Posts tagged "David Barton"

h/t: Miranda Blue at RWW 

David Barton recently spoke at Victory Family Church‎ in Decatur, Texas where he delivered his standard presentation about how every single aspect of American life and society ought to be governed according to the Bible, and that includes putting an end to things like “gender bender" days at elementary schools because "the Bible says you absolutely cannot do that."

"The Bible explicitly condemns cross-dressing," Barton said. “That’s not just a cute little thing that happened at school, that’s a biblically-addressed issue.”

 

h/t: Kyle Mantyla at RWW

Last year, David Barton advocated fighting back against the advances that gay rights activists are making by graphically highlighting how “reprehensible and disgusting” homosexuality really is. This was a theme he returned to on today’s “WallBuilders Live” broadcast as his son, Tim, was discussing the recent controversy over anti-gay comments made by Phil Robertson of “Duck Dynasty.”

Barton praised Robertson for being “quite graphic” in his statement because, in doing so, he made homosexuality seem “very repugnant, which is what it should be,” and Tim Barton and co-host Rick Green readily agreed.

h/t: Kyle Mantyla at RWW

From the 02.17.2014 edition of WallBuilders’ WallBuilders LIVE!:

See Also: Justin’s Political Corner: Senator Cruz: “Marriage Equality Is ‘Heartbreaking’ And A Threat To ‘Constitutional Liberties’”

h/t: Kyle Mantyla at RWW

An obscure concept called the Convention of the States (COS) is gaining momentum in the Bible belt—and it’s backed by the Religious Right. It’s the brainchild of Michael Farris, founder and president of the Homeschool Legal Defense Association. Far from being a noble attempt to safeguard our freedom, it’s an attempt by Farris and his cronies to rewrite the U.S. Constitution to make it more to their liking.

A little background: There are two ways to amend the Constitution. One is for two-thirds majorities in the House of Representatives and Senate to approve an amendment, which then goes to the states. If three-fours of the states say yes, the amendment is added to the Constitution.

The other mechanism has never been tried. If two-thirds of the states apply for a constitutional convention, one must be convened. Most experts on the Constitution believe that once a “con-con” has been called, it can’t be limited to just one subject. Everything would be up for discussion.

Over the years, right-wing groups have proposed con-cons to add anti-abortion, school prayer and other amendments to the Constitution.

So why does Farris want to amend the Constitution? The COS’ official website lists several suggestions, and superficially, all of them seem to be in more in line with libertarianism than the theocratic policies of the Religious Right. Among the recommended amendments: a balanced budget amendment, redefinition of the Welfare Clause and a prohibition on using international treaties and laws to govern the United States.

The site doesn’t mention religion, and yet David Barton, the noted pseudo-historian, and Rick Green, his radio co-host, publicly issued their support for a COS last week.

In an open letter to “fellow patriots” published by Glenn Beck’s website, Barton and Green wrote, “It is exciting to see such a renewed interest in basic constitutional principles. Liberty lovers across America are studying their past in order to find ways to stop our federal government’s explosive growth and sprint towards socialism.”

The letter added, “For states to refuse to use this tool would be like going into a street fight, but refusing to use one of your biggest and most effective weapons. And it is illogical to consider the use of any constitutional provision as a threat to the Constitution. It makes as much sense as violating the free-market system to save it, or breaking health care to fix it.”

It’s important to recall that Barton and Green are no fans of separation of church and state; their opposition to the concept is exactly why they spend so much time and resources constructing a dogmatic mythology that supports the notion that America is a “Christian nation.” The wall of separation is a barrier in the crusade to “Christianize” America. If a COS is convened, their legislative allies could propose—and pass—an amendment that would substantially weaken the First Amendment’s religious liberty protections, or repeal them entirely.

And for this endeavor, they have a strong ally in Farris. Farris is a champion of the Christian home-school movement, and founded Patrick Henry College, a fundamentalist Christian school that serves primarily home-schooled students. He has close ties to the Religious Right.

Farris has backed a parental rights amendment to the Constitution for years.  Ostensibly, it’s intended to “protect” the right of Christian parents to home-school (a right already upheld by the courts). But it also goes further than home-schooling, and would grant parents an absolute right to school “choice” – that is to say, sectarian education at taxpayer expense.

No mention of the parental rights amendment appears on COS’s website. But given Farris’ years of advocacy for the measure, it’s likely that passing it is among his primary motivations for launching the COS effort.

I doubt that Farris & co. are burning to call a con-con so they can add a balanced-budget amendment. That’s populist rhetoric designed to disguise the true motivations for the campaign.

Instead, it’s far more likely that the COS campaign is actually about undermining church-state separation, stopping same-sex marriage, ending legal abortion and furthering other far-right obsessions. They’d love to replace the handiwork of James Madison with something cooked up by a band of Religious Right attorneys.

Farris and his backers have a long way to go. The Georgia senate recently passed the application, and nine other states are currently deliberating the measure. Still, the matter bears watching. They might talk about “reform” but remember this: The “reform” offered by Farris, Barton and Green would ultimately restrict, not protect, our liberties.

h/t: Sarah Jones at Americans United For Separation of Church and State

Tea Partiers, Tenthers, and the corporate sponsors who support them have come up with a variety of ways to circumvent the federal government and bypass the federal regulatory system, including efforts to hold an Article V Convention, commonly called a “Con Con,” to amend the Constitution and the Sen. Ted Cruz (R, TX)-developed plan for use of “interstate compacts” to block federal law.

In a report for the Center for American Progress, Ian Millhiser described these state’s rights efforts as a project for “seceding from the union one law at a time.”  These initiatives could result in a Balkanized confederation of states that would be no match against the power of international corporations and would allow for eliminating the regulatory system and the social safety net.

The most recent issue of The Public Eye magazine includes two extensive articles on the efforts of conservatives to shift power to the states, including Frederick Clarkson’s article on the State Policy Network’s growing influence, and my article on the growing nullification movement (co-authored by Frank Cocozzelli).

Nullification is based on a legal theory that states can block enforcement of federal laws individual states deem unconstitutional. But another route to “nullification” was popularized by Senator Cruz before he even became a senator, and promoted through Tea Party organizations and the highly-controversial American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).


The Constitution, in Article I, Section 10, allows for states to form interstate compacts with the consent of Congress.  This is most commonly done to oversee shared resources, such as waterways.  One of the earliest formed and better known of these compacts is the New York – New Jersey Port Authority. But Cruz
 is claiming that interstate compacts can be expanded as a way to circumvent presidential veto power.Cruz’s idea is to use “interstate compacts” to shield states from federal laws. He developed the concept in 2010 as an alternative option for “nullifying Obamacare.” Just prior to his election as senator, Cruz worked as senior fellow with the Center for Tenth Amendment Studies at the Texas Public Policy Center, the state’s “free market” think tank and a State Policy Network member. While the concept of interstate compacts is not new, Cruz’s idea to use them as a strategy for shielding states from federal laws is uniquely original, which he freely admitted to Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard  in January 2011.

[…]

The concept was also promoted through the State Policy Network’s “Federalism in Action” program, and Cruz himself presented the idea at the 2010 American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) conference, where it promptly became the foundation for ALEC’s “Health Care Compact ACT” model legislation for state legislators.

To date, this Healthcare Compact Act has been passed in eight states: Texas, Oklahoma, Utah, Missouri, Indiana, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina. The healthcare compact is promoted and tracked through an organization called the Healthcare Compact Alliance, a project of Competitive Governance Action, a 501(c)(4) co-founded by Texas businessman Leo Linbeck III and Eric O’Keefe and sharing the address of the Linbeck Group, LLC, in Houston.

The vision of shielding entire areas of state regulation from the federal government has been further enshrined by ALEC in the form of a model bill developed by their International Task Force, and approved by the ALEC board of directors.  Under the title “State Legislature United Compact,” the model bill provides validation for those who half-jokingly warn about the “United States of ALEC,” apparently giving ALEC a role in forming and running the commission that would organize the interstate compact, and ensuring that like-minded conservatives would control the topics and outcomes of a convention.

ALEC’s December 2013 States and Nation Summit in D.C. was sponsored, in part, by another Linbeck and O’Keefe nonprofit, called the Citizens for Self Governance.  Its legal name is the John Hancock Committee of the States and it’s the parent organization of the Convention of the States (one of several organizations promoting an Article V convention to amend the Constitution).  The organization was incubated prior to gaining its own nonprofit status by American Majority, an organization founded by Drew and Ned Ryun to “infuse new Tea Party blood into the political system.”

Until now, the only method used to amend the Constitution has been through a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the states. However, there is another process in Article V that allows for a convention to be called by two thirds of state legislatures.  Mark Meckler, cofounder of the Tea Party Patriots, is now president of the Citizens for Self Governance and is overseeing the group’s Article V convention efforts.

Meckler promoted the Convention of the States project in a session at ALEC’s December summit. On the Saturday following the summit, roughly 100 state legislators from 32 states met at Mt. Vernon to advance convention plans.  Ferris’ reflections on the event acknowledged that there are divisions in conservative ranks between those who want the “con-con,” and those who fear a “runaway con-con” infiltrated and overrun by liberals. Historical revisionist David Barton has just recently endorsed a Constitutional Convention, while both Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum and the John Birch Society (JBS) fall into the second category.

As noted in The Public Eye article Nullification, Neo-Confederates, and the Revenge of the Right, the JBS has become a major force behind state nullification efforts across the country.

Despite misgivings about a “runaway con-con,” there are several right-wing groups around the country working to organize a convention, but with some disagreements about how it would work.  PRA senior fellow Frederick Clarkson, Salon’s Paul Rosenberg, and I have all listened in on conference calls by one such organization that has differences of opinion with the Convention of the States on how to proceed (you can read Rosenberg’s story about it in Salon). The leader of that organization has a plan for the first amendment to be a “Sovereignty and State’s Rights Amendment,” allowing any federal law to be “countermanded” by the agreement of 30 states.

This state’s rights movement is gaining traction across the country, including among some on the political Left, but the money and organizing behind the effort is solidly conservative­—or perhaps better described as paleo-libertarian, or a combination of radical anti-government philosophies wedded to social conservatism.

h/t: Rachel Tabachnick at Political Research Associates

During his time in office, Ken Cuccinelli worked to pass a personhood law which would have criminalized not only abortion but also several forms of contraception and fertility treatments. On top of that, he declared that God will punish America over abortion rights, which he compared to slavery, and routinely pressed to close clinics that provide abortions as well as to defund Planned Parenthood.

But to hear David Barton tell it, the only reason that Cuccinelli lost his bid to become governor of Virginia last year was because he was not anti-abortion enough!

Filling in for Glenn Beck over the holiday break, Barton brought on anti-abortion activist Michael New to discuss the state of the movement. New asserted that the “pro-life” position routinely beats the “pro-choice” position in public polling, which prompted Barton to declare that an analysis of Cuccinelli’s lost found that “if he had been stronger on pro-life issues, he probably would have won the election in Virginia.”

"That’s fairly amazing," Barton added, “to say, for Virginia which - northern Virginia is so blue - that if he had been more pro-life he would have won, which means we must be picking up public opinion across the board on this kind of issue.”

 

From the 12.26.2013 edition of TheBlazeTV’s The Glenn Beck Program:

h/t: RWW

One thing that you realize after studying David Barton for any bit of time is that one key to his success is the fact that his audiences blindly accept everything he says without question, never bothering to actually verify anything he says. 

And Barton is fully aware of this, which is why he has no qualms about lying to them time and again about things that a simple five minute Google search would prove to be false.

For example, Barton recently sat down for a series of programs on “The Gospel Truth” with Andrew Wommack where he falsely declared that President Obama does not mention “God” in his Thanksgiving proclamations.

Barton: One of the unfortunate things, this is in the past several years, the Thanksgiving message out of the White House no longer even mentions God. When we give thanks, God’s not part of that.

Wommack: Part of that’s because of who is in the White House.

Barton: That’s a real problem. You check Thanksgiving proclamations of this president with the previous ones and it’s not the same.

As usual, some basic research proves this claim to be utterly false (emphasis added).

h/t: Kyle Mantyla at RWW

Yesterday, we noted that a top Southern Baptist Convention official blasted David Barton and Kenneth Copeland for their “profoundly ignorant” comments on soldiers with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Barton and Copeland advised soldiers not to look for psychosocial help, and instead can simply “get rid of” PTSD by reading the Bible because they are God’s warriors. Joe Carter, the communications director for the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, elaborated in a blog post for The Gospel Coalition.

He calls the two right-wing speakers “fools” who are “among the last people who could be relied on to intelligently interpret a text,” adding: “Their mishandling of Scripture is inexcusable, but what makes it unconscionable is they use God’s Word to shame and berate veterans with PTSD.”

“Barton is still, inexplicably, trusted by many conservative evangelicals, he has himself built his reputation on twisting and misrepresenting historical documents for ideological and propagandist purposes,” Carter writes. “For Copeland and Barton to resurrect this ‘blame the victim’ trope and coat it with the veneer of Biblical warrant is Satanic.”

 

h/t:Brian Tashman at RWW

David Barton’s dishonest and discredited pseudo-history hasn’t stopped him from becoming a star within the Republican Party. Despite the glaring flaws and political bias found in his work, not to mention the fact that actual conservative Christian scholars are among his most vocal critics, GOP candidates for office consistently seek Barton’s advice, counsel and endorsements.

Now, Barton’s WallBuilders deputy and radio show co-host Rick Green has launched a Facebook page to draft Barton run for U.S. Senate against the Republican incumbent John Cornyn.

On October 30, Green wrote that “if the draft page gets 5k likes in just a few days, then we’ll know people want him to run.” As of today, the page currently has fewer than half that number of “likes,” but Barton’s possible run has garnered publicity and made Glenn Beck giddy. Barton recently told Beck that “if the Lord tells me to do it, I’ll do it.”

In anticipation of Barton’s possible run for office, we decided to look through our voluminous Barton archive and pull out the highlights of his radical record.

1. God Is Rightfully Blocking A Cure For HIV/AIDS

Barton is delighted by the fact that God is preventing researchers from finding a cure or vaccine for HIV/AIDS. According to Barton, HIV/AIDS is a punishment for sin and therefore God will block a potential cure: “God says, ‘Hey you’re going to bear in your body the consequences of this homosexual behavior.’” He argues that HIV/AIDS is a divine “penalty” for gay people’s “shameful sexual acts.” On a similar note, Barton has called homosexuality “absolutely reprehensible and disgusting” and said that marriage equality means we “are going down as a nation.”

2. “We Had To Destroy Indian Tribes”

Barton justified the slaughter of Native Americans as a defensive war against tribes who “declared war on all the white guys.” “We had to go in and we had to destroy Indian tribes all over until they said ‘Oh, got the point,’” Barton said, claiming that the tactics were only necessary because Native Americans were resisting missionaries who were trying to “civilize” them.

3. Demons Control Parts Of The Capitol

If Barton runs for US Senate and is elected, he will have to be careful to avoid the demon-controlled parts of Capitol Hill. Barton told televangelist Kenneth Copeland that demonic principalities have control over different government bodies and that is why politicians “think really goofy.”

4. The Bible Opposes Net Neutrality

Did you know that the Founding Fathers, Pilgrims, Puritans and the Bible all opposed Net Neutrality? According to Barton they did. He also argues that Net Neutrality is a “wicked” policy.

5. Founding Fathers Refuted The Theory of Evolution

While the nation’s founders lived long before Charles Darwin published his seminal works, Barton contends that the founders “already had the entire debate on creation and evolution” and sided with Creationism.

6. Evolution Should Be Banned In School Due To Separation Of Church And State

Barton maintains that evolution, secular humanism and atheism are all religions that should be banned in public school because of the separation of church and state. “Darwinism and evolution is a religion. Why don’t we say, ‘Hey, we can’t teach Darwinism in school. That affects the way people behave. I demand separation of church and state. Get Darwinism out of the classroom.’”

7. Government Should Regulate Gay Sex

After comparing homosexuality to cigarette smoking and eating unhealthy foods, Barton proposed: “Why don’t we regulate homosexuality?” He warned that nations that “rejected sexual regulation like with homosexuality” collapse “past the third generation from the time that they embraced it.”

“Nearly one-half of practicing homosexuals admit to five hundred or more sex partners and nearly one-third admit to a thousand or more sex partners in a lifetime,” he added. Barton also claims that a nation will have a spiritual revival once it stops tolerating homosexuality and has “chased the sodomites” out.

8. Schools Turn Kids Gay

Barton “guaranteed ” listeners that if they have children going to public schools “they are getting homosexual indoctrination.” He even said that public schools will “ force them to be homosexual.” Barton’s gay rights conspiracy theories don’t end there: Before the passage of the 2009 Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act, Barton said the law was “designed to single out preachers in the pulpit” and would put pastors in prison if they condemn homosexuality. Of course, that never happened.

9. Country Needs More Hate

Barton considered writing a book entitled, “When tolerance is a sin and hate is a virtue,” telling listeners of his radio show that nowadays “tolerance is a bad thing and hate is a good thing.” “We’re tolerating a lot stuff that destroys our families, that destroys our own character and we can’t tolerate that stuff. We have to get back to the point where hate is a virtue, at least certain kinds of hate.”

10. Bible Opposes Minimum Wage

Many of Barton’s lectures rail against progressive economic policy as unbiblical, arguing that the Bible condemns the capital gains tax, estate tax, progressive income tax and the minimum wage. “Jesus did not like the minimum wage,” Barton contends.

11. Constitution Quotes The Bible ‘Verbatim’

Even though Barton can’t find a single actually verbatim quote from the Bible in the Constitution, he consistently claims that the Constitution quotes the Bible “verbatim.” It is no wonder that he also asserts that God established America’s system of elections. It is no surprise then that Barton advocates the theocratic Seven Mountains Dominionism.

12. Life Begins Before Conception

Barton has said that life doesn’t begin at conception, but actually “life begins before conception.” Not surprisingly, Barton believes that abortion rights will lead to socialism and that abortion is banned under the Seventh Amendment. The Seventh Amendment reads: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re–examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”

13. No Limits On Second Amendment

According to Barton, under the Second Amendment there is no limit to what type of weapons people could possess, including tanks, bazookas and fighter jets.

14. Abortion Rights Leads To Divine Punishment

Barton recently claimed that inclement weather linked to climate change isn’t a result of climate change at all, but is actually God’s judgment on America for abortion rights.

15. Prayer Stopped BP Oil Spill, Drought

During a Religious Right conference call, Barton maintained that state declarations of prayer ended a drought in Georgia and also prevented damage on the Gulf Coast from the BP oil spill.

h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW

attractivedecoy:

Thanks for clearing that up, Dave.

Once “you open the door to killing,” Barton added, “it’s got a lot of different manifestations” because the nation immediately falls under the judgment of God as He removes his protection and "whap, here comes storms like we’ve never seen before and here comes floods and here comes climate stuff that we can’t explain; all of the hot times and all the cold times and not enough rain and too much rain and we’re flooding over here and we’ve got droughts over here … And today we’re saying ‘oh no, it’s global warming." No, we opened a door that lost God’s protection over our environment and that’s our choice." 

 

As a general rule, the candidate who receives the most votes in an election is declared the winner.  But that would all change if the Family Research Council’s Ken Blackwell gets his way and states start adopting a vote-rigging scheme that he is recommending whereby, in a presidential election, electoral votes would switch from winner-take-all allocations to a system where they were awarded according to congressional districts.

As a result of such a switch, candidates who lose the overall popular vote in a state could still end up receiving a majority of that state’s electoral votes simply by virtue of winning the popular vote in more individual districts.

As Blackwell admitted several months ago, if this sort of system had been in place during the last election, Mitt Romney would have won the presidency despite the fact that he lost the overall popular vote by nearly 5 million votes.

David Barton has eagerly been supporting the scheme by laughably claiming that it would “give the people a greater voice” and last night he got Glenn Beck to endorse it as well on his television program.

From the 09.19.2013 edition of TheBlazeTV’s The Glenn Beck Program:

h/t: Kyle Mantyla at RWW

Dishonest as always, David Barton claimed yesterday that the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act will allow the Obama administration to force military chaplains to perform same-sex nuptials and withhold aid from Central American nations until they legalize gay marriage. 

h/t: RWW

Yesterday’s TruNews radio broadcast with Rick Wiles was entirely dedicated to an interview with right-wing anti-Islam activist Walid Shoebat and his son Theodore during which the three of them attacked … Glenn Beck!

That’s right, according to the Shoebats, Beck is a practitioner of “Chrislam,” meaning that he is luring his audience away from true Christianity and into a dangerous Islamo-Mormon deistic universalism with the help of Religious Right leaders such as James Robison, Franklin Graham, and David Barton.

As Theodore explained, Joseph Smith, the founder of the Church of Latter-Day Saints, considered himself to be a second Muhammad, which is why, Walid said, LDS members will not proselytize to Muslims since “basically they have the same faith.”

From the 06.18.2013 edition of TruNews:

h/t: Kyle Mantyla at Right Wing Watch

After watching the Republican presidential candidates lose the last two elections, right-wing activist Ken Blackwell cooked up a scheme whereby states would move away from winner-take-all allocations of electors to a system in which Electoral College votes would be assigned according to congressional districts.

The result would be that a Republican presidential candidate who does not win the overall popular vote in the state could still end up receiving a majority of that state’s electoral votes simply by virtue of winning the popular vote in more individual districts.

Today, Blackwell appeared on “WallBuilders Live" to promote this scheme, where it was met with enthusiastic support from Rick Green and David Barton. As Blackwell explained, if every state had implemented this plan for the 2012 election, Mitt Romney would have won despite the fact that he lost the overall popular vote by nearly 5 million votes.

Blackwell: There’s an old farmer’s tale that if you throw a brick at a pack of pigs, the one that squeals is the one you hit.  Well, when we put this out there, the Left started squealing, the New York Times started squealing, so we must be on to something.

Green: You must be on to something. No doubt about that.  I haven’t had a chance to look, I don’t if anyone has done a map, I’d be real curious to know if every state did this, how would the last few elections [have gone]? Have you had a chance to look?

Blackwell: I already know. If every state did it, Romney would have won the election.  And so that’s another reason that the Left just instinctively dislikes it.

Barton: This actually is a way to give the people a greater voice rather than just having the majority slap it to the minority every time you turn around. And I really like what he’s proposed here with reverting back out of the winner-take-all philosophy of the states, going back to congressional district take all, which is a good way to do it.

From the 05.02.2013 edition of Wallbuilders Live:

h/t: Kyle Mantyla at Right Wing Watch