corrupt and
illegitimate Federal Reserve; maybe when Wilson created the monstrous
Internal Revenue Service; maybe when the 17th Amendment was adopted;
maybe when the American media convinced people that Lee Harvey Oswald
acted alone in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy; maybe
when the American people (including the vast majority of pastors and
Christians) turned their backs (and their hearts) to the Branch
Davidians, who were murdered by federal agents outside Waco, Texas;
maybe when so-called “conservative” Senate Republicans
deliberately chose to cover up President Bill Clinton’s criminal
conduct; maybe when the powers that be began demonizing anyone who
dared to question the “official” story regarding the events on
9/11/01; maybe when a vast majority of Christians and conservatives
blindly followed and actively supported the unconstitutional,
un-American policies of President George W. Bush. They supported Bush
when he threw off Western Civilization’s time-tested Just War
doctrine (and replaced it with an unconscionable Preemptive War
policy), and, again, when he officially began turning America into a
police state by creating the Department of Homeland Security,
implementing the Military Commissions Act, introducing the Patriot
Act, and dismantling Habeus Corpus and Posse Comitatus. Whenever it
started, the sad reality is, America has largely become a nation of
truth-rejecters.

There is a passage of Scripture that I simply must interject here:
“Because they received not the love of the truth . . . God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.” (II
Thess. 2:10,11 KJV)

This is one of God’s universal principles: when people deliberately
reject truth, God will allow them to believe lies, which always leads
to ultimate destruction. I submit that is exactly where America is
today. As a nation, we have rejected truth, and God is giving us over
to deceit and falsehood. And what is interesting to me is the way in
which many unbelievers seem to have a thirst for truth that far
surpasses that of many professing Christians. This leads to an amazing
paradox.

Think of it: when God is moving within a nation with His plan of
truth and justice (which He is always doing), then it stands to reason
that the evil one is, likewise, resisting and countering God’s plan
through deceit and falsehood. This means that those unbelievers who
seek truth are allying themselves with God (maybe even unwittingly),
while those professing Christians who have rejected truth are allying
themselves against God (again, maybe even unwittingly). Remember, God
called the heathen king, Cyrus, “my shepherd.” (Isa. 44:28) But
one thing is constant: truth is like a magnet: one is always being
pulled toward it or away from it, depending upon the polarity of
one’s heart and mind. People who embrace truth tend to embrace it
further, while people who reject truth tend to be continually hardened
against it.

Think of the conflicts of world and American history where brothers
fought against brothers. Many of these brethren died at the hands of
brethren fighting for truth, while other brethren died fighting
against truth. And though men may be unable to discern the difference,
God suffers from no such malady. He knows those who enable truth and
those who disable it. And many of those today that are resisting and
disabling truth call themselves Christians. There is another
appropriate Scripture: “By their fruits ye shall know them.”
(Matt. 7:20 KJV)

Again, the desire for truth is a bedrock principle of a free and
independent society. We must desire truth, first, in our own hearts.
We must be willing to objectively analyze our motives and actions
based upon this fundamental principle. How can so many people
(including professing Christians) behave so dishonestly? How can they
act so cowardly? How is it that truth is only precious when it
doesn’t cost us anything? How can people be so unconcerned about
truth and so spiteful toward those who seek it? How can those who
claim as their Savior the One is “the way, the truth, and the
life” be so calloused against truth? How can those who claim to read
the word of truth (the Bible) be so ignorant of truth?

Look around you: our society is breaking apart due to a lack of
appreciation for truth. Small businesses are being put out of business
due to a lack of truth. Families are being torn apart due to a lack of
truth. Churches are filled with bitterness, carnality, envy, deceit,
duplicity, false accusation, greed, and cowardice due to a lack of
truth. Our political institutions mock the principles of decency and
honor due to a lack of truth. The national media loves to distort
truth; the federal judiciary loves to twist truth; and there is no
such thing as truth to Big Business--only bottom line profits.

As we enter a new year in search of Heaven’s blessing and
protection, let us remind ourselves that God always judges people who
reject truth. Always! If we truly want Heaven’s blessing and
protection upon our land, we will start--each of us--by being willing
to seek and embrace truth, even if doing so costs us something;
because, in reality, people who reject truth lose a whole lot more
than whatever they had hoped to gain. Eventually, they lose, not only
their own lives, but also the life of their country.

Perseverance in Today's World

Perseverance can be a lonely road.

Or maybe a person just doesn’t know when to give up, quit.

As in Chuck Baldwin’s article below, most people just follow the crowd. The crowd is the mass of people who are following the seemingly easy path.

The mass are also the ones that are easily duped.

They cannot persevere when there are not too many people persevering along with them.

The reasons a person had for not going along with the crowd in the first place are no longer valid in their mind. After all, they may reason, Most of the people have abandoned me, so I must be wrong. Which, I admit, might be true. Sometimes a person just doesn’t know when to give up on his perseverance. He or she may be persevering in the wrong thing.

I agree with Mr. Baldwin. Most Christians probably do think a lot of the stories in the Bible are just fairy tales. Those martyrs in those “fairy tale” Bible stories standing for God’s Holy Word, standing against authorities who have over stepped their bounds, have nothing to do with our time today. Not here in the good ol’ US of A anyway. The circumstances back then could never happen today here in the United States.

Not like they happened in Rome, or not like it was in Nazi Germany, right?

Well, I am sure that the way it happened then is the way it is happening now here in our beloved country.

As Mr. Baldwin states in his article, Christians are turning against their brothers and sisters in Christ.

Those Christians are following the crowd; they are duped. They just can’t separate the true from the false. And they don’t see any correlation between our time and it’s tyrants and the past times with it’s tyrants.

It is sad and disturbing to see Christians betraying other Christians.

But we are all self-centered sinners, are we not?

We have no loyalty when it comes to our own feelings of security.

What a warning in Jeremiah 9:4,5.

I’m afraid that my cynical nature (maybe that should read “sin-ical” nature) doesn’t trust my brother or my neighbor. For I have experienced the sting of betrayal at times throughout my life, as I am sure most people have.

Read Chuck Baldwin’s article:

TIME FOR CHRISTIANS TO SHRED THEIR BIBLES

By Chuck Baldwin
December 16, 2010

chuckbaldwinlive.com

Many of us grew up in Sunday School and church. We have heard the great Bible stories over and over. We heard about the story of how Moses’ mother defied Pharaoh and hid her little baby boy in bulrushes. We heard the story of how Moses killed the Egyptian taskmaster defending a Hebrew slave and later became the great deliverer of God’s people. We heard the story of young David going out alone against the Philistines’ greatest warrior, Goliath. We heard the story of how Saul’s servants refused to carry out the king’s order to murder the priest Ahimelech. We know well the story of Daniel who defied his government’s order to refrain from praying. The names Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego are very familiar to us. We heard our teachers and preachers extol their courage in defying the government’s order to bow to the image of their emperor. We remember that John the Baptist went to prison (and was eventually beheaded), not for preaching the Gospel, but for criticizing the king for his immoral behavior. We certainly recall the story of Simon Peter who bluntly told his civil magistrates, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” We know that the Apostle Paul wrote many of his epistles from inside government prisons. We certainly recall that before John penned the Revelation, he had been banished to an island-prison by his civil authorities.

I challenge Christians to objectively look at the great stories of Bible heroes (in both testaments) and observe how many times they are noted for either being martyred for defying a civil authority, or, perhaps, for being delivered from death for defying a civil authority. The stories of defiance to civil government (in one form or another) comprise a great percentage of all the stories contained in the Bible--perhaps even a majority of them.

So, how has it happened that a majority of today’s Christians, it seems, have become such sheepish slaves of government? How has it happened that, for the most part, the concept of courage in the face of government oppression has been totally lost to the average Christian, pastor, and church? For all intents and purposes, it is time for many Christians to shred their Bibles, because the lessons and principles of God’s Word have absolutely no influence over their attitudes and conduct.

For example, if the story of Peter in prison were being experienced today, instead of the church rallying behind their pastor and conducting an all-night prayer meeting for him, most church members would be excoriating him in the name of Romans chapter 13. Instead of Paul being let down the wall in a basket to escape the civil authorities trying to apprehend him, the average Christian today would be the first one to turn him over to the authorities.

In the mind of the average Christian, God is not God; government is God! For instance, when one well-known Christian attorney was recently confronted by the teaching of Scripture relative to the church’s independence from government (meaning, no church should allow itself to be subject to the government’s tyrannical 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt status), he said, “That might be Biblically correct, but it is not legally correct.” In other words, the “Christian” attorney would rather a church be legal than Biblical. And, unfortunately, that seems to be the attitude of the vast majority of professing Christians today. They would rather please the government than please God; they would rather obey the government than obey God; they would rather be at peace with the government than be at peace with God.

And when it comes to the courage of risking anything of value in order to do right, forget it!

Think of what Abram risked when he obeyed God and left his country and kin and struck out for a land that God had not even told him of. Think of what Moses risked when he killed that Egyptian; think of what Joshua and Caleb risked when they defied the entire nation that was following the evil counsel of the ten spies; think of what David risked when he faced the giant; think of what Elijah risked when he confronted 850 false prophets all by himself; think of what the Old Testament prophets risked when they rebuked or challenged the kings of Israel and Judah; think of what the disciples risked when they “left all” and followed Jesus; think of what the early church risked when it embraced the Gospel and defied the wishes of Rome and Jewry (not to mention their own families and friends). But these stories are more like fairy tales to the average Christian today. They serve no practical benefit whatsoever!

Let a church deacon, trustee, or elder be told by some government-backed attorney that he is really a corporate officer, subject to the laws and punishments of IRS tax codes, and that church leader will say anything, sign anything, or do anything to save his own financial security. In order to not jeopardize his own standing with the IRS, that same church leader would turn his back on his best friend, or gladly join with the government in prosecuting a fellow believer.

I personally know of more than one case where professing Christians either lied against a beloved brother in order to protect themselves against threatened government (read: IRS) penalties, or actually testified for the prosecution (read: IRS) under oath in a court of law against a Christian brother. In each case, these “brothers” actually felt it was their “Christian duty” to betray their friends and brothers and help the government.

I am reminded of the verse where Jesus said, “Yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.” (John 16:2 KJV)

I am also reminded of the warning from the prophet Jeremiah when he cautioned, “Take ye heed every one of his neighbour, and trust ye not in any brother: for every brother will utterly supplant, and every neighbour will walk with slanders. And they will deceive every one his neighbour, and will not speak the truth: they have taught their tongue to speak lies, and weary themselves to commit iniquity.” (Jeremiah 9:4,5 KJV)

Jeremiah’s prophecy is spot-on! Christians today cannot be trusted to be faithful to the truth; they cannot be trusted to not betray and turn against their brethren; they cannot be trusted to not be party with slander and libel. If it means saving their own skin, or keeping their bread buttered, or staying in the good graces of the IRS, they would sell out their best friend--maybe even their own mother! And it is no coincidence that Jeremiah, himself, experienced firsthand that which he had spoken. It is no wonder he said, “Trust ye not any brother.”

When will Christians get it through their heads (and in their hearts) that oftentimes government is the enemy of God? When will they understand that they have only one Sovereign: King Jesus? When will they come to comprehend that helping government perpetrate unjust action against fellow believers is a crime against Heaven? When will they stop talking about the Bible and actually start internalizing its teachings, examples, and principles?

It has gotten to the point today many unbelievers are far more trustworthy than today’s Christians--especially when it comes to the subject of resisting unjust government. It grieves me say that many “Christian” attorneys, politicians, pastors, and church leaders are merely shills and toadies for a government that has often become both oppressive and illegitimate!

May God help us! He will have to, because we won’t get much help from the vast majority of today’s professing Christians. That is for sure!

CHUCK BALDWIN ON THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

These Are Not Negotiable

By Chuck Baldwin

October 20, 2010

Archived column:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=2484

In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote,
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established
should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly
all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer,
while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the
forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses
and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design
to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is
their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards
for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of
these Colonies."

I would argue that we, like our patriot forebears, have also endured
"patient sufferance." For at least a half-century, we have patiently
endured the erosion and abridgment of our freedoms and liberties. We
have watched the federal government become an overbearing and
meddlesome Nanny State that pokes its nose and sticks its fingers in
virtually everything we do. We cannot drive a car, buy a gun, or even
flush a toilet without Big Brother's permission. We are taxed,
regulated, and snooped-on from the time we are born to the day we die.
And then after we are dead, we are taxed again.

In the same way that Jefferson and Company patiently suffered up
until that shot was fired that was heard around the world, we who love
freedom today are likewise patiently suffering "a long train of abuses
and usurpations." In fact, I would even dare say that these States
United have become a boiling caldron of justifiable frustration and
even anger.

Accordingly, it is incumbent upon us to very seriously and
thoughtfully examine those principles that we absolutely will never
cede or surrender. We have already surrendered much of the freedom
that was bequeathed to us by our forefathers. We are now to the point
that we must define those principles that form our "line in the sand"
and that we will not surrender under any circumstance. Either that, or
we must admit to ourselves that there is nothing--no principle, no
freedom, no matter how sacred--that we will not surrender to Big
Government.

Here, then, are those principles that, to me, must never be
surrendered. To surrender these liberties to Big Government would mean
to commit idolatry. It would be sacrilege. It would reduce us to
slavery. It would destroy our humanity. To surrender these freedoms
would mean "absolute Despotism" and would provide moral justification
to the proposition that such tyranny be "thrown off."

*The Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Men without guns are not free men; they are slaves. Men without guns
are not citizens; they are subjects. Men without guns have lost the
right of self-defense. They have lost the power to defend their
families and protect their properties. Men without guns are reduced to
the animal kingdom, becoming prey to the Machiavellians among them who
would kill them for sport or for their own personal pursuits. As King
Jesus plainly ordered, "He that hath no sword, let him sell his
garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:36) This we will do--at all costs.

*The Right to Own Private Property

Like the right of self-defense, the private ownership of property is
a God-given right that is rooted in the Sacred Text. As God told
Moses, "Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark, which they of
old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in
the land that the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it." (Deut.
19:14)

In fact, the history of Western Civilization is replete with the
examples of free men who were determined (even at the cost of their
very lives) to defend the right to own property. Without private
property rights, men are reduced to serfs and servants. Like chattel,
they feed themselves by another's leave. This we will not do.

*The Right to Train and Educate Our Children

Education has never been the responsibility of the State. From time
immemorial, education has been the right and responsibility of the
family. This, too, has its foundation in the Sacred Volume. "And, ye
fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the
nurture and admonition of the Lord." (Eph. 6:4)

Therefore, the absolute right of homeshooling or
private/parochial/Christian schooling must never be surrendered.
Homeschooling, especially, is fundamental to freedom. It is not a
coincidence that throughout history, most totalitarian governments
forbade parents homeschooling their children.

Any government--federal, State, or local--that forbids, or even
restricts, the right of parents to homeschool their children has taken
upon itself the uniform of a tyrant.

*The Freedom of Speech and Worship

Speech and worship are matters of the heart and conscience (Luke
6:45; John 4:24). Only tyrants seek authority over matters of the
heart. But, of course, that is what tyrants do: they seek to control
men's thoughts and beliefs.

Hence, the alternative media is essential to liberty: the Internet,
short wave radio, as well as independent magazines and periodicals. It
is almost superfluous to say that there is no such thing as a free and
independent press among the mainstream news media today. In fact, the
major media more resembles a propaganda machine than it does a free
press.

The same can be said for most of the mainstream churches in America
today. They more resemble havens for politically correct,
Big-Government ideology than they do bastions of Bible truth.
Therefore, home-churches and non-establishment churches are
increasingly requisite to a free people.

*The Right to Determine One's Own Healthcare

The marriage of Big Government and Big Medicine has created a
healthcare monster. Already, the dispensing of medical treatment is
micromanaged by Big Brother in a way that has resulted in skyrocketing
costs and inferior care (and in some cases, even death). President
Obama's universal health care initiatives that are sure to come (in
one form or another) will only exacerbate an already untenable
situation.

Free men and women absolutely have the right to refuse vaccinations
for themselves and their children. Forced vaccinations (of any kind)
are an assault against the very foundation of freedom. Free men have
the right to choose their own physicians, their own hospitals, their
own insurance programs, etc. They also have the right to refuse any
and all of the above.

God is Creator. He is also Healer (Exodus 15:26). Therefore, how men
choose to seek God's healing is a private matter between them and God.
Alternative medicine is a right. Already, our military personnel are
used as human guinea pigs to test a variety of drugs and chemicals.
Public schools also require forced vaccinations. And now the push is
on to force the general population to take the Swine Flu vaccine. At
the current pace, it won't be long until all alternative medicines and
treatments will be illegal and the federal government will be
America's doctor. This is not acceptable.

*The Right to Life

2000 years of Western Civilization have perpetually reconfirmed that
life is a gift of God. Both Biblical and American history repeatedly
honor God as the Source and Sustainer of man's existence. Therefore,
evils such as abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia must be vehemently
resisted. It is bad enough that any government (especially one such as
ours) would legalize abortion, but the concept of FORCED abortion,
infanticide, or euthanasia could only be regarded as a despotic attack
on life and liberty of the gravest proportion. In fact, under Natural
Law, such an attack would remove said government from the protection
of Heaven and would place it in a state of war.

*The Right to Live as a Free and Independent People

God separated the Nations (Genesis 11). Therefore, it is absolutely
necessary that we Americans maintain our independence and national
sovereignty. We simply cannot (and will not) allow ourselves to become
part of any hemispheric or global union.

There they are: seven freedom-principles that are not negotiable. As
Jefferson said, we are "disposed to suffer, while evils are
sufferable." But cross these lines and free men must do what free men
must do: "throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for
their future security."

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be
made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

We Need A Revolution, Not A Movement by Chuck Baldwin

August 27, 2010

Archived column: http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=2172

The elections of 2008 (and the early elections of 2010) produced two
significant phenomena: the "Ron Paul Revolution," and the "Tea Party
Movement." And, mark it down: both of them will have profound effects
upon the upcoming November elections--and upon the 2012 elections as
well. Call them what you want, however, America doesn't need another
movement; it needs a genuine revolution.

The Tea Party movement, while still a force with which to be
contended, has already been diluted and compromised. The primary
elections plainly reveal the reality of this fact. The high spots so
far are the defeats of Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Bob Bennett
in Utah. The low spots so far are the reelection of John McCain in
Arizona and the election of Dan Coats in Indiana.

John McCain's election, in particular, demonstrates how many
conservatives and "revolutionaries" still don't get it. If any State
in the union should have an up-close-and-personal look at what we are
up against, it would be the people of Arizona. After all, they are on
the front lines in the fight of one of the most important battles
currently being waged in our country: illegal immigration. And John
McCain is one of the worst offenders in terms of facilitating and
encouraging this illegal invasion. Yet the people of Arizona reelected
McCain to the US Senate. (It would interesting to know how many
illegal aliens voted for McCain, would it not?)

Then again, John McCain received the enthusiastic endorsement of
former Alaska governor, Sarah Palin. This endorsement obviously
brought McCain thousands of Tea Party votes that otherwise would have
gone to his principal opponent, J.D. Hayworth. McCain is not the only
Big-Government globalist neocon to receive Palin's endorsement. Many
of Palin's endorsees are neocons; which leads to one of the biggest
problems with any so-called conservative movement: allowing
celebrity-type "conservatives" to become the de facto leaders and
spokesmen for what should be a true grassroots, people-generated
rebellion. Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are the two biggest culprits in
this regard.

Mark my words: Palin and Beck may see themselves as part of a
conservative "movement," but they want nothing to do with an
old-fashioned, honest-to-God, Patrick Henry-style revolution. In fact,
they are doing everything in their power to keep such a revolution
from taking place.

This does not mean that Palin and Beck do not contribute some good
things to freedom's fight. They do. The problem is, for every good
thing they contribute they counterbalance it by supporting
establishment principals, such as John McCain and Newt Gingrich, and
attacking non-establishment players and ideas, which serves only to
keep the Big-Government power structure firmly ensconced in
Washington, D.C.

Get real, folks, and start thinking for yourselves. Ask yourself why
Fox News never (or hardly ever) invites non-establishment patriots to
appear on their network. Why do you not see former Assistant Secretary
of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts on Fox News? Why do you not see
former Georgia congressman and Presidential candidate Bob Barr on Fox
News? Why do you not see former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura on
Fox News? Why do you not see former Director of the US Office of
Economic Opportunity and Presidential candidate Howard Phillips on Fox
News? Why do you not see Presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin on Fox
News? The list is endless.

Fox News is not "fair and balanced." It is as controlled and
manipulated as any other media news network. The only thing it
balances is the other networks' infatuation with the Democrat Party,
by promoting Republican candidates and ideas. What it does not do is
educate and inform the American people with the truth as to what both
major parties are doing to destroy our country. But remember, Fox News
is owned by Keith Rupert Murdoch, the same man who helped finance
Hillary Clinton's campaign for the US Senate, and who is as much of a
globalist as anyone in Washington, D.C., or New York City.

As an aside, and speaking of Hillary Rodham, I predict that she will
replace Vice President Joe Biden BEFORE the 2012 elections. I've said
that in private for many weeks, and now say it in this
column--remember, you heard it here. The Clinton-Bush Crime Syndicate
(CBCS) needs Hillary in the White House badly, and Obama has readily
accepted a subservient role in the criminal affairs of CBCS (for very
profitable reasons, no doubt). And with the CBCS bosses pretty much
running things at the White House (they don't worry about domestic or
social issues, providing that these do not interfere with their
international criminal activities), is it any wonder that Obama has
already taken more vacations than most Presidents take during an
entire term?

And it is the influence of globalists and neocons upon national and
international politics that the likes of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck
simply do not get--or do not want to get. And because many Tea
Partiers are so enamored with these two (and allow them to do much of
their thinking for them), they remain clueless as well.

Ladies and gentlemen, America is in the throes of socialist and
Marxist political upheaval. The curtain could fall at any time. The
American people need to wake up to this truism: a "conservative"
movement--even a conservative Tea Party movement--will not save us.
The only thing that will save us is an old-fashioned State revolt.

Arizona had the opportunity to become a modern-day version of 1775
Massachusetts. But Arizona has probably forfeited that leadership role
by 1) reelecting John McCain, and 2) being willing to allow federal
courts to dictate law to a sovereign State. Instead of taking its case
to the federal courts, Arizona should simply tell the federal
government that it will enforce its own State laws (including the
newly enacted anti-illegal immigration law) regardless of what any
federal court says or doesn't say. At some point, that is exactly what
some State (or group of states) in this union is going to have to do,
or liberty will be forever lost.

As long as freedom lovers are content to remain satisfied with the
status quo by allowing party politics and media celebrities to
dominate their efforts, there will be no stopping this socialist
avalanche that is crashing down upon us. The Tea Party movement of
2010 (if left free of Big-Government neocons) could certainly
translate into positive developments this November; that is for sure.
A revival of the "Ron Paul Revolution" in 2012 could also make a
significant contribution, but it is going to take a State revolution
to seal the deal. I, for one, am ready.

DON'T BE FOOLED BY THE RINOS (Most of the Republicans that are in office)

JOHN McCAIN'S ATTACK ON LIBERTY

By Chuck Baldwin
August 24, 2010
NewsWithViews.com

Anyone paying attention knows that John McCain has been a Big-Government Globalist Neocon (BGGN) for virtually his entire senatorial career. As with many BGGNs hiding out in the Republican Party, McCain likes to talk about smaller government, but his track record is littered with the promotion of one big government program after another. But, what else would one expect from a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)?

Lately, however, McCain has outdone himself. He has introduced two bills in the US Senate that are about as Machiavellian as they could be. I am referring to S.3081, a bill that would authorize the federal government to detain American citizens indefinitely without trial, and S.3002, a bill that would authorize the federal government to regulate vitamins, minerals, and virtually all health and natural food products.

According to Examiner.com, "John McCain introduced a bill into the U.S. Senate which, if passed, would actually allow U.S. citizens to be arrested and detained indefinitely, all without Miranda rights or ever being charged with a crime."

The Examiner report continued by saying "This bill, introduced by McCain, who despite overwhelming evidence, claims to be a 'conservative,' would not only take away our right to a trial, but would also allow the federal government to arrest and imprison anyone the current administration deems hostile.

"Of course, that would be the same administration whose Homeland Security Secretary has classified veterans, retired law enforcement, Ron Paul [and Chuck Baldwin] supporters, and conservatives as 'terrorists.'"

The Examiner report concluded by saying "If it was not clear before, it should be now that John McCain has as little respect for the Constitution as he does for our borders."

Amen!

If McCain gets his way, your constitutional right to a speedy trial by jury is gone, as well as your constitutional right to Habeas Corpus. But, of course, they would attempt to justify this by claiming it is being done in the name of national security and the war on terrorism.

See the Examiner report here.

Regarding McCain's desire for the federal government to take over the vitamin industry, attorney Jonathan Emord wrote, "If you had any doubt about whether John McCain is a limited government conservative, you may put that doubt to rest--he is not. On February 3, 2010, John McCain introduced to the United States Senate the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010. Reflecting upon this poorly written bill, I am struck by the fact that John McCain apparently sees little difference between fissile material and dietary supplements. He is intent on regulating supplements as if they were radioactive enriched uranium rather than bioactive vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and botanicals that more often than not help people.

"The Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010 enjoys support from the most liberal members of Congress. It is an invitation for the FDA to assume broad new powers and replicate here the system now operating in Europe over dietary supplements where dietary ingredients are presumed adulterated and unlawful to sell unless pre-approved by the government. In short, good bye free enterprise, good bye limited government, and hello more heavy handed, arbitrary and punitive FDA bias against the beleaguered dietary supplement industry."

See Emord's column here.

Please remember, this is the same John McCain who, during the 2008 Presidential campaign, said he would "order the secretary of the treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America." Of course, McCain didn't explain where this authority would come from, because such a proposal has no legal or constitutional authority. And, by the way, this one little sentence, if implemented, would cost taxpayers some $300 billion.

McCain also said he wanted to tap Mr. Climate Change Wacko himself, Al Gore, "to work in his administration on developing a new and much tougher U.N.-sponsored global warming treaty."

Source: Cliff Kincaid. See his column here.

This is the same John McCain who addressed the Hoover Institution on May 1, 2007, and said if he were elected President, he would create a new international organization known as the "League of Democracies" (LD).

In advancing the LD, McCain said, "We should go further and start bringing democratic peoples and nations from around the world into one common organization, a worldwide League of Democracies." He then added, "The new League of Democracies would form the core of an international order . . ."

See McCain's speech to the Hoover Institution here.

If McCain and his CFR buddies get their way, this new LD would be a United Nations on steroids! As I said all over America on the campaign trail in 2008, "John McCain is a globalist." Of course, so is Barack Obama. In fact, every President since (and including) George H.W. Bush has been a full-fledged, rotten-to-the-core globalist.

And, yes, this is the same John McCain who was one of the primary movers and shakers (along with Obama, Lindsey Graham, and G.W. Bush) who attempted (and would again) to provide amnesty to illegal aliens and open America's borders to illegal immigration.

And now McCain wants the federal government to take over the vitamin industry, and he wants to give the federal government the power to jail American citizens indefinitely without trial.

The citizens of Arizona can do the American people--and liberty itself--a great favor this year by giving Senator John McCain his walking papers. Big-Government dinosaurs like McCain are an albatross around the neck of freedom and constitutional government. If we don't send them packing now, the shackles they put around our throats will become insufferable

.

DATES THAT DESTROYED AMERICA

By Chuck Baldwin

August 20, 2010
chuckbaldwinlive.com

The decision by Congress to socialize medicine in the US ranks among the most draconian, most egregious, most horrific actions ever taken by the central government in Washington, D.C. This bill rocks the principles of liberty and constitutional government to the core. It changes fundamental foundations; it repudiates historical principle. Oh! The same flag may fly on our flagpoles, the same monuments may grace our landscape, and the same National Anthem may be sung during our public ceremonies, but it is not the same America. The Congress of the United States has now officially turned America into a socialist state.

On March 21, 2010, Congress passed, and on March 23, 2010, President Barack Obama signed the dreaded national health care bill into law, and as such, these dates join a list of dates that have each inflicted unconstitutional, socialistic, and sometimes even tyrannical action against the States united and have, therefore, contributed to the destruction of a free America.

April 9, 1865

This is the date when General Robert E. Lee surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia to U.S. Grant at Appomattox Court House, Virginia. Regardless of where one comes down on the subject of the Civil War, one fact is undeniable: Abraham Lincoln seriously dismantled the Jeffersonian model of federalism in America. Ever since, virtually every battle that free men have fought for the principles of limited government, State sovereignty, etc., has stemmed directly from Lincoln's usurpation of power, which resulted in the subjugation and forced union of what used to be "Free and Independent States" (the Declaration of Independence). In fact, the philosophical battles being waged today regarding the recent health care debacle (and every other encroachment upon liberty and State power by the central government) have their roots in Lincoln's tyranny.

July 9, 1868

This is the date when the 14th Amendment was ratified. This amendment codified into law what Lincoln had forced at bayonet point. Until then, people were only deemed citizens of their respective states. The Constitution nowhere referred to people as "US citizens." It only recognized "the Citizens of each State." Notice also that citizenship was only recognized among the "several States," not among people living in non-State territories. Until the 14th Amendment, people were "Citizens of each State." (Article. IV. Section. 2. Paragraph. 1.) The 14th Amendment created a whole new class of persons: "citizens of the United States." This false notion of "one nation" overturned the Jeffersonian principle that our nation was a confederated republic, a voluntary union of states.

February 3, 1913

This is the date when the 16th Amendment was ratified, and the direct income tax and IRS were instituted. This was a flagrant repudiation of freedom principles. What began as a temporary measure to support the War of Northern Aggression became a permanent income revenue stream for an unconstitutional--and ever-growing--central government.

April 8, 1913

This is the date when the 17th Amendment was ratified. This amendment overturned the power of the State legislatures to elect their own senators and replaced it with a direct, popular vote. This was another serious blow against State sovereignty. The framers of the Constitution desired that the influence and power in Washington, D.C., be kept as close to the people and states as possible. For example, the number of representatives in the House of Representatives was to be decided by a limited number of voters. In the original Constitution, the ratio of "people of the several States" deciding their House member could not exceed "one for every thirty thousand." (Article. I. Section. 2. Paragraph. 3.) And when it came to the US Senate, the framers also recognized the authority of each State legislature to select its own senators, thereby keeping power and influence from aggregating in Washington, D.C. The 17th Amendment seriously damaged the influence and power of the states by forcing them to elect their US senators by popular vote. The bigger the State, the less influence the State legislature has in determining its US senator. Senators who answered to State legislators, each answering to a limited number of voters, were much more accountable to the "citizens of the several States" than those who were elected by a large number (many times numbering into the millions) of people. For all intents and purposes (at least in the larger states), US Senators are more like "mini-Presidents" than they are representatives of sovereign states.

December 23, 1913

This is the date when the Federal Reserve Act was passed. This Act placed oversight of America's financial matters into the hands of a cabal of private international bankers, who have completely destroyed the constitutional principles of sound money and (for the most part) free enterprise. No longer would the marketplace (private consumption, thrift, growth, etc.) be the determinant of the US economy (which is what freedom is all about), but now a private, unaccountable international banking cartel would have total power and authority to micromanage (for their own private, parochial purposes) America's financial sector. Virtually every recession, depression, and downturn (including the one we are now experiencing) has been the direct result of the Fed's manipulation (again, for its own purposes and with Washington's cooperation) of the market.

June 26, 1945

This is the date when the United Nations Charter was signed and America joined the push for global government. Ever since, US forces have spilled untold amounts of blood and sacrificed thousands of lives promoting the UN's agenda. Since the end of World War II, in virtually every war in which US military forces have been engaged, it has been at the behest of the UN. And it is also no accident that America has not fought a constitutionally declared war since we entered the UN--and neither have we won one.

Furthermore, it is America's involvement in the United Nations that has spearheaded this draconian push for a New World Order that George H. W. Bush, Henry Kissinger, Tony Blair, Walter Cronkite, et al., have talked so much about. The United Nations is an evil institution that has completely co-opted our US State Department and much of our Defense Department. It is an anti-American institution that works aggressively and constantly against the interests and principles of the United States. But it is an institution that is ensconced in the American political infrastructure. Like a cancer, the UN eats away at our liberties and values, and both major political parties in Washington, D.C., are culpable in allowing it to exert so much influence upon our country.

June 25, 1962, and June 17, 1963

These are the dates when the US Supreme Court removed prayer ('62) and Bible reading ('63) from public schools. At this point, these two Supreme Court decisions were the most serious affront to the First Amendment in US history. Think of it: from before a union of states was established in 1787, children had been free to pray and read the Scriptures in school. We're talking about a period of more than 300 years! Of course, the various State legislatures--and myriad city and county governmental meetings--still open their sessions in prayer, as do the US House and Senate, and even the US Supreme Court. But this same liberty is denied the children of America. There is no question that America has not recovered from these two horrific Supreme Court decisions. In effect, the federal government has expelled God not only from our public schools, but also from our public life. And America has not been the same since.

October 22, 1968

This is the date when President Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the Gun Control Act of 1968. Before this Act, the 2nd Amendment was alive and well in the United States. The Gun Control Act of 1968 turned a right into a privilege and forever forced the American people to bow at the altar of government when seeking to arm themselves. Interestingly enough, this Gun Control Act mirrored Nazi Germany's Gun Control Act of 1938. In fact, the Gun Control Act of 1968 is almost a verbatim copy of Hitler's Gun Control Act of 1938.

Our Founding Fathers could never have imagined that governments within the "several States" would ever be allowed to deny the people's right to keep and bear arms. In fact, it was the attempted confiscation of the firearms stored at Concord, Massachusetts, that triggered the War of Independence in 1775. That the people of Massachusetts would be denied their right to keep and bear arms, as they are today, could not have been foreseen--and would never have been tolerated--by America's founders.

Yet, most of the hundreds of draconian gun control laws that have been inflicted upon the American people have all come about as a result of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

January 22, 1973

This is the date when the US Supreme Court issued the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions, which, in effect, legalized abortion-on-demand. These two decisions expunged the Jeffersonian principle that all men are endowed by their Creator with the unalienable right to life (Declaration). Since then, more than 50 million unborn babies have been legally murdered in their mothers' wombs. Abortion is, without a doubt, America's national holocaust. It has opened the door to a host of Big Government programs and policies that have resulted in the wanton destruction of human life both in the United States and overseas. It has created an entire industry whose express purpose for existing is the destruction of human life. It has desensitized the conscience and soul of America. Furthermore, it has forced men of decency and good will to finance--with their tax dollars--the unconscionable act of killing unborn children.

And once again, another Jeffersonian principle was eviscerated. He said, "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." The Roe and Doe decisions violate this principle in the most egregious manner possible.

October 26, 2001

This is the date when President George W. Bush signed the USA Patriot Act, and the federal government's war against individual liberty began in earnest. Most of the unconstitutional eavesdropping, snooping, wiretapping, phone call intercepting, email reading, prying, financial records tracking, travel watching, ad infinitum, ad nauseam, by federal police agencies began with the implementation of the Patriot Act. The Department of Homeland Security and the "war on terrorism," which have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people worldwide, and the usurpation of federal power at home, have all come about as an outgrowth of the Patriot Act. The USA Patriot Act has forever shifted the focus of American law and jurisprudence against constitutional government and individual liberty, toward a police-state mentality. The Patriot Act is even attempting to turn our local and State law enforcement agencies into military-style "Jackboots," where police officers see themselves not necessarily as guardians of the citizenry, but, as often as not, as adversaries, where citizens are deemed to be the "enemy."

October 17, 2006, and October 9, 2009

These are the dates when President G.W. Bush signed and President Barack Obama re-signed the Military Commissions Act. This Act is the outgrowth of the Patriot Act but has, in effect, terminated the fundamental protections of individual liberty, which are found in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. For all intents and purposes, the Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act eviscerated the 4th and 5th Amendments, and do serious injury to several others. The Military Commissions Act also expunges the constitutional right of Habeas Corpus.

March 21 and 23, 2010

These are the dates when Congress passed and President Obama signed into law the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," the so-called "health care reform" bill that we spoke about at the beginning of this column. While Social Security and various Welfare programs have toyed with socialism in the United States, this bill is the largest and most expansive endorsement of socialism in American history. This bill socializes some 18% of the US economy by socializing the health care industry in America. The fallout and ramifications of this bill are going to be horrific.

When future historians review the demise of our once-great republic, they will observe that the above dates were the dates that destroyed America. The American people have been far too tolerant for far too long.

People concerned about the future of freedom and prosperity in America should line up quickly and demand that their respective State legislatures and governors resist this new health care bill, even to the point of refusing to implement it in their states. More than 30 states are threatening to take the health care bill to court. But states must do more than that. They must pass legislation refusing to comply with it. Yes, I'm saying it: it is time for another State rebellion! If states do not stand up and draw their lines in the sand now, it will be forever too late.

I DO NOT WANT GOVERNMENT TO RUN HEALTH CARE!

You Want THEM To Control Healthcare?
By Chuck Baldwin
August 17, 2010


This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=2095


Among the scariest words ever heard are, "We are from the federal government, and we are here to help you." Shiver me timbers, matey! When you hear those words, pick up your peg leg and RUN, because you are about to get hammered. And that is exactly what is fixing to happen to the American people when the new Obama national healthcare law is fully implemented: we are going to get hammered.

Anyone who believes that the federal government can manage anything efficiently is 8 years old, rationally challenged, or in the business of profiting from the federal government's inefficiency. The only thing the federal government can do with precision is destroy things (and people). That is the one thing the feds can do with complete and total proficiency. Our first and greatest President, George Washington, understood this reality. He said, "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." Amen.

A recent AP report should serve as another illustration as to the folly of trusting the federal government with the supervision and care of anything beyond those narrowly limited responsibilities defined in the US Constitution. The July 27, 2010, report said, "A U.S. audit has found that the Pentagon cannot account for over 95 percent of $9.1 billion in Iraq reconstruction money, spotlighting Iraqi complaints that there is little to show for the massive funds pumped into their cash-strapped, war-ravaged nation."

The report went on to say, "The Pentagon has repeatedly come under fire for apparent mismanagement of the reconstruction effort--as have Iraqi officials themselves.

"Seven years after the U.S.-led invasion, electricity service is spotty, with generation capacity falling far short of demand. Fuel shortages are common and unemployment remains high, a testament to the country's inability to create new jobs or attract foreign investors.

"Complaints surfaced from the start of the war in 2003, when soldiers failed to secure banks, armories and other facilities against looters. Since then the allegations have only multiplied, including investigations of fraud, awarding of contracts without the required government bidding process and allowing contractors to charge exorbitant fees with little oversight, or oversight that came too late."

See the report at:

http://tinyurl.com/us-loses-iraqi-funds

Did you get that? "THE PENTAGON CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR OVER 95 PERCENT OF $9.1 BILLION IN IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION MONEY." But this is the same federal government that says it can manage America's multibillion-dollar healthcare system efficiently and with less cost. GAG!

Another report that caught my eye was this one dated August 12, 2010, and carried on My Way News. The report said, "The $700 billion U.S. bailout program launched in response to the global economic meltdown had a far greater impact overseas than other countries' financial rescue plans did on the U.S., according to a new report from a congressional watchdog.

"Billions of dollars in U.S. rescue funds wound up in big banks in France, Germany and other nations. That was probably inevitable because of the structure of the Treasury Department's program, the Congressional Oversight Panel says in a new report issued Thursday.
"The U.S. program aimed to stabilize the financial system by injecting money into as many banks as possible, including those with substantial operations overseas. Most other countries, by contrast, focused their efforts more narrowly on banks in their nations that usually lacked major U.S. operations."
I'm sure everyone is glad to hear this, Amen? Aren't you happy to learn that your hard-earned tax dollars "had a far greater impact overseas" than in the United States? In other words, ladies and gentlemen, big foreign banks (and internationally-owned banks) were the primary beneficiaries of the taxpayer-funded Wall Street bailouts.

The report went on to say, "But the report says that if the U.S. had gotten more data on which foreign banks would benefit the most, the government might have been able to ask those countries to share some of the cost.

"'There were no data about where this money was going,' panel chair Elizabeth Warren said in a conference call with reporters on Wednesday. 'The American people have a right to know where the money went.'"

See the report at:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100812/D9HHSM180.html

Dear Reader, are you getting this? "IF THE U.S. HAD GOTTEN MORE DATA . . . THE GOVERNMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ASK THOSE COUNTRIES TO SHARE SOME OF THE COST"? Holy slimeballs, Batman! This is the same government that is collecting nearly 2 billion pieces of electronic correspondence (emails, text messages, cellular calls, phone calls, etc.) EVERY DAY from virtually EVERY CITIZEN in the country. This is the same government that wants to electronically take our clothes off and look at every square inch of our naked bodies every time we get on a commercial airliner. But this same government was not able to obtain the data necessary to determine which foreign banks were going to receive billions of taxpayer bailout dollars? And, "There were NO DATA ABOUT WHERE THIS MONEY WAS GOING"?

Ladies and gentlemen, I ask you, who are the morons here? These government politicians and bureaucrats (who are either the most inept, incompetent fools to ever live, or the most deceptive, duplicitous con artists on the planet), or We the People for putting up with these nincompoops?

At this point, I invite readers to listen to this brief archived audio sound bite from former President Ronald Reagan (one of my favorite quotes) at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=145

For those of you who are reading a hard copy of this column and not an online edition, and, therefore, are unable to link to the audio above, the file quotes Reagan as saying, "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Do I hear an "Amen" out there?

How, in the name of common sense, can anyone (or any State) be willing to forfeit to the federal government one additional cent or even an ounce more authority knowing that every dollar it grabs and every authority it garners is used only to increase the size of the shackles that it puts around our necks?

And you want THEM to manage healthcare?

Declaration Of Independence Day For Kids By Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=1845


This past week, my son and constitutional attorney, Tim Baldwin, wrote the
following and then delivered it to his elementary age Bible class at our
church. It tells the story of our brave forebears' struggle for freedom and
independence in a way that even children can comprehend. Oh! By the way, the
class stood up and clapped after Tim delivered this address. I offer Tim's
lesson to my reading audience with the prospect that many of you may want to
read this story to your children or grandchildren this weekend, as we
celebrate our nation's independence.

A long time ago, or not so long ago, depending on how you look at it, men,
women and children set sail across the Atlantic Ocean in the 1600s to
establish their own communities and to raise their families in a country
that was inhabited only by Indian tribes and wild animals. By the thousands,
they risked their lives by traveling across a vast ocean of rough seas,
stormy nights and nauseating waves so they could build their homes in a
place called America. Many of them died on their way here, and even more of
them died after having reached the shores of the Atlantic coast. Still, with
all of the elements of nature against them, including disease, harsh winters
and some of the Indians who were very hostile towards them, they were able
to build homes, churches and a form of government so that they could live a
life pleasing to themselves, their families and their God.

During the 1600s and 1700s, more and more people came from mostly the
European countries. There were people who came to America under the
authority of the king of Great Britain to establish a colony. A colony is a
territory of land that is founded by a people on behalf of their government,
even though the government was not anywhere close to that territory of land.
Eventually, thirteen colonies were established in America, all of them in
the Eastern territories of America. The most northern colony was New
Hampshire and the most southern colony was Georgia. When each colony was
founded, the people of those colonies formed constitutions so that the
people of each colony could enjoy a free society and a free government.

These people had to work extremely hard to make a good life for themselves.
It has been described by people who first settled these areas that the trees
were so vast and many that a squirrel could travel from New Hampshire to
Georgia through trees and never have to touch the ground. Think of the
amount of work it took to clear out the land, build their homes and make
their food. To live in America was no easy task. It took determination, and
no one here could be lazy. You would die if you were.

As the years passed, the people in America became very self-sufficient,
relying upon their own hard work and labor to meet their needs. They thanked
God for the way He provided for them and all of them celebrated Thanksgiving
Day just as their forefathers, the Pilgrims, did, because they knew that God
had blessed them with a great country, with great people and great land to
live on. With the ability to take care of themselves, to provide for their
families, to run their own businesses and to have their own government,
there was a spirit of liberty and freedom in those colonies.

However, over time, it became apparent to everyone, including the king of
Great Britain and the Parliament of Great Britain, that the resources of
America were too valuable not to benefit from. So, Great Britain began
passing and executing laws that took advantage of the labor, agriculture and
industry of the American colonists. Even though Great Britain had very
little to do with the American way of life, their business and the people
there, they enjoyed taxing the colonists so that they could get money from
them and spend that money for the benefit of Great Britain.

The American colonists at first did not mind the laws that Great Britain
passed to tax and regulate them. They saw Great Britain as their mother
country and they gave loyalty to the king and parliament. They saw their
authority as complying with the British Constitution, which had existed
there throughout hundreds of years of their history. Great Britain had a
king to execute the laws, which would be similar to a President; it had a
Parliament to create laws, which would be similar to our Congress; and it
had judges, to apply the laws to individual cases, just as our courts do
today. The American colonists were very proud to be loyal to Great Britain,
because it was considered to be the greatest country in the world, with the
greatest form of government.

But that feeling did not last forever. What began happening was Great
Britain started using the American colonies and colonists as a way to obtain
more money and wealth for themselves. Finally, they passed a law called the
Stamp Act in 1765. This Stamp Act was designed to tax the internal
commercial activities of the colonies. Before the Stamp Act, Great Britain
taxed only the external commerce of the colonies, that is, where the
colonies shipped goods from America to other countries. But now, the Stamp
Act taxed goods and products that were made in America and sold in America.
This was the first time that Great Britain had tried to interfere with the
internal affairs of the American colonies.

To some in America, the Stamp Act was unacceptable, and they would not stand
for it. The colonial governments, which had been handling the affairs of
their own colonies, began sending to Great Britain their letters of
dissatisfaction, requesting that the king repeal this law. These colonists
cried out, "No taxation without representation!" See, the American colonies
were not involved in the way government operated and what laws passed in
Great Britain, because that was across the ocean and they had no
representatives in parliament to make sure their interests and their will
was expressed and made part of the decision making process. The resistance
became so heavy that the king and parliament decided to repeal the Stamp
Act. The colonists celebrated as they found out. They had parties, music and
gatherings all over to express their joy for what they had accomplished.

However, their celebration was soon to end. See, Great Britain repealed the
Stamp Act, but they still declared that they could regulate and tax the
colonies at any time they wanted, even though the colonists did not have any
representatives in Great Britain. Thus, it is no wonder that the conflict
between Great Britain and the colonies would soon arise again, and indeed it
did arise again.

Not too long after Great Britain repealed the Stamp Act, Great Britain
passed another law that taxed the America colonies, just as they did before.
Great Britain declared to the colonies that their laws were the supreme law
of the land and that they were constitutional. To resist these laws was
treason and worthy of extreme punishment. The colonists had mixed feelings
about what was going on before them. Some thought that Great Britain had the
constitutional right to regulate them because the constitution allowed them
to do so. Others did not care one way or the other. However, there were
others in America who believed that their natural rights from God allowed
them to govern themselves based upon their own consent and not upon the will
of some ruler who did not have their interests in mind. These people were
called Patriots.

In 1775, the intensity was becoming more and more heavy. Each colony was
trying to figure out what to do. Some suggested that they send more letters
to Great Britain, expressing their loyalty to the king and to the
constitution, just hoping that the king and parliament would listen to their
complaints and would grant them relief. But others were not so hopeful. One
man in particular believed that action was required and that mere words were
a waste of time. He believed that the time for taking up arms in defense of
their liberty was required, and that the king should know that they were
free people and would not stand to be trodden under the foot of the king.
This man was Patrick Henry.

The story goes that Patrick Henry delivered a speech that was so moving and
so full of wisdom and inspiration that he convinced the colony of Virginia
to do just what he said they should do: prepare for war! And that they did.
Now keep in mind, the colonists did not start a war, but they were preparing
for a war that Great Britain was launching against them. During this time,
Great Britain had sent soldiers to the colonies to make sure that the
colonists behaved and followed the laws passed by Great Britain. Patrick
Henry knew that those soldiers were not there to play games but to enforce
Great Britain's rule, and if necessary, kill those who refused.

A year of struggle between the colonists and Great Britain took place, but
the one incident that cemented in the minds of the people that they must
break away from their government was when Great Britain's soldiers tried to
disarm the people by taking away their guns and ammunition. During that
effort, some people died as the American colonists tried to defend what was
rightfully theirs. In the colonists' minds, like Patrick Henry, there was no
way that Great Britain and America could ever be reconciled with each other.
America must be free from them, for as Patrick Henry said in his famous
speech to take up arms in their defense, "Give me Liberty or give me death."

So, on July 4, 1776, after representatives were sent from each colony to
meet at a convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, each colony declared its
independence from Great Britain and America was born as a nation to stand
above all other nations. It was the place that God used to spread the gospel
of Jesus Christ to the rest of the world. It was the place where men and
women sacrificed their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, so that you and I
could have a legacy of freedom.