The Man Who Fired The Shot Heard ’Round The World

Posted on April 19, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
April 19, 2012

April 19, 1775, should be regarded as important a date to Americans as July 4, 1776. It’s a shame that we don’t celebrate it as enthusiastically as we do Independence Day. It’s even more shameful that many Americans don’t even remember what happened on this day back in 1775. For the record, historians call this day, “Patriot’s Day.” More specifically, it was the day that the shot was fired that was heard ’round the world. It was the day America’s War for Independence began.

Being warned of approaching British troops by Dr. Joseph Warren, Pastor Jonas Clark and his male congregants of the Church of Lexington (numbering 60-70) were the ones that stood with their muskets in front of the Crown’s troops (numbering over 800), who were on orders to seize a cache of arms which were stored at Concord and to arrest Sam Adams and John Hancock (who were known to be in the area, and who had actually taken refuge in Pastor Clark’s home).

According to eyewitnesses, the king’s troops opened fire on the militiamen almost without warning, immediately killing eight of Pastor Clark’s parishioners. In self defense, the Minutemen returned fire. These were the first shots of the Revolutionary War. This took place on Lexington Green, which was located directly beside the church-house where those men worshipped each Sunday. Adams and Hancock were not taken. They owed their lives to Pastor Clark and his brave Minutemen–albeit eight of those men gave their lives protecting Adams and Hancock.

According to Pastor Clark, these are the names of the eight men who died on Lexington Green: Robert Munroe, Jonas Parker, Samuel Hadley, Jonathan Harrington, Jr., Isaac Muzzy, Caleb Harrington, and John Brown, all of Lexington, and one Mr. Porter of Woburn.

By the time the British troops arrived at the Concord Bridge, hundreds of colonists had amassed a defense of the bridge. A horrific battle took place, and the British troops were routed and soon retreated back to Boston. America’s War for Independence had begun!

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, these two elements of American history are lost to the vast majority of historians today: 1) it was attempted gun confiscation by the British troops that ignited America’s War for Independence, and 2) it was a pastor and his flock that mostly comprised the “Minutemen” who fired the shots that started our great Revolution.

With that thought in mind, I want to devote today’s column to honoring the brave preachers of Colonial America–these “children of the Pilgrims,” as one Colonial pastor’s descendent put it.

It really wasn’t that long ago. However, with the way America’s clergymen act today, one would think that preachers such as James Caldwell, John Peter Muhlenberg, Joab Houghton, and Jonas Clark never existed. But they did exist; and without them, 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, although one historian referred to Clark as a Trinitarian and a Calvinist. But these men had one thing in common (besides their faith in Jesus Christ): they were all ardent patriots who participated in America’s War for Independence, and in the case of Jonas Clark, actually ignited it.

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 was bribed by the British to assassinate Pastor Caldwell–which is exactly what he did. 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 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:

“[M]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: As I said at the beginning of this column, Jonas Clark was pastor of the Church of 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. 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.

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 under the title, “The Battle of Lexington, A Sermon and Eyewitness Narrative, Jonas Clark, Pastor, Church of Lexington.”

Order the book containing Clark’s sermon at:

www.NordskogPublishing.com

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?

Readers should know that my constitutional attorney son, Tim, and I have co-authored a blockbuster book dealing with Romans 13. The book is entitled, “Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission.” And it can be ordered at:

http://www.romans13truth.com/

Plus, I also delivered four messages dealing with Romans 13. The message series is entitled, “The True Meaning of Romans 13.” These four video messages have been recorded on one DVD and may be ordered at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/3146

I am absolutely convinced that one of the biggest reasons America is in the sad condition that it is in today is because the sermons Americans frequently hear from modern pulpits deal mostly with prosperity theology, entertainment evangelism, feelgoodism, emotionalism, and Aren’t-I-Wonderful ear tickling! This milquetoast preaching, along with a totally false “obey-the-government-no-matter-what” interpretation of Romans 13, have made it next to impossible to find Christian men with 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, John Peter Muhlenberg, Joab Houghton, and, yes, Jonas Clark. We need them as much today as we did then–maybe more!

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/4790

*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
Copyright © Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 8 grandchildren. See Chuck’s complete bio at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

The Man Who Should Be President

Posted on April 12, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
April 12, 2012

Today, I am going to do something that I have never done: I am going to devote virtually my entire column to posting another man’s words. That man is the man who should be President of the United States: Congressman Ron Paul of Texas. The following is a written transcript of a speech Dr. Paul gave on the floor of the US House of Representatives back in 2007. Had Congressman Paul been elected President in 2008, the country would be four years into the greatest economic, political, and, yes, spiritual recovery in the history of America. As it is, the US is on the brink of totalitarianism and economic ruin. And you can mark it down, four years from now it won’t matter to a tinker’s dam whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney was elected President this November. Neither man has the remotest understanding of America’s real problems nor the courage and backbone to do anything about it if they did understand.

Read the following. This is a man who understands the Constitution. This is a man who understands sound economic principles. This is a man who understands liberty and freedom. This is a man who has the guts to tell the truth. This is a man who has put his life and career on the line for the principles of liberty for more than two decades. This is a man who has returned every dollar that he has been paid as a US congressman to the taxpayers. This is the man who should be President of the United States.

[Ron Paul’s speech begins here] For some, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. For others, it means dissent against a government’s abuse of the people’s rights.

I have never met a politician in Washington or any American, for that matter, who chose to be called unpatriotic. Nor have I met anyone who did not believe he wholeheartedly supported our troops, wherever they may be.

What I have heard all too frequently from various individuals are sharp accusations that, because their political opponents disagree with them on the need for foreign military entanglements, they were unpatriotic, un-American evildoers deserving contempt.

The original American patriots were those individuals brave enough to resist with force the oppressive power of King George. I accept the definition of patriotism as that effort to resist oppressive state power.

The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility and out of self-interest for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state. Resistance need not be violent, but the civil disobedience that might be required involves confrontation with the state and invites possible imprisonment.

Peaceful, nonviolent revolutions against tyranny have been every bit as successful as those involving military confrontation. Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., achieved great political successes by practicing nonviolence, and yet they suffered physically at the hands of the state. But whether the resistance against government tyrants is nonviolent or physically violent, the effort to overthrow state oppression qualifies as true patriotism.

True patriotism today has gotten a bad name, at least from the government and the press. Those who now challenge the unconstitutional methods of imposing an income tax on us, or force us to use a monetary system designed to serve the rich at the expense of the poor are routinely condemned. These American patriots are sadly looked down upon by many. They are never praised as champions of liberty as Gandhi and Martin Luther King have been.

Liberals, who withhold their taxes as a protest against war, are vilified as well, especially by conservatives. Unquestioned loyalty to the state is especially demanded in times of war. Lack of support for a war policy is said to be unpatriotic. Arguments against a particular policy that endorses a war, once it is started, are always said to be endangering the troops in the field. This, they blatantly claim, is unpatriotic, and all dissent must stop. Yet, it is dissent from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion of liberty.

It is conveniently ignored that the only authentic way to best support the troops is to keep them out of dangerous undeclared no-win wars that are politically inspired. Sending troops off to war for reasons that are not truly related to national security and, for that matter, may even damage our security, is hardly a way to patriotically support the troops.

Who are the true patriots, those who conform or those who protest against wars without purpose? How can it be said that blind support for a war, no matter how misdirected the policy, is the duty of a patriot?

Randolph Bourne said that, “War is the health of the state.” With war, he argued, the state thrives. Those who believe in the powerful state see war as an opportunity. Those who mistrust the people and the market for solving problems have no trouble promoting a “war psychology” to justify the expansive role of the state. This includes the role the Federal Government plays in our lives, as well as in our economic transactions.

Certainly, the neoconservative belief that we have a moral obligation to spread American values worldwide through force justifies the conditions of war in order to rally support at home for the heavy hand of government. It is through this policy, it should surprise no one, that our liberties are undermined. The economy becomes overextended, and our involvement worldwide becomes prohibited. Out of fear of being labeled unpatriotic, most of the citizens become compliant and accept the argument that some loss of liberty is required to fight the war in order to remain safe.

This is a bad trade-off, in my estimation, especially when done in the name of patriotism. Loyalty to the state and to autocratic leaders is substituted for true patriotism; that is, a willingness to challenge the state and defend the country, the people and the culture. The more difficult the times, the stronger the admonition comes that the leaders be not criticized.

Because the crisis atmosphere of war supports the growth of the state, any problem invites an answer by declaring war, even on social and economic issues. This elicits patriotism in support of various government solutions, while enhancing the power of the state. Faith in government coercion and a lack of understanding of how free societies operate encourages big-government liberals and big-government conservatives to manufacture a war psychology to demand political loyalty for domestic policy just as is required in foreign affairs.

The long-term cost in dollars spent and liberties lost is neglected as immediate needs are emphasized. It is for this reason that we have multiple perpetual wars going on simultaneously. Thus, the war on drugs, the war against gun ownership, the war against poverty, the war against illiteracy, the war against terrorism, as well as our foreign military entanglements are endless.

All this effort promotes the growth of statism at the expense of liberty. A government designed for a free society should do the opposite, prevent the growth of statism and preserve liberty.

Once a war of any sort is declared, the message is sent out not to object or you will be declared unpatriotic. Yet, we must not forget that the true patriot is the one who protests in spite of the consequences. Condemnation or ostracism or even imprisonment may result.

Nonviolent protesters of the Tax Code are frequently imprisoned, whether they are protesting the code’s unconstitutionality or the war that the tax revenues are funding. Resisters to the military draft or even to Selective Service registration are threatened and imprisoned for challenging this threat to liberty.

Statism depends on the idea that the government owns us and citizens must obey. Confiscating the fruits of our labor through the income tax is crucial to the health of the state. The draft, or even the mere existence of the Selective Service, emphasizes that we will march off to war at the state’s pleasure.

A free society rejects all notions of involuntary servitude, whether by draft or the confiscation of the fruits of our labor through the personal income tax. A more sophisticated and less well-known technique for enhancing the state is the manipulation and transfer of wealth through the fiat monetary system operated by the secretive Federal Reserve.

Protesters against this unconstitutional system of paper money are considered unpatriotic criminals and at times are imprisoned for their beliefs. The fact that, according to the Constitution, only gold and silver are legal tender and paper money outlawed matters little. The principle of patriotism is turned on its head. Whether it’s with regard to the defense of welfare spending at home, confiscatory income tax, or an immoral monetary system or support for a war fought under false pretense without a legal declaration, the defenders of liberty and the Constitution are portrayed as unpatriotic, while those who support these programs are seen as the patriots.

If there is a war going on, supporting the state’s effort to win the war is expected at all costs, no dissent. The real problem is that those who love the state too often advocate policies that lead to military action. At home, they are quite willing to produce a crisis atmosphere and claim a war is needed to solve the problem. Under these conditions, the people are more willing to bear the burden of paying for the war and to carelessly sacrifice liberties, which they are told is necessary.

The last 6 years have been quite beneficial to the health of the state, which comes at the expense of personal liberty. Every enhanced unconstitutional power of the state can only be achieved at the expense of individual liberty. Even though in every war in which we have been engaged civil liberties have suffered, some have been restored after the war ended, but never completely. That has resulted in a steady erosion of our liberties over the past 200 years. Our government was originally designed to protect our liberties, but it has now, instead, become the usurper of those liberties.

We currently live in the most difficult of times for guarding against an expanding central government with a steady erosion of our freedoms. We are continually being reminded that 9/11 has changed everything.

Unfortunately, the policy that needed most to be changed, that is, our policy of foreign interventionism, has only been expanded. There is no pretense any longer that a policy of humility in foreign affairs, without being the world’s policemen and engaging in nation building, is worthy of consideration.

We now live in a post-9/11 America where our government is going to make us safe no matter what it takes. We are expected to grin and bear it and adjust to every loss of our liberties in the name of patriotism and security.

Though the majority of Americans initially welcomed the declared effort to make us safe, and we are willing to sacrifice for the cause, more and more Americans are now becoming concerned about civil liberties being needlessly and dangerously sacrificed.

The problem is that the Iraq war continues to drag on, and a real danger of it spreading exists. There is no evidence that a truce will soon be signed in Iraq or in the war on terror or the war on drugs. Victory is not even definable. If Congress is incapable of declaring an official war, it is impossible to know when it will end. We have been fully forewarned that the world conflict in which we are now engaged will last a long, long time.

The war mentality and the pervasive fear of an unidentified enemy allows for a steady erosion of our liberties, and, with this, our respect for self-reliance and confidence is lost. Just think of the self-sacrifice and the humiliation we go through at the airport screening process on a routine basis. Though there is no scientific evidence of any likelihood of liquids and gels being mixed on an airplane to make a bomb, billions of dollars are wasted throwing away toothpaste and hair spray, and searching old women in wheelchairs.

Our enemies say boo, and we jump, we panic, and then we punish ourselves. We are worse than a child being afraid of the dark. But in a way, the fear of indefinable terrorism is based on our inability to admit the truth about why there is a desire by a small number of angry radical Islamists to kill Americans. It is certainly not because they are jealous of our wealth and freedoms.

We fail to realize that the extremists, willing to sacrifice their own lives to kill their enemies, do so out of a sense of weakness and desperation over real and perceived attacks on their way of life, their religion, their country, and their natural resources. Without the conventional diplomatic or military means to retaliate against these attacks, and an unwillingness of their own government to address the issue, they resort to the desperation tactic of suicide terrorism. Their anger toward their own governments, which they believe are coconspirators with the American Government, is equal to or greater than that directed toward us.

These errors in judgment in understanding the motive of the enemy and the constant fear that is generated have brought us to this crisis where our civil liberties and privacy are being steadily eroded in the name of preserving national security.

We may be the economic and the military giant of the world, but the effort to stop this war on our liberties here at home in the name of patriotism is being lost.

The erosion of our personal liberties started long before 9/11, but 9/11 accelerated the process. There are many things that motivate those who pursue this course, both well-intentioned and malevolent, but it would not happen if the people remained vigilant, understood the importance of individual rights, and were unpersuaded that a need for security justifies the sacrifice for liberty, even if it is just now and then.

The true patriot challenges the state when the state embarks on enhancing its power at the expense of the individual. Without a better understanding and a greater determination to rein in the state, the rights of Americans that resulted from the revolutionary break from the British and the writing of the Constitution will disappear.

The record since September 11th is dismal. Respect for liberty has rapidly deteriorated. Many of the new laws passed after 9/11 had, in fact, been proposed long before that attack. The political atmosphere after that attack simply made it more possible to pass such legislation. The fear generated by 9/11 became an opportunity for those seeking to promote the power of the state domestically, just as it served to falsely justify the long-planned invasion of Iraq.

The war mentality was generated by the Iraq war in combination with the constant drumbeat of fear at home. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, who is now likely residing in Pakistan, our supposed ally, are ignored, as our troops fight and die in Iraq and are made easier targets for the terrorists in their backyard. While our leaders constantly use the mess we created to further justify the erosion of our constitutional rights here at home, we forget about our own borders and support the inexorable move toward global government, hardly a good plan for America.

The accelerated attacks on liberty started quickly after 9/11. Within weeks, the PATRIOT Act was overwhelmingly passed by Congress. Though the final version was unavailable up to a few hours before the vote, no Member had sufficient time to study it. Political fear of not doing something, even something harmful, drove the Members of Congress to not question the contents, and just voted for it. A little less freedom for a little more perceived safety was considered a fair trade-off, and the majority of Americans applauded.

The PATRIOT Act, though, severely eroded the system of checks and balances by giving the government the power to spy on law-abiding citizens without judicial supervision. The several provisions that undermine the liberties of all Americans include sneak-and-peek searches, a broadened and more vague definition of domestic terrorism, allowing the FBI access to library and bookstore records without search warrants or probable cause, easier FBI initiation of wiretaps and searches, as well as roving wiretaps, easier access to information on American citizens’ use of the Internet, and easier access to e-mail and financial records of all American citizens.

The attack on privacy has not relented over the past 6 years. The Military Commissions Act is a particularly egregious piece of legislation and, if not repealed, will change America for the worse as the powers unconstitutionally granted to the executive branch are used and abused. This act grants excessive authority to use secretive military commissions outside of places where active hostilities are going on. The Military Commissions Act permits torture, arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the full discretion of the President and without the right of habeas corpus, and warrantless searches by the NSA. It also gives to the President the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony.

Since 9/11, Presidential signing statements designating portions of legislation that the President does not intend to follow, though not legal under the Constitution, have enormously multiplied. Unconstitutional Executive Orders are numerous and mischievous and need to be curtailed.

Extraordinary rendition to secret prisons around the world have been widely engaged in, though obviously extralegal.

A growing concern in the post-9/11 environment is the Federal Government’s list of potential terrorists based on secret evidence. Mistakes are made, and sometimes it is virtually impossible to get one’s name removed even though the accused is totally innocent of any wrongdoing.

A national ID card is now in the process of being implemented. It is called the REAL ID card, and it is tied to our Social Security numbers and our State driver’s license. If REAL ID is not stopped, it will become a national driver’s license ID for all Americans. We will be required to carry our papers.

Some of the least-noticed and least-discussed changes in the law were the changes made to the Insurrection Act of 1807 and to posse comitatus by the Defense Authorization Act of 2007. These changes pose a threat to the survival of our Republic by giving the President the power to declare martial law for as little reason as to restore public order. The 1807 act severely restricted the President in his use of the military within the United States borders, and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 strengthened these restrictions with strict oversight by Congress. The new law allows the President to circumvent the restrictions of both laws. The Insurrection Act has now become the “Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.” This is hardly a title that suggests that the authors cared about or understood the nature of a constitutional Republic.

Now, martial law can be declared not just for insurrection, but also for natural disasters, public health reasons, terrorist attacks or incidents, or for the vague reason called “other conditions.” The President can call up the National Guard without congressional approval or the Governors’ approval, and even send these State Guard troops into other States.

The American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care. These precedent-setting changes in the law are extremely dangerous and will change American jurisprudence forever if not revised. The beneficial results of our revolt against the King’s abuses are about to be eliminated, and few Members of Congress and few Americans are aware of the seriousness of the situation. Complacency and fear drive our legislation without any serious objection by our elected leaders. Sadly, though, those few who do object to this self-evident trend away from personal liberty and empire-building overseas are portrayed as unpatriotic and uncaring.

Though welfare and socialism always fails, opponents of them are said to lack compassion. Though opposition to totally unnecessary war should be the only moral position, the rhetoric is twisted to claim that patriots who oppose the war are not supporting the troops. The cliché “Support the Troops” is incessantly used as a substitute for the unacceptable notion of supporting the policy, no matter how flawed it may be.

Unsound policy can never help the troops. Keeping the troops out of harm’s way and out of wars unrelated to our national security is the only real way of protecting the troops. With this understanding, just who can claim the title of “patriot”?

Before the war in the Middle East spreads and becomes a world conflict for which we will be held responsible, or the liberties of all Americans become so suppressed we can no longer resist, much has to be done. Time is short, but our course of action should be clear. Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes.

But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty. [Ron Paul’s speech ends here]

There it is. The speech Dr. Paul gave in 2007 seems even more relevant today than it did then. Don’t you think?

You want to elect a real American statesman? You want to elect a man who would preserve liberty and freedom in America? You want to elect a man who would resist the devilish New World Order? You want to elect a man who would reestablish sound economic principles? If so, you will vote to elect Ron Paul as President of the United States. (And, no, no one has paid me a penny to post his speech or make this endorsement.)

Forget all the smoke and mirrors and the dog and pony shows that you see and hear from the other Presidential candidates. The issues that Dr. Paul addressed in this speech are the issues that are going to determine our country’s future. Again, this is the man who should be President of the United States.

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/4769

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

Hutaree Militiamen Cleared In Court

Posted on April 5, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
April 5, 2012

Much to the chagrin of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a federal judge has cleared the members of a Michigan militia who were accused by federal law enforcement agents of conspiracy to commit sedition. Since you didn’t hear much about this ruling from the national press corps, here is one online version of the report:

“Seven members of a Michigan militia have been cleared of plotting to overthrow the U.S. government as a judge dismissed the most serious charges against them.

“In a shock defeat for federal authorities, District Judge Victoria Roberts said the group’s expressed hatred of law enforcement did not amount to a conspiracy.

“The FBI secretly planted an informant and an agent inside the Hutaree militia in 2008 to collect hours of anti-government audio and video that became the cornerstone of the case.

“Senior officials had insisted they had captured homegrown rural extremists poised for war.

“But the judge said: ‘The court is aware that protected speech and mere words can be sufficient to show a conspiracy. In this case, however, they do not rise to that level.’’

“Judge Roberts granted requests for acquittal on the most serious charges: conspiring to commit sedition, or rebellion, against the U.S. and conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction.

“Other weapons crimes linked to the alleged conspiracies were also dismissed.”

http://tinyurl.com/7wp8jhe

At this point, I believe it is necessary that I review a column I wrote on April 6, 2010, regarding the Hutaree militia raid. As you read the words that follow, please remember that they were written TWO YEARS AGO–almost to the day.

[2010 column starts here] I want to try and expound on William Norman Grigg’s outstanding analysis of the Hutaree militia raid. In doing so, I am going to also expand upon Grigg’s reference to James Madison’s trenchant treatise in Federalist 46.

Referring to the federal indictment against the Hutaree militia, that alleged members were making preparations for potential armed conflict against law enforcement officers as a “seditious conspiracy,” Grigg astutely noted, “If they were acquiring weapons and developing appropriate skills in anticipation of defending themselves against government aggression, their actions–while possibly conspiratorial in nature–don’t amount to a crime. This is particularly true in light of our cultural history, in which sedition–agitation to change the existing political order–is our proudest civic tradition.”

Grigg then rightly observes, “Government is nothing more than the rationalization and exercise of violence. Everything done by government contains at least the implicit threat of lethal coercion. Thus the indictment’s description of Hutaree as ‘an anti-government extremist organization which advocates violence against local, state and Federal law enforcement’ is a product of rhetorical onanism [from Genesis 38:9--a great analogy, Will].”

As a general rule, government is the most violent force on the planet. If one wants to get a true perspective on the historical record regarding who or what routinely produces the most violence and death, one should pick up a copy of R. J. Rummel’s book, “Death By Government.” Since the end of World War II, Communist China and Red Russia lead the pack when it comes to death and brutality; however, the US government has inflicted its share of carnage as well. For example, in Iraq and Afghanistan alone, the government in Washington, D.C., has killed over 800,000 civilians (and this figure is a conservative estimate noting the most credible resources possible).

See: http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

Also see: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/images/10/11/human.cost.of.war.pdf

Plus, does anyone remember the violence that our federal government enacted upon the Branch Davidians outside Waco, Texas? Does anyone remember the mother shot in the head while innocently holding her little baby in her own home by a federal sniper near Ruby Ridge, Idaho (after her small son was shot in the back by federal agents)? In fact, the list of civilians who have been killed by federal law enforcement agents over the years is a very long one. Granted, many of these killings were done in lawful self-defense; but others amounted to nothing less than old-fashioned murder (and never was the federal agent who committed the murder ever brought to justice).

If one wants to indict an “organization which advocates violence,” then surely the central government in Washington, D.C., should be indicted!

If Hutaree members were indeed planning AGGRESSIVE violence against anyone–in the government or without–they deserved to be stopped. If, however, they were simply preparing to DEFEND THEMSELVES against government overreach or abuse–and would only resort to violence in an act of lawful self-defense–they committed no crime and are but the most recent victims of federal abuse of power. This is a question that will doubtless be determined in a court of law.

To charge, however (as the indictment does), that Hutaree members (all 9 of them!) planned “to levy war against the United States, [and] to oppose by force the authority of the Government of the United States . . .” will take some doing to make stick. As Grigg points out, “If Hutaree was preparing for armed DEFENSE against criminal actions by government officials, this charge is as pointless as a broken pencil. If their efforts to ‘prevent, hinder, and delay’ various government initiatives were confined to activism, rather than armed conflict, they are–in that particular–not substantially different from hundreds or thousands of other groups.”

The entire case against Hutaree appears to be based upon the testimony of an FBI undercover agent inside the group. Placing agent provocateurs inside groups such as Hutaree is a classic strategy of federal police agencies. This part of the story was broken by the Wall Street Journal.

See the WSJ report at:

http://tinyurl.com/wsj-hutaree

Using agent provocateurs is a long-favored tactic of both the Kremlin and the White House. Joel Skousen’s latest WORLD AFFAIRS BRIEF contains an extremely trenchant and insightful analysis of how Russia and the US have used–and continue to use–this tactic.

Skousen writes, “A related tactic [to false flag operations] is the hiring of agent provocateurs to infiltrate a group targeted for destruction and induce radical elements of that group to perform crimes against innocent civilians that will justify armed retaliation or arrest. With the sudden surge in claimed terrorism in Russia and the arrest of the radical Hutaree group in the US, it is helpful to review the role of false flag terror attacks in Russia and the role of agent provocateurs in the US as we analyze what’s really going on.”

Skousen further states, “As we move on to discuss the arrest of the radical members of the Hutaree cult in Michigan, it is important to note that virtually every prosecution of so-called domestic terrorism in the past decade is owed to the infiltration of FBI informants. While none of us in America dispute the need to gain intelligence on real threats to national security, we have to question the propriety of training and pressuring informants (most of which have been forced to accept the informant assignment in lieu of a prison term for other crimes committed) to provoke and induce angry and unstable dissidents to commit acts of terror.

“All too often, FBI ‘informants’ have been pressured by superiors to go far beyond informing. They have provided weapons, explosives, and even acted as the guiding hand to map out the strategy and tactics for performing the deed. These things only come out reluctantly during trial, and even then I suspect that we are never allowed to know the full extent of these provocations.”

To receive a sample of Joel Skousen’s WORLD AFFAIRS BRIEF or to subscribe to this excellent newsletter (I highly recommend it), write to:

editor@worldaffairsbrief.com

In addition, Will Grigg states that another major component of the indictment that is worrisome is the charge that Hutaree is guilty of “seditious conspiracy.” As Grigg writes, “Whatever is eventually learned about Hutaree, as things presently stand the indictment against it could provide a template for ‘seditious conspiracy’ prosecutions involving practically any group that endorses the use of defensive force to protect citizens against government aggression.

“Indeed, the definition of ‘conspiracy’ used in the Hutaree indictment could make a criminal out of anyone who reads Federalist Paper 46 in public, thereby sharing James Madison’s commendably seditious admonition that the people preserve ‘the advantage of being armed’ in the event that insurrection against the central government proves necessary in order to preserve liberty.”

Let’s look a little closer at Federalist 46, written by Founding Father, author of the US Constitution, and America’s fourth President, James Madison. In dispelling the fears of colonists toward a standing federal army, Madison said in Federalist 46, “Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops.”

Madison went on to say, “Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”

Could Madison be any clearer? He (and the rest of America’s founders) emphatically expected the militia of the “several States” to be universally armed against the potential encroachment on liberty by the central government, meaning: the citizenry must at all times be prepared to use their arms against any aggressive nature of the federal government to trample their freedoms.

This, of course, reinforces the founders’ intent, that the 2nd Amendment protected the right of the people to keep and bear arms for the express purpose of providing the citizenry with the capability to repel (with violence) any assault against their liberties by their own federal government.

So, pray tell, would today’s FBI categorize James Madison’s statements in Federalist 46 as “seditious conspiracy”? If so, perhaps we are closer to tyranny than any of us wants to admit!

Furthermore, it is not lost to millions of Americans that this is the same federal government (through Department of Homeland Security fusion centers) that just recently characterized pro-lifers; people who support the 2nd Amendment; people who oppose the United Nations and illegal immigration; people who voted for Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin; and Iraq War veterans as “extremists” and potential “dangerous militia members.”

But, once again, the federal government–along with their propagandists in the major news media, including its artificial authority on militias, the ultra-liberal Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) in Montgomery, Alabama–is able to use the Hutaree militia to demonize militias in general, and even more damaging, to try and destroy the concept of constitutional State militias in the minds of the American public.

Did members of the Hutaree intend to carry out aggressive violence against law enforcement personnel? I have no idea. Until this story broke in the national media, I had never heard of this group. I will wait for the facts to come out–if indeed the federal government and national media even allow the facts to come out.

I do know this: I do not trust the federal government to tell the truth about anything! They did not tell the truth about the Branch Davidians at Waco; they did not tell the truth about Randy Weaver; they did not tell the truth about Gordon Kahl; and, if their track record is any indicator, it is doubtful that they are telling the truth about the Hutaree militia. But we shall see.

In the meantime, as William Norman Grigg opines, “There’s reason to believe that the Feds have expanded and escalated this ongoing enterprise to exploit, and exacerbate, growing public hostility toward an increasingly invasive and esurient government.

“Whether it is ever demonstrated that Hutaree intended to ‘levy war’ against the U.S. government, this much is beyond serious dispute: The Homeland Security state is unambiguously preparing for war with the public–in fact, it has been doing so for a long time.” [2010 column ends here]

I invite readers to visit William Norman Grigg’s blog at:

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2010/03/causus-belli.html

Well, now in 2012, the facts have all been laid bare. The Hutaree militia was innocent of the federal government’s conspiracy charges, and the federal government, once again, did not tell the truth. And, furthermore, the words written by yours truly and Will Grigg seem even more relevant today than they did two years ago, do they not?

In closing, let me be very clear about this: I have nothing but appreciation and respect for honest, God-fearing law enforcement personnel. I count law enforcement personnel among my kinfolk, and I feel very privileged to have been made an honorary deputy sheriff by my former county sheriff. I certainly share no anti-law enforcement prejudice. But the current trend to militarize and federalize law enforcement is both unconstitutional and alarming. Even more alarming is the manner in which the federal government and its toadies at the SPLC are attempting to criminalize the expressions of freedom and constitutional government–the same words, thoughts, and ideas expressed by America’s Founding Fathers. To quote myself, “So, pray tell, would today’s FBI categorize James Madison’s statements in Federalist 46 as ‘seditious conspiracy’? If so, perhaps we are closer to tyranny than any of us wants to admit!”

In the meantime, congratulations to federal District Judge Victoria Roberts for representing the court in a manner consistent with the founders’ intentions: by using the gavel as a hammer to protect liberty rather than as a rubber stamp to dismantle it–as so many federal judges are inclined to do these days.

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/4760

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

What Many Churches And The SPLC Have In Common

Posted on March 29, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
March 29, 2012

Those of us who believe in constitutional government, the Bill of Rights, personal liberty, and State autonomy are beginning to taste what German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer and pastor Martin Niemoller experienced back in 1930’s Germany. These two great lovers of God and freedom were ostracized and eventually persecuted by both Germany’s political and social societies and by “German Christians.” History does have a way of repeating itself, doesn’t it?

Anyone who does not recognize that America is rapidly being transformed into a fascist state is as dumb as Balaam’s ass. No, dumber! At least the ass had the sense to stop when it realized it was heading smack into God’s wrath.

For all intents and purposes, the US Constitution is dead; the Bill of Rights is dead; the vision of the Founding Fathers is dead; and federalism and republicanism are also dead. What we have left is a blend of socialism, welfarism, fascism, statism, and warfarism, with fascism becoming the dominant “ism” of the bunch.

If you want to know where America is quickly heading, go watch the movie “The Hunger Games,” currently playing in theaters everywhere. Or read Orwell’s “1984,” or Huxley’s “Brave New World.” Or better yet, take your eyes off ESPN just long enough to take a good look outside. America, as “the land of the free,” is disappearing. It is already unrecognizable from the country I grew up in, not to mention the country that our Founding Fathers fought and died to create. What happened in fascist Germany is happening right now in America. And one of the telltale marks of this emerging fascist society is the way people who believe in constitutional government, liberty, and individualism are being treated by the mainstream media, mainstream religion, and mainstream politics.

For years, the mainstream media has characterized constitutionalists, patriots, and traditionalists as “far-right,” “extremist,” “radical,” etc. Establishment politicians in both major parties have likewise branded anyone who would not subscribe to their big-government agenda. Groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) have regurgitated the same inflammatory rhetoric, throwing “racist” and “anti-government” into the mix. And since 9/11/01, the Naziesque Department of Homeland Security has picked up the hype and fomented fear and suspicion of anyone so identified in the hearts of law enforcement personnel nationwide. Now, just like in Nazi Germany, even churches and professing Christians are getting into the act.

For the sake of their precious 501c3 non-profit corporation status, many churches are becoming little more than government disinformation centers. Instead of energizing men and women with the message of Christian liberty (of which the Gospel is at the center), churches are busily sedating them. The Caesars’ “bread and circus” scheme had nothing over the “music, smoke, and entertainment” scheme of the modern American church. Instead of giving young people the scriptural tools necessary to be the champions of liberty, they are providing the opiate by which they will sheepishly take the Mark of the Beast. And woe be unto any Christian who decides to step outside these politically correct religious boxes!

In his blockbuster book, “Hitler’s Cross,” Erwin Lutzer wrote, “The crisis of which he [Bonhoeffer] spoke was only partly a conflict between Hitler and Christianity. It was primarily a struggle of the church against itself; it was the struggle of the false and true, the swastika and the Cross. It was a struggle within a church that had voluntarily embraced the German nationalism of the day.”

Lutzer continued saying, “The ‘German Christians’…were committed to bringing the church in line with Nazism.” Again he wrote, “The ‘German Christians’ [were] also known as ‘The Faith Movement.’” And again, “These Christians adorned their altars with Nazi flags and had their congregations join in the Nazi salute.”

Lutzer points out that the “German Christians” commonly sewed the Cross in the middle of the Nazi flag and enthusiastically embraced what they called Hitler’s “positive Christianity.” Lutzer rightly notes that Hitler successfully “Nazified” Germany’s churches, and that had he not done so, the history of Germany (and the world) would have been drastically different.

It was men such as Bonhoeffer and Niemoller who resisted Hitler’s “Nazification” and started what became known as “The Confessing Church.” These churches were comprised of pastors and Christians who would not subordinate the scriptures to the dominion and will of the state. They refused to sacrifice the Gospel message of Christian liberty to Hitler’s erroneous “Obey-the-government-no-matter-what” interpretation of Romans chapter 13. They refused to allow their churches to be bought off or bribed by government tax deductions and benefits.

How many churches were in “The Confessing Church”? Out of 14,000 evangelical churches in Germany at the time, approximately 800 stayed true to scripture. That’s right. About 5% of Germany’s churches and pastors refused to surrender to the fascist state emerging around them. And you know that those 800 churches paid a terrible price for their resolve. They were scorned and snubbed by their “Christian” brothers and sisters. They were called “extremist,” “radical,” and “anti-government.” Friends and coworkers ostracized them. The German national press corps marginalized them. They were blackballed, ridiculed, and shunned. And eventually, they were imprisoned, tortured, and even murdered.

And ladies and gentlemen, right now in these United States, Christians who are part of the modern “Confessing Church” are experiencing the same kind of mischaracterization, ridicule, and resentment by the mainstream media, the SPLC, and even fellow Christians. Yes, in America today, the SPLC and many churches have the denouncing and hatred of the uncompromising “Confessing Church” in common.

To those of us in the modern “Confessing Church,” I ask, “If thou hast run with the footmen, and they have wearied thee, then how canst thou contend with horses?” (Jeremiah 12:5) In other words, if we cannot withstand a little ridicule, if we are unwilling to be ostracized, if we cannot take the mischaracterizations that we are experiencing now, what will we do when it gets serious? If the footmen tire you, what will the horsemen do? I say to you, “Quit you like men; be strong.” (I Corinthians 16:13) “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” (Galatians 5:1)

And to those of you who think you can sit on the fence of popularity and acceptance and yet remain true to Christ and to the principles of liberty, which He established, you are sadly mistaken. If you think you can be neutral in this fight, you are deluded. If you think that when America has been thoroughly immersed in this baptism of fascism that you and your family will escape unscathed, you are dreaming. What we in the modern “Confessing Church” are experiencing, you will soon experience. Either that, or you will sell your soul and the souls of your children to Satan and his kingdom.

Someone rightly said, “It is dangerous to be right when your government is wrong.” Bonhoeffer and Niemoller discovered the truth of that statement; and so are many of us today. But as Sean Connery’s character said at the end of “The Wind And The Lion,” “Is there not one thing in your life that is worth losing everything for?” Ask yourself, are comfort, acceptance, money, and position, etc., worth losing your liberty for? No, they are not; but liberty IS worth losing everything for! At least Bonhoeffer and Niemoller thought so. So did America’s founders. And so do I!

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/4740

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

Chuck’s Annual Reading List

Posted on March 22, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
March 22, 2012

It’s time for my annual suggested reading list column. First, here are a couple of maxims about reading in general. “Leaders are readers.” And, “A man is the sum total of the people he associates with and the books he reads.” Accordingly, here are books that I have recently read, that I am currently reading, or that are on my short list of books soon to read.

“Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission”
By Tim Baldwin and Chuck Baldwin

This is a blockbuster book co-authored by my constitutional attorney son and me. It exposes the fallacy of the “Obey-the-government-no-matter-what” interpretation of Romans chapter 13. I am absolutely convinced that if enough Christian ministers and churchmen truly understood the true meaning of Romans 13, they could change the course and direction of our country. If you don’t read any other book this year (beside the Bible, of course,) I strongly encourage you to read this book. You can find it online here:

http://www.romans13truth.com/

Life of Washington
“A rare, faith-filled, historic biography of America’s first President, George Washington. Originally published in 1842.”
By Anna C. Reed

War Is A Racket
By Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler

Every American should read this classic. I try to stay reminded of General Butler’s wisdom by reading his book every year or two.

Boston’s Gun Bible
By Boston T. Party

A terrific manual on the Second Amendment, shooting, guns, self-defense, etc. Every American who claims to love liberty should read the chapter entitled “How To Become A Rifleman.” That chapter alone is worth the price of the book.

Patriots
“A Novel of Survival in the Coming Collapse”
By James Wesley, Rawles

This is a book that I whole-heartily recommend. This just might be the quintessential book on survival, preparedness, and the political, social, and military science behind it.

*Lex Rex, or The Law and the Prince
By Samuel Rutherford (1600 – March 20, 1661)

*Two Books on the Elements of Universal Jurisprudence By Samuel Pufendorf (January 8, 1632 – October 13, 1694)

*The Rights of War and Peace
By Hugo Grotius (April 10, 1583 – August 28, 1645)

*On The Law Of War And Peace
By Hugo Grotius

*The Law of Nations
Emer de Vattel (April 25, 1714 – December 28, 1767)

*Discourses Concerning Government
Algernon Sidney (January 14 or 15, 1623 – December 7, 1683)

*Second Treatise of Government
By John Locke (August 29, 1632 – October 28, 1704)

This is another one that I try to read every year.

*Among others, these seven classics are books that our Founding Fathers read. They provide scriptural, historical, philosophical, moral, and political principles necessary to the understanding of American law, jurisprudence, and constitutional government. Caution: reading these books may turn one into a patriot in the similitude of Washington, Henry, and Jefferson. The books can be obtained very reasonably, but, if you have to, sell your clothes to get them. But, be advised, you will not be able to read these books quickly; and you must be prepared to rethink virtually everything you’ve been taught in school, read in newspapers, or watched on television.

They Preached Liberty
“An anthology of timely quotations from New England ministers of the American Revolution on the subject of liberty: its source, nature, obligations, types, and blessings.”
Edited by Franklin P. Cole

I wish every preacher in America would read this book, and also these next two:

Political Sermons of the American Founding Era, 1730-1805 Edited by Ellis Sandoz

The Battle of Lexington
“A Sermon and Eyewitness Narrative”
By Jonas Clark, Pastor, Church of Lexington Originally Titled: The Fate of Blood-Thirsty Oppressors and God’s Tender Care of His Distressed People

Here is the eyewitness account of the man who led the Minutemen as they fired the “shot heard ’round the world” on Lexington Green and later at Concord Bridge. The Minutemen were comprised mostly of the male congregants of Clark’s Church of Lexington. You haven’t been told that in your modern history books or by your church pastor, have you? Read the book.

The Art Of The Rifle
By Jeff Cooper

[George] Patton’s Principles
“A Handbook for Managers Who Mean It!”
By Porter B. Williamson

This is another book I try to read every year or so.

Hitler’s Cross
“The revealing story of how the Cross of Christ was used as a symbol of the Nazi agenda.”
By Erwin W. Lutzer

As I have said many times, this is a book that everyone needs to read. I have personally recommended this book to hundreds of people. Get this book!

The Federal Siege At Ruby Ridge
By Randy and Sara Weaver

The siege against the Weaver home in Northern Idaho by federal police agencies (along with the siege against the Branch Davidians outside Waco, Texas) is without a doubt one of the most egregious examples of federal abuse of power in the history of the United States. I had studied the siege when it occurred back in 1992, but until I read the first-person account by the Weavers themselves, I did not have the full picture of what actually took place. Regardless of what one thinks of Randy Weaver and his personal, political, and social views, he and his family are American citizens, and to have happen to them what happened is both a personal nightmare and a national disgrace. Pray you don’t ever have to endure what they did. But since no federal officer who participated in the murder of a mother and her teenage son at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, was ever brought to justice, don’t think for one minute that it cannot happen to you. I wept all the way through this book.

The Pilgrim’s Progress
By John Bunyan

This is the immortal book that has sold more copies worldwide than any other book, with the exception of the Holy Bible. A timeless treasure that every Christian should read.

Death By Government
By R. J. Rummel

Read this and you will discover that John Dillinger, Al Capone, and Bonnie and Clyde were rank amateurs.

John Wayne: The Man Behind The Myth
By Michael Munn

A wonderful read about Hollywood’s most famous and enduring legend. John Wayne’s face and name are more recognized around the world than any other American, living or dead. FYI, my favorite John Wayne movies are: True Grit, Sands of Iwo Jima, The Alamo, The Green Berets, She Wore A Yellow Ribbon, The Searchers, and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

A Foreign Policy Of Freedom
“Peace, Commerce, And Honest Friendship”
By Congressman Ron Paul

The Law
By Frederic Bastiat

This is another classic that needs to be read every year.

Vindiciae, Contra Tyrannos
Or Concerning The Legitimate Power Of A Prince Over The People, And Of The People Over The Prince Edited by George Garnett

This is another must-read for all freedom lovers.

The Black Book Of Communism
By Stephane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Panne, Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, and Jean-Louis Margolin

This is the most definitive and comprehensive book I have ever found on the history and fallout of communism all over the world.

There you have it, fellow patriots: my suggested reading list for 2012. Whatever we do this year, let’s read a few good books!

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/4722

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

The Brotherhood Of The Free

Posted on March 15, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
March 15, 2012

One of my all-time favorite pieces of literature is this section from Friedrich Schiller’s William Tell:

“By this fair light which greeteth us, before
Those other nations, that, beneath us far,
In noisome cities pent, draw painful breath,
Swear we the oath of our confederacy!
A band of brothers true we swear to be,
Never to part in danger or in death!

“We swear we will be free as were our sires,
And sooner die than live in slavery!

“We swear, to put our trust in God Most High,
And not to quail before the might of man!”

Another personal favorite is the St. Crispin’s Day speech from Shakespeare’s Henry V:

“This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered.

“We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he today that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother, be he ne’er so vile.
This day shall gentle his condition.

“And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.”

Schiller and Shakespeare called it “Band of Brothers.” The Apostle Peter called it “Brotherhood.” (I Peter 2:17) Call it what you will: without it, no cause will prevail. And that is one of the biggest problems we face in America today: there is very little brotherhood among brothers.

No, not all brothers are part of the brotherhood. The Scripture acknowledges this in Proverbs 18:24, “There is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.” And again in Proverbs 27:10, “Better is a neighbor that is near than a brother afar off.” A brother that doesn’t “stick close” is certainly not part of the brotherhood. Neither is a brother that is “afar off.”

The sad truth is, even in the vast majority of churches, brotherhood is virtually unknown. Sitting in a church congregation is no more indicative of brotherhood than sitting in a crowded football stadium. In fact, there might even be MORE brotherhood at a football game than there is in the average church today.

Churches today are literally eaten up with malice, jealousy, gossip, slander, backbiting, faultfinding, ad infinitum. (But the same is true with other establishment organizations as well.) For all intents and purposes, today’s churches make a mockery of all that Jesus taught regarding Christian love and brotherhood. On the whole, it simply does not exist today.

This past Sunday, I delivered a message simply entitled, “Brotherhood.” I encourage readers to watch or download this message at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/redirection2/go2/?WPNTHJ

For the sake of this column, and for the freedom movement especially, let me issue a clarion call for all of us who call ourselves Patriots. It is absolutely critical that we recognize The Brotherhood of the Free.

After signing the Declaration of Independence, Benjamin Franklin said, “We must hang together, or we most assuredly will hang separately.” How right he was!

Our patriot-forebears, this “Band of Brothers,” were as diverse a group of men as would ever be found. They represented virtually every Christian denomination that existed in Colonial America. They also included men who identified with no Christian church or denomination. While most of our Founding Fathers were Christians, not all of them were. But they all joined shoulder-to-shoulder in the fight for liberty and independence. Christians were fighting for the freedom to worship God as they pleased, and non-Christians were fighting for the freedom to not worship God if they pleased. But both fought side-by-side for freedom. Why do Christians today have such a blind spot in this regard?

It doesn’t matter that Mitt Romney is a Mormon, or that Newt Gingrich is a Catholic, or that Rick Santorum is a Catholic. What matters is that not one of them is part of The Brotherhood of the Free. Not one of them has a clue as to what the real principles of liberty and constitutional government are all about. Not one of them recognizes the New World Order, the emerging police state, or the foolhardiness of perpetual war–whatever church they attend notwithstanding!

And that’s the problem with most of our Christian “brothers”: They just don’t get it! And when push comes to shove, most of them will join with the forces of darkness in persecuting real Patriots and freedom lovers. Don’t believe it? Look at how they are treating Ron Paul.

Say what you want about Ron Paul, he is an elder statesman in The Brotherhood of the Free. Ron Paul is in the Brotherhood. He knows what’s going on. He sees the danger. He cares about liberty. He understands the Constitution. He is my brother in the fight!

Do I agree with Dr. Paul about every issue? No! We will never agree with our fellow Patriots about every single issue–neither should we have to. We agree on the basics. We each love liberty and independence. We believe in constitutional government. We despise globalism, corporatism, socialism, and fascism. We recognize a police state when we see it. We recognize the right of free moral beings to make their own personal moral choices. As Christians, we know that only Christ can change the hearts (and thereby, the conduct) of men–NOT GOVERNMENT!

Does anyone find it more than interesting that men such as John Adams, Sam Adams, and George Washington joined with Benjamin Franklin in signing the Declaration of Independence? The Adams boys and Mr. Washington were well known far and wide as men of intense piety and personal morality, while Mr. Franklin was known by everyone to be an incurable ladies man–even in his old age. If John and Sam and George would have behaved as so-called Christians do today, they would have said, “If Ben is signing this document, count me out!” But there they were, side-by-side, shoulder-to-shoulder, fighting for liberty and independence.

I, too, will gladly stand with my fellows in The Brotherhood of the Free. It doesn’t mean that I approve of all that they do. It doesn’t mean that I believe all that they believe. But it does mean as long as they are part of the Brotherhood and are willing to fight for the principles of liberty, I will stand with them!

Joining Ron Paul are thousands of men and women who should be recognized as part of this noble Brotherhood. As did our Founding Fathers, we come from varied walks of life, varied religious persuasions, varied belief systems, etc., but we all share a love of liberty and independence that burns deeply in our breasts.

Accordingly, I am glad to stand with (and to have stood with) Patriots such as Montana State Legislator Rick Jore, John McManus, Dr. Stan Montieth, Howard Phillips, Larry Pratt, Paul Walter, Herb Titus, Bill Olson, Ed Vieira, Judge Darrell White, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Pat Buchanan, Chelene Nightingale, Charley Reese, Scott Bradley, Joel Skousen, Tom DeWeese, Ezola Foster, Sheriff Richard Mack, Alex Jones, Governor Jesse Ventura, Sam Bushman, the late Congresswoman Helen Chenoweth-Hage, the late William Shearer, the late Joseph Sobran, the late George Putnam, and thousands like them.

My dear fellow Patriots, we are part of a Brotherhood. As Franklin said, “We must hang together.” If we do, the cause of liberty will prevail. If we do not, the cause of liberty will most assuredly perish.

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/4705

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

Status Quo Has To Go

Posted on March 8, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
March 8, 2012

A few weeks ago, I said in this column, “It is far more important who is elected as your governor than who is elected President. It is far more important who is elected as your State attorney general than who is appointed US attorney general. It is far more important who is elected to your State legislature than who is elected to the US House and Senate. It is far more important who is elected as your sheriff than who is appointed as the Director of the FBI. But if all you watch is FOX News, CNN, NBC, CBS, and ABC, you will be mesmerized with national politics, and you will forget about that which is the most important defender of our liberties: our individual state governments. In fact, in many cases today, our State and local governments are as abusive of our liberties as is the federal government. This is mainly due to the inattention and misunderstanding of the People as to the importance of electing local and State leaders who will accept, as their first responsibility, the maintenance of liberty for the people they represent. And by nature, that means being a faithful watchdog to the incursions of the federal government against our freedoms.”

See my column at: http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=4471

I can’t stress enough that our liberties will be won or lost at the State level. All of the evil machinations that spew forth from that Cesspool By The Potomac would have absolutely no bearing upon or authority over our lives without the approbation of our State leaders. If our states had governors like Patrick Henry and State legislators and senators like Samuel Adams today, Washington, D.C., would not be the obnoxious bully that it is.

And let’s face it: some states are better positioned to reclaim their lawful jurisdictional authority than other states. Furthermore, I am personally convinced that all it would take would be for three or four states to draw their “line in the sand” and a host–maybe even a majority–of other states would quickly follow suit. And I further believe that my home State of Montana is uniquely poised to be one of those states.

The problem in Montana, however, is similar to that of most states: the “good-old-boy,” “politics-as-usual,” “scratch-my-back-and-I’ll-scratch-yours” politicians are ensconced in the State political infrastructure. And it’s going to take some political dynamite to blast them out! And that dynamite is a courageous constitutionalist (or better yet, a host of courageous constitutionalists) who is not afraid to take on these arrogant elitists and restore the principles of liberty to their states. In short, the status quo has to go!

And I want to let readers know that there is an epic battle underway right now in Montana that is both a microcosm and precursor of the battle that is raging nationally. In fact, this political duel might be the most important fight in the State of Montana this year. And because of Montana’s leadership in the national fight for freedom, it must be regarded as one of the most important political duels in the country.

I’m talking about the race for Montana State Senate District Three. The incumbent is the personification of the word RINO. This neocon is the bane of liberty and constitutional government. In fact, he is quoted as having told a gathering of local Republicans a few days ago, “We are NOT constitutionalists; we are NOT freedom-fighters.” Pray tell, Senator, if you are not willing to support and defend the Constitution, if you are not willing to support and defend freedom, what in Hades are you doing in public office?

This man comes from a long-established Montanan family with a good reputation in the State. Unfortunately, he has used that reputation to vault himself to the State senate. Name the issue and this Big Government toady is on the wrong side of it. He’s on the wrong side of the Second Amendment issue; he’s on the wrong side of the life issue; he’s on the wrong side of the less government and less taxes issue; he’s on the wrong side of the right to work issue; he’s on the wrong side of the State sovereignty issue; and he’s on the wrong side of the right of parents to educate their children via private or Christian education or homeschooling issue. And adding insult to injury, if this man is reelected this year, he will, in all likelihood, be elected Senate President, which means he will use his incredible power and influence to kill most of the good legislation that many of the noble house members and senators will bring forth next legislative term–not to mention the scores of RINOs and neocons that he will help place in key political positions around the State. This man simply must be defeated in the Republican primary, which takes place this June.

And the good news is that there is a courageous constitutionalist who is running against this neocon Neanderthal. His name is Rollan Roberts II. I’ve known Rollan for many years, and I can tell you that Rollan is as straight as a gun barrel on every single constitutional issue facing us today. He’s straight on the Second Amendment issue; he’s straight on the life issue; he’s straight on the private and Christian education and homeschooling issue; he’s straight on the State sovereignty issue; he’s straight on the constitutional government issue; he’s straight on the right to work issue; and he’s straight on the less government and less taxes issue. Rollan has the grit and determination of Ron Paul; he has the business acumen of Steve Forbes; and he has the look and polish of Ronald Reagan. Rollan Roberts is the real deal!

As you can imagine, Rollan is going up against a political MACHINE. These elitists have already attempted to threaten and intimidate Rollan by using very graphic language. They are making it their reason for getting up in the morning to defeat Rollan in the primary election. They know what is at stake. If Rollan can beat this Big Government elitist, their plans to dominate the State senate and thwart the noble efforts of the many constitutionalists, which are in the Montana House of Representatives, will be set back for years to come.

For all intents and purposes, Rollan has two months (sixty days) to win this senate seat. You see, a large number of Montanans vote via mail-in ballot, and these ballots are distributed on the first of May. So, Rollan has the months of March and April to upset this elitist RINO. And I’m telling you: Rollan has a VERY GOOD CHANCE of succeeding. A lot of Montanans see through his opponent and are working and praying for Rollan’s success.

I am asking all of my readers, if you believe in constitutional government, if you believe in State sovereignty, if you want to help a man who is uniquely poised to make a difference, not only in the State of Montana, but in the entire country as well, please consider helping Rollan Roberts II win this State senate seat. If every reader sends a $20 contribution to Rollan’s election campaign, this just might put him over the top. Will you help?

Rollan’s campaign website is: http://www.rr2senate.com

Again, time is of the essence! Rollan only has two months to win this race. If he wins the primary, he will most assuredly win the general election in November, as this senate district is heavily Republican. In fact, as of this writing, I haven’t even heard of a Democrat who has filed for this seat.

Will you prayerfully consider helping Rollan Roberts? If I didn’t know this man as I do, I would not use this column to ask readers to support him.

Ladies and gentlemen, when we find good constitutionalists who are running for public office, we need to do everything we can to support them. If you know of such people who are running for public office in your State and community, please support them. As I said, our liberties will be won or lost at the State level!

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=4646

*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

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

Remembering The Alamo

Posted on March 1, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
March 1, 2012

March 6 marks the anniversary of the fall of the Alamo back in 1836. For more than 13 days, 186 brave and determined patriots withstood Santa Anna’s seasoned army of over 4,000 troops. To a man, the defenders of that mission fort knew they would never leave those ramparts alive. They had several opportunities to leave and live. Yet, they chose to fight and die. How foolish they must look to this generation of spoiled Americans.

It is difficult to recall that stouthearted men such as Davy Crockett (a nationally known frontiersman and former congressman), Will Travis (only 23 years old with a little baby at home), and Jim Bowie (a wealthy landowner with properties on both sides of the Rio Grande) really existed. These were real men with real dreams and real desires. Real blood flowed through their veins. They loved their families and enjoyed life as much as any of us do. There was something different about them, however. They possessed a commitment to liberty that transcended personal safety and comfort.

Liberty is an easy word to say, but it is a hard word to live up to. Freedom has little to do with financial gain or personal pleasure. Accompanying Freedom is her constant and unattractive companion, Responsibility. Neither is she an only child. Patriotism and Morality are her sisters. They are inseparable: destroy one and all will die.

Early in the siege, Travis wrote these words to the people of Texas: “Fellow Citizens & Compatriots: I am besieged by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna. . . . The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise the garrison are to be put to the sword . . . I have answered the demand with a cannon shot & our flag still waves proudly from the walls. I shall never surrender or retreat. . . . VICTORY OR DEATH! P.S. The Lord is on our side. . . .”

As you read those words, remember that Travis and the others did not have the A.C.L.U., P.E.T.A., the National Education Association, and the Southern Poverty Law Center telling them how intolerant and narrow-minded their notions of honor and patriotism were. A hostile media did not constantly castigate them as a bunch of wild-eyed extremists. As schoolchildren, they were not taught that their forefathers were nothing more than racist jerks. Neither did they have pastors constantly filling their hearts and minds with this imbecilic “Obey-the-government-no-matter-what” misinterpretation of Romans chapter 13.

The brave men at the Alamo labored under the belief that America (and Texas) really was “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” They believed God was on their side and the freedom of future generations depended on their courage and resolve. They further believed their posterity would remember their sacrifice as an act of love and devotion. It all looks pale now.

By today’s standards, the gallant men of the Alamo appear rather foolish. After all, they had no chance of winning–none. Yet, the call for pragmatism and practicality was never sounded. Instead, they answered the clarion call, “Victory or death!”

Please try to remember the heroes of the Alamo as you watch our gutless political and religious leaders surrender to globalism, corporatism, socialism, and political correctness. Try to recall the time in this country when ordinary men and women had the courage of their convictions and were willing to sacrifice their lives for freedom and independence.

One thing is certain: those courageous champions at the Alamo did not die for a political party or for some “lesser of two evils” mantra. They fought and died for a principle, and that principle was liberty and independence. So did the men at Lexington and Concord. That is our heritage.

Today, however, our national leaders are in the process of turning the United States over to the very forces that the Alamo defenders (and America’s Founding Fathers) gave their lives resisting. On second thought, do they look foolish, or do we?

P.S. Let me remind readers that I have a DVD available entitled, “The True Meaning of Romans 13.” This DVD contains four messages and may be purchased at the incredibly low price of only $15 (price includes shipping). In essence, you are getting all four of my Romans 13 messages for the price of one!

In this message series, I quote scores and scores of Biblical references to show the “whole counsel of God” relative to the subject of submission to government. The Biblical and historical records on this subject are clearly propounded in these messages. This might be the most relevant and important message series I’ve ever delivered.

To order the Romans 13 DVD, go to:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=3146

Plus, my son, Tim Baldwin (who is an attorney and constitutional scholar), and I have collaborated on a blockbuster book on Romans 13. It is entitled, “Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission.” This book has even more information, scriptural references, documentation, quotations, etc., than the DVD. To order the Romans 13 book, go to:

http://www.romans13truth.com/

I urge readers to obtain as many of the DVDs and/or books as you can and distribute them to your Christian friends, church leaders, and pastors. It is no hyperbole to say that the erroneous “Obey-The-Government-No-Matter-What” misinterpretation of Romans 13 is destroying America–just as it destroyed Germany when Adolf Hitler promoted this fallacy to German pastors and churches.

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=4632

*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
Copyright © Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

What Ron Paul’s Detractors Reveal

Posted on February 23, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
February 23, 2012

It is no secret that I am a huge Ron Paul fan–and I have been for many years. Do I agree with him on every single issue? Of course not. And I don’t have to agree with him on every single issue to know Ron Paul is the only true constitutionalist in the Presidential field–from either major party. And when a President (or any other public office holder) takes his or her oath of office, they do not swear to be a good conservative, or to be a good Christian, or to support the state of Israel, or to “create jobs,” etc., etc. They swear to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. That is their solemn oath before God and the American people. Nothing more. Nothing less. And for over two decades, Congressman Ron Paul has demonstrated his fidelity to that oath. And for that, I can and must support him.

In spite of Dr. Paul’s stellar congressional record, however, there are large numbers of Republicans and “conservatives” that are his fiercest critics. I’ve even heard some “conservatives” say that they would rather see Barack Obama reelected than for Ron Paul to become President. Such is the lunacy of many so-called “conservatives” today.

So, what is it about Ron Paul’s detractors that cause them to despise him so much? What is their beef? They would never say that they would rather Obama be reelected than to see Mitt Romney, or Newt Gingrich, or Rick Santorum elected President. In fact, most of them spout the antiquated mantra, “Anybody but the Democrat (whoever it happens to be at the time).” Or, “At least Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, etc., won’t take us over the cliff quite as fast as Obama.” But when discussing Ron Paul, many “conservatives” take the position, “Anybody but Ron Paul.” Why is this? What is it about this good man that so many good people can have such animosity toward him?

I am convinced that these “conservatives” who oppose Ron Paul reveal much more about themselves than they do about Dr. Paul. Let me proffer a few observations.

Observation Number One: We Have A Constitutionally Illiterate Society

Many “conservatives” are woefully ignorant of the US Constitution, and when a constitutional scholar such as Ron Paul interjects the Constitution into the political debate, he is speaking a language that many of these “conservatives” simply do not understand. He might as well be speaking Spanish or French. To many “conservatives,” the Constitution is a foreign language.

For the better part of the Twentieth Century, the Constitution was ignored and neglected. Pastors have never studied the Constitution. Businessmen have never studied it. High school teachers and college professors have never studied it. Policemen and sheriff deputies have never studied it. Even attorneys and judges haven’t studied the Constitution. Let’s be honest: we have a constitutionally illiterate society today. As a result of this constitutional ignorance, people (including Christians and “conservatives”) simply cannot fathom–much less appreciate–constitutional solutions to America’s political woes.

Dr. Paul knows the Constitution. He has studied it. He has read what America’s Founding Fathers and framers have written about the Constitution. He has studied the enlightenment philosophers, theologians, and teachers–you know, the same ones that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison studied. He knows that the reason America is in the mess it is in today is because the Constitution has been abandoned. And he also knows that the only way to fix it (politically) is to return to constitutional governance.

Therefore, when Dr. Paul talks about drugs, foreign policy, military adventurism, or even social issues, he does so from a constitutional point of reference. And the Constitution is clear when it comes to these matters. Domestic drug laws are the exclusive responsibility of the states–as is virtually every other law enforcement matter. Foreign entanglements, empire building, turning our military personnel into the world’s policemen, etc., are all anathema to constitutional government. And the longer our political leaders continue to ignore the Constitution, the more America will continue to slide down this slippery slope in which we now find ourselves.

Ron Paul’s position on these matters is in historical agreement with America’s Founding Fathers and the US Constitution. The following report outlines Dr. Paul’s sagacity regarding so-called “social conservatism” and the proper role of constitutional government (the title of the news report notwithstanding):

http://tinyurl.com/82slxzf

Dr. Paul’s detractors demonstrate that they do not truly understand the US Constitution.

Observation Number Two: Many “Conservatives” Have A Misguided Perception Of Ron Paul’s Position On The State Of Israel.

How many times have we heard Dr. Paul’s critics say that Ron Paul is “against Israel”? Too many times to count. I have been with Ron Paul in public and private many times, and I have never heard the first anti-Semitic word come out of his mouth.

Theologically speaking, you could not get a consensus of opinion from among the leading Biblical scholars and theologians regarding the modern state of Israel and Biblical prophecy if your life depended upon it. Many sincere Christians believe that the Biblical promises to Israel have all taken place in history past. Many sincere Christians believe that there are many promises to Israel that are yet future. And of these groups, many believe that the modern state of Israel is the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, while many others believe that the modern state of Israel has no relationship whatsoever to the future Davidic Kingdom. And the fact is, when it comes to America’s foreign policy, it doesn’t matter!

Constitutionally, the President of the United States owes his loyalty and allegiance to only one country: The United States of America. He has no right to interfere with the internal affairs of any country–including Israel. He has no authority to give trillions of dollars of hard-earned taxpayer dollars of foreign aid to any country–including Israel. When Americans go to the polls this November, they will elect the President of the United States, not the Prime Minister of Israel. As far as any American President is concerned, Israel, like every other nation, should be judged on the basis of its actions, good or bad (as should our own nation be judged). Any American President should do everything in his power to cultivate peaceful trade relations with foreign countries, and to protect America’s people and territory from those nations that would attempt to harm us–no matter who that nation is.

Ron Paul’s position on Israel is a constitutional one. He knows the US should stop meddling in her affairs and let her govern herself as she sees fit. Israel is a sovereign, independent nation fully capable of conducting her own affairs. What is amazing to me about so much of this Israel debate is the way many Christians ignore the fact that for every dollar the US gives to Israel, it gives at least four dollars to her Arab neighbors. Tell me again how this “blesses” Israel? How has America’s foreign policy of manipulation and coercion into the political and commercial affairs of nations throughout the world (including the Middle East) “blessed” Israel–or any other nation, for that matter? Can anyone remember when Iran was our friend? And who was it that cut the legs out from under that friend and elevated a government that would become hostile to both the United States and Israel? The US State Department, that’s who! Who orchestrated the rise to power of both Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein? The US State Department, CIA, etc., that’s who! Who has repeatedly demanded that Israel swap “land for peace”? Various US Presidents and Secretaries of State, that’s who! And what is currently stirring the pot of strife and hostility in the Middle East today? An interventionist US foreign policy, that’s what!

It is no accident that Ron Paul receives more support from American military personnel, active and retired, than all other GOP Presidential candidates combined. See this report:

http://tinyurl.com/7gk9c4o

No matter what one’s personal view of Biblical eschatology may be, the President of the United States is obligated to put the interests and safety of the people of the United States first! Period! How dare any President pander to ANY foreign country? How dare any President elevate ANY foreign nation to a position superior to the United States? And how dare any American citizen expect that our President would do either?

Observation Number Three: Ron Paul’s Detractors Must Not Comprehend The Existence Of The New World Order (NWO).

Ladies and gentlemen, ever since the Woodrow Wilson administration, the United States has been increasingly under the influence of internationalists who desire to commercially merge the nations of the world into one global community. The United Nations is a major contributor to this agenda, as are a number of international organizations. The New World Order is not a fantasy; it is a developing reality! And Presidential administrations from both major parties have willingly collaborated with this draconian agenda. In fact, under Presidents George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, G.W. Bush, and now Barack Obama, globalization efforts have mushroomed exponentially.

The Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderbergers, etc., are major players in the creation of a NWO, as is the military-industrial complex, the Federal Reserve, and international banks on both sides of the Atlantic. Another major component of the establishment of a New World Order is the burgeoning surveillance society and police state that both major parties in Washington, D.C., seem determined to implement.

Ron Paul is the ONLY Presidential candidate from either major party that truly understands the New World Order and is determined to resist it. He’s the only one! Mark it down, neither Romney, Santorum, nor Gingrich will lift a finger to resist the power elite inside the New World Order. They will do nothing to reverse the surveillance society taking shape in America. They will do nothing to resist the federal government’s obsessive control-freaks who are running many federal bureaucracies. Either none of them understands it, or if they do, they are absolutely unwilling to lift a finger to resist it.

I can only conclude that Ron Paul’s detractors haven’t a clue about the New World Order. They must not see it. They must not understand it. They must not be able to identify it. They must be totally ignorant about it, or else they would clearly appreciate Dr. Paul’s knowledge and acumen when he seeks to warn people about it and put himself on the firing line to oppose it. Even if one disagrees with Dr. Paul regarding particular societal issues, one must admire Ron Paul’s stand against the New World Order–especially since he is the only one opposing it! It is obvious to me that the only people who cannot appreciate Dr. Paul’s courageous commitment against the NWO are those who totally do not understand it.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that everyone must agree with me and support Ron Paul for President. I know that good people can come to different conclusions in any political race. What I am saying is that it seems obvious to me that the vast majority of Dr. Paul’s vocal detractors seem to demonstrate misperceptions–or even downright ignorance–in at least one or more of the above realities.

Support him or not, vote for him or not, any honest American who understands constitutional government, who understands what a constitutional foreign policy should look like, and who understands and is concerned that America is in the throes of a burgeoning New World Order MUST at least appreciate and admire Congressman Ron Paul. And as for me, I SUPPORT, AND WILL VOTE FOR, RON PAUL!

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=4609

*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
Copyright © Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

Left-Right Paradigm Is A Hoax

Posted on February 16, 2012 by Christian Faith In America

By Chuck Baldwin
February 16, 2012

[Subtitle: Both Liberals And Conservatives Are Selling Out America]

There may have been a time when the words “conservative” and “liberal” meant something, but that time is no more. Today, “conservatives” in government are doing as much to promote Big Government, as are “liberals.” In fact, if one were to honestly evaluate the twelve years of the George Herbert Walker Bush and G.W. Bush administrations, one could say that “conservatives” even eclipse “liberals” in promoting Big Government. Under the two Bushes, the federal government expanded (and even exploded) to levels that for-real liberal Democrats could only dream about.

Let’s get realistic. Just because a politico says he or she is “pro-life,” or “pro-family,” or “pro-marriage,” etc., does not mean that they are going to do anything to help save the country. Come on, folks; think! “Conservative” Republican administration appointments have dominated the US Supreme Court since the infamous Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions that effectively legalized abortion-on-demand. And we are no closer to overturning Roe and Doe after almost forty years of electing “pro-life conservatives” than we were the year after the Roe and Doe decisions were rendered. And for the first six years of the 21st Century, “conservative” Republicans dominated the entire federal government, and still the Roe and Doe decisions stand.

And when it comes to marriage and family, there is not a darn thing that Washington, D.C., can do to “save” it. Washington can no more “save” the family than it can “create” jobs! Washington is not God–the attitudes of most Washington politicians and national newscasters notwithstanding.

Herein lies the real problem: both “conservatives” and “liberals” expect Washington, D.C., to be the panacea for all the nation’s ills. Oh, the left and right come to Washington expecting different solutions, but they both come to Washington, D.C., for the solution. Both “conservatives” and “liberals” expect the federal government to “fix” America. But, in this regard, Ronald Reagan spoke with great profundity when he said, “Government [especially the federal government] is not the solution to our problem; government [especially the federal government] IS the problem!”

Hear President Reagan’s quote at:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=145

Both “conservatives” and “liberals” look to the federal government to establish and enforce their parochial agendas. “Liberals” look to Washington for the establishment of “social justice,” while “conservatives” look to Washington for the establishment of “military justice.” The net result is the federal government keeps getting bigger and bigger regardless of who controls the White House, Congress, or Supreme Court.

“Conservatives,” whether Christian or not, are just as culpable in the expansion of Big Government as are “liberals.” In fact, when it comes to the expansion of military adventurism, “conservatives” are the most culpable. And when it comes to the ever-burgeoning police state that is currently taking shape in the United States, “liberals” and “conservatives” are equally to blame. Let’s face it: both “conservatives” and “liberals” are in the midst of an intense and illicit love affair with Washington, D.C.

The way many “conservatives” have embraced the candidacy of Rick Santorum is a prime example of how skewed their understanding of historic, constitutional principles really is. Santorum goes around talking about “pro-life” and “pro-family” issues, while his voting record in the US Senate demonstrates that he is just another conservative-talking, big-spending politician. He has voted for so many Big-Government bills and endorsed so many Big-Government toadies that it is incredible that anyone could refrain from laughing out loud when he calls himself a “conservative.”

To check the factual record of Senator Rick Santorum, go here:
http://tinyurl.com/75yw3jp

By the same token, it is absolutely incredible that “conservatives,” especially Christian “conservatives,” could so quickly and firmly reject the candidacy of the man who most likely is going to go down in history as the greatest congressman to ever sit in the US House of Representatives, Congressman Ron Paul of Texas. Patrick Henry was probably the greatest governor that the United States has ever seen; and Daniel Webster was probably the greatest senator that the country has ever seen; and I am personally convinced that history will regard Congressman Ron Paul as our greatest US House member. For his entire political career, Congressman Paul has stood like a rock for the fundamental principles of liberty and constitutionalism, and, yet, many “conservatives” reject his Presidential candidacy. They would rather support Big-Government toadies like Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, or Mitt Romney. Egad!

Have people not wondered why the direction of the country has not changed one iota regardless if “conservatives” or “liberals” are running things? One would think that at some point people would wake up to the fact that until we start electing civil magistrates who take their oaths to the Constitution seriously, and who truly understand the nature of our federalist form of government, and who are truly committed to the preservation of the Bill of Rights, and who truly understand and appreciate the jurisdiction and authority of the states, nothing is going to change in this country. Nothing! And in 2012, there is only one man in the Presidential field who has an intellectual grasp and moral commitment to all of the above: Ron Paul. I will say it yet again: it will not matter to a tinker’s dam if anyone other than Ron Paul is elected President in 2012.

Furthermore, if Americans do not wake up to the importance of electing State governors, attorney generals, senators, legislators, and county sheriffs who understand that their primary responsibility as a State office holder is to safeguard the rights and liberties of the citizens of their respective states FROM THE USURPATION AND OVERREACH OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, our liberties are lost–no matter how many “conservatives” we elect!

Ladies and gentlemen, face it: the left-right paradigm is a hoax! It creates false conflicts and masks true problems. It caters to the increase of socialism on the one hand and fascism and corporatism on the other hand. It saps our strengths and augments our weaknesses. It blinds our eyes to the warning clouds above us and deafens our ears to the sounds of the sirens around us. It turns friends into adversaries and adversaries into friends. It dulls our senses and sharpens our illusions. It removes true courage and gives false hope. It sullies our character and shines our betrayal, and it puts shackles around our feet and greases the skids of oppression.

Instead of worrying about whether one professes to be a “conservative” or a “liberal,” we should be concerned about whether the people we vote for understand the fundamental principles of liberty and constitutional government and have the moral character to defend such principles at all costs. Furthermore, we should be concerned that both “conservatives” and “liberals” look to government for the solutions to our problems instead of looking to the Natural Law principles of our Creator. Yes, Martha, the Golden Rule really does matter–even in Washington, D.C.

This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=4581

*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
Copyright © Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

Christian Faith in America

"Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD" Psalm 33:12 (NIV)

Category Archives: Chuck Baldwin

The Man Who Fired The Shot Heard ’Round The World

The Man Who Should Be President

Hutaree Militiamen Cleared In Court

What Many Churches And The SPLC Have In Common

Chuck’s Annual Reading List

The Brotherhood Of The Free

Status Quo Has To Go

Remembering The Alamo

What Ron Paul’s Detractors Reveal

Left-Right Paradigm Is A Hoax