Religious Freedom 3: Time for Push Back, Defending Religious Freedom vs. Secularism Attacks

Religious Freedom 3:

Time for Push Back, Defending Religious Freedom vs. Secularism Attacks

For anyone who has a religious faith, by far the most important part of exercising that faith is the teaching of that religion to our children. The passing on of the faith. There is no greater gift we can give our children and no greater expression of love. ~William Barr, US Attorney General

William Barr Speech Notre Dame Part 3

Recent History

This refusal to accommodate the free exercise of religion is relatively recent. Just 25 years ago, there was broad consensus in our society that our laws should accommodate religious belief.

war on christianityIn 1993, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act – RFRA. The purpose of the statute was to promote maximum accommodation to religion when the government adopted broad policies that could impinge on religious practice. 

At the time, RFRA was not controversial. It was introduced by Chuck Schumer with 170 cosponsors in the House, and was introduced by Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch with 59 additional cosponsors in the Senate. It passed by voice vote in the House and by a vote of 97-3 in the Senate.

Recently, as the process of secularization has accelerated, RFRA has come under assault, and the idea of religious accommodation has fallen out of favor.

Because this Administration firmly supports accommodation of religion, the battleground has shifted to the states. Some state governments are now attempting to compel religious individuals and entities to subscribe to practices, or to espouse viewpoints, that are incompatible with their religion.

Ground zero for these attacks on religion are the schools. To me, this is the most serious challenge to religious liberty.

For anyone who has a religious faith, by far the most important part of exercising that faith is the teaching of that religion to our children. The passing on of the faith. There is no greater gift we can give our children and no greater expression of love.

For the government to interfere in that process is a monstrous invasion of religious liberty.

Secularists Attacking on 3 Fronts

Yet here is where the battle is being joined, and I see the secularists are attacking on three fronts.

1) Public School Curriculum

indoctrination in schoolsThe first front relates to the content of public school curriculum. Many states are adopting curriculum that is incompatible with traditional religious principles according to which parents are attempting to raise their children. They often do so without any opt out for religious families.

Thus, for example, New Jersey recently passed a law requiring public schools to adopt an LGBT curriculum that many feel is inconsistent with traditional Christian teaching. Similar laws have been passed in California and Illinois. And the Orange County Board of Education in California issued an opinion that “parents who disagree with the instructional materials related to gender, gender identity, gender expression and sexual orientation may not excuse their children from this instruction.”

Indeed, in some cases, the schools may not even warn parents about lessons they plan to teach on controversial subjects relating to sexual behavior and relationships.

This puts parents who dissent from the secular orthodoxy to a difficult choice: Try to scrape together the money for private school or home schooling, or allow their children to be inculcated with messages that they fundamentally reject.

2) State Policies that starve Religious Schools

tyranny of stateA second axis of attack in the realm of education are state policies designed to starve religious schools of generally-available funds and encouraging students to choose secular options.  Montana, for example, created a program that provided tax credits to those who donated to a scholarship program that underprivileged students could use to attend private school.  The point of the program was to provide greater parental and student choice in education and to provide better educations to needy youth.

But Montana expressly excluded religiously-affiliated private schools from the program.  And when that exclusion was challenged in court by parents who wanted to use the scholarships to attend a nondenominational Christian school, the Montana Supreme Court required the state to eliminate the program rather than allow parents to use scholarships for religious schools.

It justified this action by pointing to a provision in Montana’s State Constitution commonly referred to as a “Blaine Amendment.”  Blaine Amendments were passed at a time of rampant anti-Catholic animus in this country, and typically disqualify religious institutions from receiving any direct or indirect payments from a state’s funds.

The case is now in the Supreme Court, and we filed a brief explaining why Montana’s Blaine Amendment violates the First Amendment.

3) Use of State Laws to force religious schools to bow to Secularism

tyranny-social justiceA third kind of assault on religious freedom in education have been recent efforts to use state laws to force religious schools to adhere to secular orthodoxy. For example, right here in Indiana, a teacher sued the Catholic Archbishop of Indianapolis for directing the Catholic schools within his diocese that they could not employ teachers in same-sex marriages because the example of those same-sex marriages would undermine the schools’ teaching on the Catholic view of marriage and complementarities between the sexes.

This lawsuit clearly infringes the First Amendment rights of the Archdiocese by interfering both with its expressive association and with its church autonomy. The Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in the state court making these points, and we hope that the state court will soon dismiss the case.

Taken together, these cases paint a disturbing picture. We see the State requiring local public schools to insert themselves into contentious social debates, without regard for the religious views of their students or parents. In effect, these states are requiring local communities to make their public schools inhospitable to families with traditional religious values; those families are implicitly told that they should conform or leave.

At the same time, pressure is placed on religious schools to abandon their religious convictions. Simply because of their religious character, they are starved of funds – students who would otherwise choose to attend them are told they may only receive scholarships if they turn their sights elsewhere.

Simultaneously, they are threatened in tort and, eventually, will undoubtedly be threatened with denial of accreditation if they adhere to their religious character.  If these measures are successful, those with religious convictions will become still more marginalized.

I do not mean to suggest that there is no hope for moral renewal in our country.

But we cannot sit back and just hope the pendulum is going to swing back toward sanity.

push backAs Catholics, we are committed to the Judeo-Christian values that have made this country great.

And we know that the first thing we have to do to promote renewal is to ensure that we are putting our principles into practice in our own personal private lives.

We understand that only by transforming ourselves can we transform the world beyond ourselves.

This is tough work. It is hard to resist the constant seductions of our contemporary society. This is where we need grace, prayer, and the help of our church.

Beyond this, we must place greater emphasis on the moral education of our children.

Education is not vocational training. It is leading our children to the recognition that there is truth and helping them develop the faculties to discern and love the truth and the discipline to live by it.

We cannot have a moral renaissance unless we succeed in passing to the next generation our faith and values in full vigor.

The times are hostile to this. Public agencies, including public schools, are becoming secularized and increasingly are actively promoting moral relativism.

If ever there was a need for a resurgence of Catholic education – and more generally religiously-affiliated schools – it is today.

I think we should do all we can to promote and support authentic Catholic education at all levels.

Finally, as lawyers, we should be particularly active in the struggle that is being waged against religion on the legal plane.

We must be vigilant to resist efforts by the forces of secularization to drive religious viewpoints from the public square and to impinge upon the free exercise of our faith.

I can assure you that, as long as I am Attorney General, the Department of Justice will be at the forefront of this effort, ready to fight for the most cherished of our liberties: the freedom to live according to our faith.

Thank you for the opportunity to talk with you today. And God bless you and Notre Dame.

 

Religious Freedom 2: Progressive Politics, Destruction of Culture are Consequences of Rejecting God

Religious Freedom 2:

Progressive Politics, Destruction of Culture are Consequences of Rejecting God

William Barr Speech at Notre Dame Part 2

Barr Slams Secularism

[T]he force, fervor, and comprehensiveness of the assault on religion we are experiencing today. This is not decay; it is organized destruction. Secularists, and their allies among the “progressives,” have marshaled all the force of mass communications, popular culture, the entertainment industry, and academia in an unremitting assault on religion and traditional values. ~William Barr

political correctness, feelingsWhat we call “values” today are really nothing more than mere sentimentality, still drawing on the vapor trails of Christianity.

Now, there have been times and places where the traditional moral order has been shaken.

In the past, societies – like the human body – seem to have a self-healing mechanism – a self-correcting mechanism that gets things back on course if things go too far.

The consequences of moral chaos become too pressing. The opinion of decent people rebels. They coalesce and rally against obvious excess. Periods of moral entrenchment follow periods of excess.

This is the idea of the pendulum. We have all thought that after a while the “pendulum will swing back.”

But today we face something different that may mean that we cannot count on the pendulum swinging back.

3 Obstacles to Moral Renewal

 

1) Organized Destruction by Progressive Politics

secular humanism

Secular Humanism

First is the force, fervor, and comprehensiveness of the assault on religion we are experiencing today. This is not decay; it is organized destruction. Secularists, and their allies among the “progressives,” have marshaled all the force of mass communications, popular culture, the entertainment industry, and academia in an unremitting assault on religion and traditional values.

These instruments are used not only to affirmatively promote secular orthodoxy, but also drown out and silence opposing voices, and to attack viciously and hold up to ridicule any dissenters.

Secularism like a Religion

One of the ironies, as some have observed, is that the secular project has itself become a religion, pursued with religious fervor. It is taking on all the trappings of a religion, including inquisitions and excommunication.

Those who defy the creed risk a figurative burning at the stake – social, educational, and professional ostracism and exclusion waged through lawsuits and savage social media campaigns.

The pervasiveness and power of our high-tech popular culture fuels apostasy in another way. It provides an unprecedented degree of distraction.

Ignoring Big Questions of Life

global secular humanismPart of the human condition is that there are big questions that should stare us in the face. Are we created or are we purely material accidents? Does our life have any meaning or purpose? But, as Blaise Pascal observed, instead of grappling with these questions, humans can be easily distracted from thinking about the “final things.”

Indeed, we now live in the age of distraction where we can envelop ourselves in a world of digital stimulation and universal connectivity. And we have almost limitless ways of indulging all our physical appetites.

There is another modern phenomenon that suppresses society’s self-corrective mechanisms – that makes it harder for society to restore itself.

2) No Consequences, No Responsibility

responsibilityIn the past, when societies are threatened by moral chaos, the overall social costs of licentiousness and irresponsible personal conduct becomes so high that society ultimately recoils and reevaluates the path that it is on.

But today – in the face of all the increasing pathologies – instead of addressing the underlying cause, we have the State in the role of alleviator of bad consequences. We call on the State to mitigate the social costs of personal misconduct and irresponsibility.

  • So the reaction to growing illegitimacy is not sexual responsibility, but abortion.
  • The reaction to drug addiction is safe injection sites.
  • The solution to the breakdown of the family is for the State to set itself up as the ersatz husband for single mothers and the ersatz father to their children.

The call comes for more and more social programs to deal with the wreckage. While we think we are solving problems, we are underwriting them.

We start with an untrammeled freedom and we end up as dependents of a coercive state on which we depend.

Interestingly, this idea of the State as the alleviator of bad consequences has given rise to a new moral system that goes hand-in-hand with the secularization of society.  It can be called the system of “macro-morality.”  It is in some ways an inversion of Christian morality.

Christianity teaches a micro-morality. We transform the world by focusing on our own personal morality and transformation. 

The new secular religion teaches macro-morality. One’s morality is not gauged by their private conduct, but rather on their commitment to political causes and collective action to address social problems.

This system allows us to not worry so much about the strictures on our private lives, while we find salvation on the picket-line. We can signal our finely-tuned moral sensibilities by demonstrating for this cause or that.

Example of the Government Replacing Charities

James Madison on charitySomething happened recently that crystallized the difference between these moral systems. I was attending Mass at a parish I did not usually go to in Washington, D.C.  At the end of Mass, the Chairman of the Social Justice Committee got up to give his report to the parish. He pointed to the growing homeless problem in D.C. and explained that more mobile soup kitchens were needed to feed them.

This being a Catholic church, I expected him to call for volunteers to go out and provide this need. Instead, he recounted all the visits that the Committee had made to the D.C. government to lobby for higher taxes and more spending to fund mobile soup kitchen.

3) Law used as a Battering Ram

battering ramA third phenomenon which makes it difficult for the pendulum to swing back is the way law is being used as a battering ram to break down traditional moral values and to establish moral relativism as a new orthodoxy.

Law is being used as weapon in a couple of ways.

First, either through legislation but more frequently through judicial interpretation, secularists have been continually seeking to eliminate laws that reflect traditional moral norms.

At first, this involved rolling back laws that prohibited certain kinds of conduct. Thus, the watershed decision legalizing abortion. And since then, the legalization of euthanasia. The list goes on.

Lawyers War on Christianity

war on christianityMore recently, we have seen the law used aggressively to force religious people and entities to subscribe to practices and policies that are antithetical to their faith.

The problem is not that religion is being forced on others. The problem is that irreligion and secular values are being forced on people of faith.

This reminds me of how some Roman emperors could not leave their loyal Christian subjects in peace but would mandate that they violate their conscience by offering religious sacrifice to the emperor as a god.

Similarly, militant secularists today do not have a “live and let live” spirit – they are not content to leave religious people alone to practice their faith. Instead, they seem to take a delight in compelling people to violate their conscience.

obama vs christianityFor example, the last Administration sought to force religious employers, including Catholic religious orders, to violate their sincerely held religious views by funding contraceptive and abortifacient coverage in their health plans. Similarly, California has sought to require pro-life pregnancy centers to provide notices of abortion rights.

Religious Freedom 1: Judeo-Christian view of Human Nature understood by Founding Fathers

Religious Freedom 1:

Judeo-Christian view of Human Nature understood by Founding Fathers

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.” ~John Adams

Bowing to political correctness, Notre Dame promptly took down this address. So I am posting it in its fulness, in three parts. Unlike phony icons of the Left, William Barr is a real statesman, a man of true integrity. This speech is long and meaty, but well worth studying, and teaching to your family. ~C.D.

William Barr Speech at Notre Dame Part 1

Today, I would like to share some thoughts with you about religious liberty in America. It’s an important priority in this Administration and for this Department of Justice.

religious freedomWe have set up a task force within the Department with different components that have equities in this area, including the Solicitor General’s Office, the Civil Division, the Office of Legal Counsel, and other offices. We have regular meetings. We keep an eye out for cases or events around the country where states are misapplying the Establishment Clause in a way that discriminates against people of faith, or cases where states adopt laws that impinge upon the free exercise of religion.

From the Founding Era onward, there was strong consensus about the centrality of religious liberty in the United States.

The imperative of protecting religious freedom was not just a nod in the direction of piety. It reflects the Framers’ belief that religion was indispensable to sustaining our free system of government.

James Madison

In his renowned 1785 pamphlet, “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments,” James Madison described religious liberty as “a right towards men” but “a duty towards the Creator,” and a “duty….precedent both in order of time and degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society.”

It has been over 230 years since that small group of colonial lawyers led a revolution and launched what they viewed as a great experiment, establishing a society fundamentally different than those that had gone before.

They crafted a magnificent charter of freedom – the United States Constitution – which provides for limited government, while leaving “the People” broadly at liberty to pursue our lives both as individuals and through free associations.

This quantum leap in liberty has been the mainspring of unprecedented human progress, not only for Americans, but for people around the world.

In the 20th century, our form of free society faced a severe test.

There had always been the question whether a democracy so solicitous of individual freedom could stand up against a regimented totalitarian state.

That question was answered with a resounding “yes” as the United States stood up against and defeated, first fascism, and then communism.

But in the 21st century, we face an entirely different kind of challenge.

Threat not from outside the US

American foundersThe challenge we face is precisely what the Founding Fathers foresaw would be our supreme test as a free society.

They never thought the main danger to the republic came from external foes. The central question was whether, over the long haul, we could handle freedom. The question was whether the citizens in such a free society could maintain the moral discipline and virtue necessary for the survival of free institutions.

By and large, the Founding generation’s view of human nature was drawn from the classical Christian tradition.

These practical statesmen understood that individuals, while having the potential for great good, also had the capacity for great evil.

Men are subject to powerful passions and appetites, and, if unrestrained, are capable of ruthlessly riding roughshod over their neighbors and the community at large.

No society can exist without some means for restraining individual rapacity.

But, if you rely on the coercive power of government to impose restraints, this will inevitably lead to a government that is too controlling, and you will end up with no liberty, just tyranny.

Madison vs. tyrannyOn the other hand, unless you have some effective restraint, you end up with something equally dangerous – licentiousness – the unbridled pursuit of personal appetites at the expense of the common good. This is just another form of tyranny – where the individual is enslaved by his appetites, and the possibility of any healthy community life crumbles.

Edmund Burke summed up this point in his typically colorful language:

“Men are qualified for civil liberty, in exact proportion to their disposition to put chains upon their appetites…. Society cannot exist unless a controlling power be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without.

Men who cannot control their passions cannot be free

 It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.”

So the Founders decided to take a gamble. They called it a great experiment.

Freedom depends on the Self-Discipline and virtue of the People

Madison-self controlThey would leave “the People” broad liberty, limit the coercive power of the government, and place their trust in self-discipline and the virtue of the American people.

In the words of Madison, “We have staked our future on the ability of each of us to govern ourselves…”

This is really what was meant by “self-government.” It did not mean primarily the mechanics by which we select a representative legislative body. It referred to the capacity of each individual to restrain and govern themselves.

But what was the source of this internal controlling power? In a free republic, those restraints could not be handed down from above by philosopher kings.

Instead, social order must flow up from the people themselves – freely obeying the dictates of inwardly-possessed and commonly-shared moral values. And to control willful human beings, with an infinite capacity to rationalize, those moral values must rest on authority independent of men’s will – they must flow from a transcendent Supreme Being.

In short, in the Framers’ view, free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people – a people who recognized that there was a transcendent moral order antecedent to both the state and man-made law and who had the discipline to control themselves according to those enduring principles.

As John Adams put it, “We have no government armed with the power which is capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.

Our Government made only for a Moral and Religious People

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”~John Adams

As Father John Courtney Murray observed, the American tenet was not that:

John Adams-Constitution morality“Free government is inevitable, only that it is possible, and that its possibility can be realized only when the people as a whole are inwardly governed by the recognized imperatives of the universal moral order.”

How does religion promote the moral discipline and virtue needed to support free government?

First, it gives us the right rules to live by. The Founding generation were Christians. They believed that the Judeo-Christian moral system corresponds to the true nature of man. Those moral precepts start with the two great commandments – to Love God with your whole heart, soul, and mind; and to Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself.

But they also include the guidance of natural law – a real, transcendent moral order which flows from God’s eternal law – the divine wisdom by which the whole of creation is ordered. The eternal law is impressed upon, and reflected in, all created things.

From the nature of things we can, through reason, experience, discern standards of right and wrong that exist independent of human will.

Modern secularists dismiss this idea of morality as other-worldly superstition imposed by a kill-joy clergy. In fact, Judeo-Christian moral standards are the ultimate utilitarian rules for human conduct.

They reflect the rules that are best for man, not in the by and by, but in the here and now. They are like God’s instruction manual for the best running of man and human society.

By the same token, violations of these moral laws have bad, real-world consequences for man and society. We may not pay the price immediately, but over time the harm is real.

Religion helps Train People to Do What is Right and Good

Moral Absolutes quoteReligion helps promote moral discipline within society. Because man is fallen, we don’t automatically conform ourselves to moral rules even when we know they are good for us.

But religion helps teach, train, and habituate people to want what is good. It does not do this primarily by formal laws – that is, through coercion. It does this through moral education and by informing society’s informal rules – its customs and traditions which reflect the wisdom and experience of the ages.

In other words, religion helps frame moral culture within society that instills and reinforces moral discipline.

I think we all recognize that over the past 50 years religion has been under increasing attack.

On the one hand, we have seen the steady erosion of our traditional Judeo-Christian moral system and a comprehensive effort to drive it from the public square.

On the other hand, we see the growing ascendancy of secularism and the doctrine of moral relativism.

By any honest assessment, the consequences of this moral upheaval have been grim.

Virtually every measure of social pathology continues to gain ground.

In 1965, the illegitimacy rate was eight percent. In 1992, when I was last Attorney General, it was 25 percent. Today it is over 40 percent. In many of our large urban areas, it is around 70 percent.

Along with the wreckage of the family, we are seeing record levels of depression and mental illness, dispirited young people, soaring suicide rates, increasing numbers of angry and alienated young males, an increase in senseless violence, and a deadly drug epidemic.

As you all know, over 70,000 people die a year from drug overdoses. That is more casualties in a year than we experienced during the entire Vietnam War.

Bitter Fruits of the Secular Age

moral decline graph

Only Staying above world standards is still moral decline

I will not dwell on all the bitter results of the new secular age. Suffice it to say that the campaign to destroy the traditional moral order has brought with it immense suffering, wreckage, and misery. And yet, the forces of secularism, ignoring these tragic results, press on with even greater militancy.

Among these militant secularists are many so-called “progressives.” But where is the progress?

We are told we are living in a post-Christian era. But what has replaced the Judeo-Christian moral system? What is it that can fill the spiritual void in the hearts of the individual person? And what is a system of values that can sustain human social life?

The fact is that no secular creed has emerged capable of performing the role of religion.

Scholarship suggests that religion has been integral to the development and thriving of Homo sapiens since we emerged roughly 50,000 years ago. It is just for the past few hundred years we have experimented in living without religion.

We hear much today about our humane values. But, in the final analysis, what undergirds these values? What commands our adherence to them?

History Facts: Fall of Berlin Wall was a Victory for Liberty

30th Anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall a victory for Liberty

 

November 9,  1989

It would not have happened but for a miracle . . .

berlinwallreagan“Shortly after Reagan was first elected, someone tried to kill him. The killer shot the president under his left arm; the bullet drove through his body and stopped within an inch of the president’s heart. If that bullet had penetrated his heart, Reagan would have died instantly.

            Miraculously, at the hospital where Reagan was treated, every doctor needed to save his life was present. Reagan’s life was saved; he served his country for eight years, during which he led the free world to defeat the Soviet Empire.”[1]

[1] Chris and Ted Stewart, Seven Miracles that Saved America

More about Ronald Reagan

Communists not held accountable for millions killed

Rush Limbaugh

berlinwallhammerThey’re afraid to appear partisan.  They are afraid to gloat.  They are afraid to behave in triumph.  And a great example is Bush 41 when the Berlin Wall came down, the Soviet Union fell.  He went out of his way not to humiliate Gorbachev.  Not to humiliate communism.

The point is that there was never an accounting of the Soviet atrocities their system made inevitable.  There was never an education for the American people of the rotgut that is communism.  There was never a detailed explanation complete with body counts, deaths numbering in the millions, the imprisonment of free people for doing nothing more than thinking their own thoughts. 

He did not call for an accounting of the millions of lives ruined, the millions killed.  He did not define why the Soviet Union imploded.  He just called it the evolution of democracy.  The good vibes of freedom finally overcame.  Reagan said that the Soviet Union would eventually implode because of the weight of its own immorality.  We won the House, 1992, the midterm elections there.  Didn’t gloat.

RUSH: I got a note from a friend of mine last night.  I’m going to spend time on this, not right now, but I don’t want you to miss this.  I got a note from a friend last night who was really happy, really ecstatic, because he believes, or he did until he talked to me, he believes that we are on the threshold here of a major American reawakening.  He thinks that we’re on the cusp.  He can’t put his finger on it.  He’s a well-known writer and he thinks that all of these things happening here are going to open the American people’s eyes to just how devastatingly damaging, destructive and corrupt liberalism is.

Today: Indifference to Liberty is the Default

I keep asking myself, “Why, after years and years of demonstrable conservative triumph and success…?” Such as the eight years of Reagan, when we reduced deficits, we reduced unemployment, we grew this economy like it hasn’t grown since. We were producing jobs.  We were producing careers.

We took down the Soviet Union.  We were advancing technologically.  We were just rolling.  Reagan won in two landslides, and I’ve asked myself: How does it happen that after eight years — and Reagan was demonstrably conservative, and Reagan made no bones about being conservative. And Reagan, better than anybody else, articulated conservatism as he was executing it. 

This is what I wrote my friend back.  I said, “Here’s the problem:  Liberalism has been rejected many, many times.  The Democrat Party has been rejected many, many times.  But the mistake that we all make is thinking that conservatism is being affirmed at the same time.  Conservatism or the Republican Party is being accepted at the same time.”

Here’s my theory, folks.  And you may have stumbled across this yourself years ago.  If so, I apologize.  It just hit me.  This election that we’ve got coming up is a great illustration.  Conservatism is a protest vote, not an affirmative vote.  If the Republicans win big in this election, it’s for one reason.  People are fed up with the Democrats.  They’re fed up with Obamacare and foreign policy. They’re fed up with everything. They’re going to vote for the other guys.  They’re not voting for conservatives.  By necessity they’re voting Republican, but they’re not voting ideologically.

berlinwall2I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this.  Eight years of Reagan and yet the voters are easily fooled to returning to liberalism.  There was no protest when the liberals came along and started raising taxes, making everything worse, destroying jobs, what they always do, wrecking the culture.  No protests.  People voted for it.  And my conclusion is that voters never, other than Reagan, the lone example, never affirmatively vote for conservatism because it’s never really presented to them.  It’s presented to them by me and Fox News on some occasions and other so-called new media, but it’s not presented to voters by the Republican Party.

So why, after eight years, are people able to so easily forget it and return to voting for liberal Democrats? It’s something that’s amazed me and made me curious for years, many years.  It happened again.  It’s happened a lot of times.  It happened again in 1994. The Republicans win the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years.  They did it with a substantive agenda, the Contract with America.

It was made up of ten agenda points that they intended to do, and they were substantive – balance the budget, reduce the deficit, reduce spending, all those things — and they set out to do them.  But it wasn’t many years later that voters went right back to voting Democrat. They embraced Bill Clinton all over again and I was left scratching my head.  I was asking how is it that these voters forget?

Now, don’t think I’m ignoring something here.  I know what the media’s role in this is. I’m not downplaying that. The media, even during those eight years, was telling people it wasn’t real.  And during the first term of George W. Bush they were telling people it wasn’t real.  The media is out there trying to create as much negativism as they can and they’re beating up these conservative Republicans.  I know all that.

But nevertheless, people lived it, and yet it didn’t seem to have much impact, not lasting.  The words of the media — the smears, the lies, the distortions — carried more weight than actual real life. At least when it came to voting, results at the ballot box.  Here’s some headlines today.  Politico.com: “Poll: Obama Hits Lowest Approval Ever.”  ABC News/Washington Post poll: “Obama Hits Lowest Approval.”

He’s down around 40 in this poll and that’s lower than he has ever been. From TheHill.com, as well: “Where Did It Go Wrong for Obama?”  They just can’t figure out where Obama went wrong. He’s such a great guy; he’s so smart; he’s so articulate.  He’s the first black president! How did it go so wrong?  What happened?  Of course, it can’t be the state of the country.

It can’t be the economy.  It can’t be Obama.  It can’t be anything substantive. What is it?  “Where Did Obama Go Wrong?”  They can’t figure it out! Next, we have this from the Washington Post: “The Democrat Party Hits a 30-Year Low.”  Now, the Republicans are even lower in this poll but that doesn’t obviate my point.  Democrat Party, 30-year low.  Obama, lowest approval ever.  “Where Did Obama Go Wrong?”

Then we’ve got a sound bite from John Harwood on CNBC in which he claims that Obamacare — despite how bad it is, despite the absolute mess, despite premiums rising, despite coverage being cancelled, despite policies being cancelled, despite co-pays going up, despite the mess that’s HealthCare.gov — has fizzled as a campaign issue for the Republicans.

Now, when Snerdley heard that today, he said, “No it hasn’t! No it hasn’t!”  Yes, it has.  It may end up being something people vote against Democrats for but they’re not voting for Republicans on it.  Now, in the midst of all this I got a note last night from a famous, nationally known and acclaimed writer.  It says, “Rush, just positing here. I’m at least a column or more away from verbalizing it.

I’m wondering if we’re at some 21st Century version of Lexington/Concord, or Fort Sumter, or the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand or Hitler’s invasion of Poland, or Reagan defeating Carter. In other words, Rush, are we on the cusp of an event or events that abruptly tips the balance of something that’s, in fact, been long in the works?”

He was just thinking out loud, sending me his thoughts.  What he was saying was: Are we on the verge of a tipping point where finally the American people wake up, once and for all, and understand what a demonstrable failure liberalism is and how bad it is for the country? That’s what he sees.  That’s what he thinks is going on.  He thinks that we’re on the verge of that tipping point.

This note from him kind of crystallized this for me because, like I just mentioned, I have been asking myself left and right: “How in the world can people live eight years and arguably 12 because the Bush…?” Well, I was going to say Bush 41.  He campaigned as the third term of Ronald Reagan, and he got elected on that basis.  He got elected on the basis that he was going to be the third term of Ronald Reagan.  It didn’t last but two years.

So let’s say 10 years.  And the Reagan revolution, the Reagan economy continued and boomed all the way through the Clinton administration.  Clinton’s out there taking credit for it, but he didn’t do anything but slow down what was already roaring, slowing it down with his tax increases and everything.  So again, how does this happen where people live through the horrors of liberalism like now, live through the demonstrable prosperity and successes of conservatism, and yet predictably return to voting liberal Democrat, how does it happen?

Now, I know why this happens, by the way.  I know what you’re thinking.  “Okay, Rush, that makes sense, but so what?”  Well, I think what I said is exactly right and I think I know the reason for it.  Even conservatives who are good at making our case are afraid to declare victory when we show the monumental failings of liberalism.  And this election is going to present us another opportunity.  This campaign presents us an opportunity.  And we’re not doing it.  We are not utilizing the opportunity that’s been handed to us on a silver platter.

People are fed up.  They are mad.  They are angry, and it’s time we told them why.  It’s time we told them why the country’s in the dumps.  Why they can’t get a job.  Why their healthcare is being screwed up royally.  It’s time that we told them it’s because of liberalism, and we name names.  And then when we win, we declare victory and we explain why the American people voted the way they did.  We demonstrate and point out the monumental failings of liberalism. 

appeasementThis is what we do not do.  Look at Bush 41.  Look at how Bush 41 treated the fall of the Soviet Union.  I know he was not very conservative, but he was still with a lot of Reaganites around him at the time.  He went out of his way not to humiliate Gorbachev.  He went out of his way to say this was an evolution of democracy, not a final defeat of an evil totalitarian system.  We had to be nice.  We had to accommodate.  We had to be polite.  We had to show that we weren’t mean.  And we never hammer home the final nail.  

 

Maybe Obamacare wasn’t enough to do it.  Maybe the job situation, the economy, all that, but this, this rampant incompetence on how to deal with a killer disease, it’s just patently obvious that we don’t have competent people in charge here.  ISIS, add that on top of it.  We’ve got this big plan here to wipe out all the terrorists and all they’re doing is getting stronger, supposedly on the verge of taking Baghdad, for crying out loud.  There probably is a lot of awakening going on, and the awakening is because people are breaking through the illusion of government competence.

Now back to my point here.  Nothing wrong with a protest vote.  But the protest vote is not like the protest vote that founded America.  The protest vote this time around is people just fed up with the Democrats.  They tried them for six years.  They were fed up with Bush and tried the other guys.  Fed up with Democrats and it’s not working.  But they don’t know what they’re voting for.  They’re just voting for the other guys here.  They don’t know what they’re voting for because the Republican Party strategy is not to define themselves. They’re afraid of defining themselves for fear people won’t like them, and so don’t upset the apple cart, just take advantage of people voting against Democrats. 

But I mean it.  I know why this is happening.  It’s happening for a reason.  And I can name names.  I’m not going to here, but even conservatives, as I said, who are good at making our case are afraid to declare victory.  They’re afraid to hurt feelings.  They’re afraid to appear partisan.  They are afraid to gloat.  They are afraid to behave in triumph.  And a great example is Bush 41 when the Berlin Wall came down, the Soviet Union fell.  He went out of his way not to humiliate Gorbachev.  Not to humiliate communism.  He said instead that it was an evolution of democracy. 

He didn’t portray it as a resounding final defeat of an evil totalitarian dictatorship system.

Meanwhile, similar treatment does not come our way.

The point is that there was never an accounting of the Soviet atrocities their system made inevitable.  There was never an education for the American people of the rotgut that is communism.  There was never a detailed explanation complete with body counts, deaths numbering in the millions, the imprisonment of free people for doing nothing more than thinking their own thoughts. 

 

None of that was explained.  To this day communism is not considered to be that big of a deal.  It’s just another way of organizing government. Not one Republican stands up and says, “Why are you doing this?  Do you not see what’s happening in Cuba?  Why are you doing this?  Why do you want to try what failed in the Soviet Union?”  They’re not made to explain it.  They just go on their merry way implementing this stuff, while we worry about demographics and diversity.  We let them define what we ought to care about.  It’s the same, my friends, with failing social welfare programs.  Republicans, even lots of conservatives, are the same way. As these programs implode, one after another, after they fail one on top of another, what did we do?  We seem more interested in conceding the good intentions of the people who tried than in demonstrating that these programs will inevitably fail.

 

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/10/15/on_the_cusp_of_a_great_american_awakening

Political Cartoon: Left wing Media mourn Baghdadi death, defend Terrorist

Political Cartoon:

Left wing Media mourn Baghdadi death, defend Terrorist

Left wing Media ignore truth about Terrorist Baghdadi

cartoon-baghdadi-saintA.F. Branco Cartoon – Who’s Your Baghdadi

Democrats have come just short of making Baghdadi a saint in the press only because Trump gave the order. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

 

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Loose Lips

cartoon-baghdadi-dead-dems-madISIS leader Baghdadi has been killed during an operation ordered by President Trump but he withheld it from Pelosi and Schiff due to past Democrat leaks. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

Under reported News: Truth about Planned Parenthood sale of Baby Body Parts Shocking News to Jury

Under reported News:

Truth about Planned Parenthood sale of Baby Body Parts Shocking News to Jury

Baby body parts testimony brings jury to tears

Report: Jury sees video for 1st time; ‘It was a game changer’

There’s been a “game-changer” at the California civil trial in which Planned Parenthood is suing the investigators whose undercover videos exposed the abortion industry’s scheme to profit from the sale of baby body parts.

For the first time, jurors were allowed to see portions of the videos that were released in 2015.

The videos — featuring Planned Parenthood executives making admissions on hidden camera — caused a furor that caught the attention of lawmakers.

baby sleepingCalifornia regulators shut down businesses that had been buying body parts, and two congressional committees referred companies and individuals for possible prosecution. The committees cited a federal law that bans profiting from the sale of body parts.

In the California case, Planned Parenthood is seeking $16 million in damages from the Center for Medical Progress videographers, alleging violations of privacy laws.

The defendants, David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, argue the videos were made in a public restaurant where their conversations could be overheard.

Operation Rescue, whose president Troy Newman is being sued as a board member of CMP, provided a report from the trial.

“The jury was stunned. It was the first time during the three-week trial that they had seen any of the debated video. It was a game changer and a huge victory for the pro-life defendants. Planned Parenthood’s star witness turned into a star witness for the defense. It could not have been a better day.”

A second juror held his head in his hands during the playing of the video.

The American Center for Law and Justice, Liberty Counsel, Life Legal Defense Fund and the Freedom of Conscience Defense Foundation are defending the videographers.

The witness on the stand was Deborah Nucatola, former medical director for Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

The courtroom observer told Operation Rescue that tears could been seen on the faces of some members of the jury as they watched Nucatola speaking on video “about liver, lungs, hearts, muscle, and calvarium (baby heads) that were harvested from the bodies of aborted babies.”

 

Read More

 

Baby body parts testimony brings jury to tears

History Facts: Brett Baier, Three Days at the Brink— FDR’s Daring Gamble to Win World War II

History Facts:

Brett Baier, Three Days at the Brink—FDR’s Daring Gamble to Win World War II

RUSH:He has written a young reader edition of this book for young readers ages 9 through 14 precisely because what he thinks is the importance that young people understand history.

It really is an abomination how history is being taught today, and it’s not just public schools. The way history’s taught in private schools, colleges and so forth. It’s all been politicized to advance progressive heroes, leftist heroes in history and future leftist heroes of today and tomorrow.

Rush Limbaugh

Brett Baier book FDR WW2The latest, Three Days at the Brink: FDR’s Daring Gamble to Win World War II that basically architects the Cold War. Bret, thanks for your time.

BAIER: It’s something that I’ve just come to love, finding these historical nuggets, focusing on a moment in history, like through a soda straw, and then bouncing back and looking at how these leaders get to this point.

RUSH: Well, you know, FDR, FDR is a polarizing figure. I remember growing up I was from, am from a family which did not have a high opinion of FDR, but a lot of people in our town did. FDR arguably the man who, creating the welfare state, then empowering the Democrat Party to stay in power in perpetuity. Others look at him as not just that, but the architect of victory in World War II and even maybe using some manipulation to get public opinion behind it. What was most surprising to you about FDR that you learned that you didn’t know?

FDR New DealBAIER: Well, first of all, he’s complex. And I think in all of these leaders you look at them, we look back in time, we look at them as superhuman. You know, FDR is the picture of the jaunty pose in the convertible with the cigarette, and he had many, you know, positive qualities — optimism, self-confidence, this communication ability. But he also had major flaws. He was egotistical and stubborn and had a god complex at the end.

He’d been elected four times and he believed he alone could lead America in the right direction, which is what leads, Rush, to some of the concessions he gives to Stalin, first to Tehran and then at Yalta that empower Stalin. FDR believes that he can steer Stalin, corral him, contain him, but after Yalta FDR goes back to the U.S. and dies thereafter, and Stalin then goes on to take over Eastern Europe eventually and that starts the Cold War.

gospel of envy ChurchillBAIER: He knew he was a bad person and he believed that that he had to make the deals he had. Churchill was always telling him, you know, be careful. It was almost the Reagan message of trust but verify. Churchill eventually says to FDR no one has been a more consistent opponent of communism in the last 25 years than me, but if Hitler invaded the gates of hell, I would at least make a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons. So they knew they had to hold the hands of the devil in order to win the war, but they lost the peace.

RUSH: I think a lot of people are gonna be surprised. You mentioned Yalta. And most people think that was the meeting between Stalin and FDR and Churchill. I think you’re gonna find a lot of people had no idea there was a Tehran meeting.

BAIER: And it was such a crucial part in the war. The fact that Stalin chooses Tehran, and he holds the line, says I’m not gonna meet anyplace else, he holds the cards. So FDR makes a 6,000 mile journey to get there. Yalta’s even further. The Tehran journey really hits FDR as far as his health. Yalta essentially kills him.

RUSH:We got the world carved up after World War II, which, as you say, led to the Cold War. I mean, we did beat Hitler, but look what some would say was the price for it. And I just wonder, was this understood? Did they know what they were giving Russia, i.e., the Soviet Union, when they cut these deals at Yalta?

D-Day WW2BAIER: I think Churchill understood it more than FDR. Maybe FDR understood it, but he believed that the real issue at hand was beating Hitler. And in that case, he’s right. I mean, there is, and we forget, there is a real chance that the allies could lose World War II. If D-Day doesn’t happen, if it’s not planned, if it doesn’t go off well, we could all be speaking German. That’s not a joke. It was real.

RUSH: [Brett Baier]  has written a young reader edition of this book for young readers ages 9 through 14 precisely because what he thinks is the importance that young people understand history.

It really is an abomination how history is being taught today, and it’s not just public schools. The way history’s taught in private schools, colleges and so forth. It’s all been politicized to advance progressive heroes, leftist heroes in history and future leftist heroes of today and tomorrow.

But he {Baier]made a point of writing a version of this that he calls the young reader edition for ages 9 to 14. He did it because he’s got sons in that age range, and he wanted them to be able to read the book now, rather than having to wait some years. So if you are interested in his book, it’s again, Three Days at the Brink: FDR’s Daring Gamble to Win World War II. It’s about the Tehran Conference, not Yalta. A lot of people don’t even know there was a Tehran Conference between Churchill and FDR and Joseph Stalin.

 

Bret Baier Joins Us to Talk About His Latest Book — And Impeachment

Abuse of Power Exposed by Turning Point USA: Adam Schiff Resignation Update

Abuse of Power Exposed by:

Turning Point USA

Adam Schiff Resignation Update

Fellow American,

Turning Point USA logoOver 90 members of the House have motioned to condemn and censure Rep. Adam Schiff.  

 

Because of concerned American patriots like you, Congress is waking up to the Schiff corruption. 

 

adam schiff familyWe’ve flooded their offices with petitions and phone calls demanding action be taken against his smear campaign of hateful lies that have split our nation in two.  

 

We’re leading the charge, but we need to continue this amazing momentum. Will you demand Congress call for Adam Schiff’s formal resignation?

Judeo-Christian Worldview: History Heroes Theme Quotes

Judeo-Christian Worldview:

History Heroes Theme Quotes

Without a heritage, every generation starts over. ~Heritage Foundation

He that thinks absolute power purifies men’s blood and corrects the baseness of human nature, need only read history to be convinced to the contrary. ~John Locke

It has been said that the door of history turns on small hinges, and so do people’s lives. The choices we make determine our destiny. ~Thomas S. Monson

History often holds the keys to survival. A line well written is worth a thousand words shouted; a moment of faith more than scores of years doubted. A reflection, a moment, a gathered thought is one past overcome, one future bought. ~C.A. Davidson

Left wing abuse of Trump“I urge you to beware the temptation of pride, the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, so ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.” ~Ronald Reagan

We have the best culture in the history of the world, and the cultures we are bringing in are corrupt and primitive. ~Ann Coulter

Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it.~Edmund Burke

Therefore my people are gone into captivity because they have no knowledge. ~Isaiah 5:13

Reagan-no democracy without GodI will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations. ~ Doctrine and Covenants 52:14

“Get it all on record now – get the films – get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some ‘b —–‘ will get up and say that this never ever happened”. ~Dwight D. Eisenhower

It didn’t take long for Eisenhower’s concerns to materialize. Despite his presence in many photographs, Holocaust deniers persist to this day.UK removing holocaust from history books? For fear of offending muslims

http://www.examiner.com/article/eisenhower-statement-about-the-holocaust

Ben Franklin-rebellion to tyrantsAre we doing a good enough job teaching our children what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world? ~Ronald Reagan

Refusing to believe the danger does not lessen the reality of the threat. ~Bodie Thoene, Prague Counterpoint

Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. ~Benjamin Franklin

reagan quote freedom next generation“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” –Ronald Reagan

Abraham Lincoln “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.”~Abraham Lincoln

“Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.”~Thomas Paine

“Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.”~William Penn

 “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” ~Thomas Jefferson

“Show me the loving bonds between your families today and I will show you the patriotism and moral clarity of your nation tomorrow. Our choices on how we raise and educate our children in fact provide the blueprint for the next generation. If we do not advocate a love of country to our children and generations to come, then why would our children grow up to fight for their countries?” ~Melania Trump

family reading Bible

A father reads to his three young children from the Holy Bible.

A Battle We Must Win. “We are engaged in a battle with the world. In the past, the world competed for our children’s energy and time. Today, it fights for their identity and mind. Many loud and prominent voices are trying to define who our children are and what they should believe. We cannot let society give our family a makeover in the image of the world. We must win this battle. Everything depends on it.”~ Bradley D. Foster

“Rise from your knees and from your lethargy or you will be crying over your children every day.” ~Beata Szydło, Prime minister of Poland

This is an important question, because Europe and European identity is rooted in Christianity.” We must therefore drag the ancient virtue of courage out from under the silt of oblivion. There is no free, prestigious and honorable Europe without the lifeblood of nations and the wisdom of two thousand years of Christianity. ~Viktor Orbán, Prime Minister of Hungary

 

Comic Relief, Parody and Satire: Donald Trump Quotes about Winning in Funny Video Montage

Comic Relief

Parody and Satire

History FACTS

Donald Trump Quotes about Winning in Funny Video Montage