Have nothing to do with the [evil] things that people do, things that belong to the darkness. Instead, bring them out to the light... [For] when all things are brought out into the light, then their true nature is clearly revealed...

-Ephesians 5:11-13

Tag Archives: Chuck Baldwin

The Entitlement Society: Caviar with Chains

Cropped screenshot of Charlton Heston from the...

Cropped screenshot of Charlton Heston from the trailer for the film The Ten Commandments. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Pastor Chuck Baldwin nails it: the entitlement society destroys morality. We are enjoying the fruits of the Stockholm Syndrome which is where the prisoners fall in love with their captors.

As a preacher, Baldwin can’t resist the temptation to reach into Scriptures to tell us that we’ve been here before:

There is an Old Testament story that parallels with what is going on in America today. The story is found in Numbers chapter 11. God had delivered His people from great bondage. They witnessed His mighty hand of power and deliverance in defeating their oppressors and leading them toward a land of promise and liberty. He even dropped “angels’ food” (called manna) from Heaven to sustain them.

But after being delivered from bondage, they began to yearn for a return to Egypt. In verse 5 of that chapter, the people are recorded as complaining, “We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick.” (KJV)

Return us to slavery! At least then we have security and predictability and someone else providing for us. This eliminates our need to

Keep Reading…

Where Did the Tea Party Republicans Go?

Wired – House Approves Sweeping, Warrantless Electronic Spy Powers

The House on Wednesday reauthorized for five years broad electronic eavesdropping powers that legalized and expanded the George W. Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program.

privacy

privacy (Photo credit: Sean MacEntee)

Where are the Tea Party Republicans on this one? This re-authorization of a law that should never have been passed in the first place (thanks, George, for that) passed the House by 301 to 118. Most of those voting against it were – ready? – Democrats!  Only seven Republicans mustered enough courage to say no to warrantless wire-tapping!

This is from the article in Wired.com:

The government does not have to identify the target or facility to be monitored. It can begin surveillance a week before making the request, and the surveillance can continue during the appeals process if, in a rare case, the secret FISA court rejects the surveillance application. The court’s rulings are not public.

So the whole fishing expedition is wrapped in secrecy.

Rep. Lamar Smith, a Republican from Texas, sponsored the bill, saying that it “is one of the most important votes we cast in this Congress” because “terrorists are committed to the destruction of our country.”

Question: what about the terrorists in Congress who are determined to shred what remains of the Constitution and the Fourth Amendment and turn the country into a dictatorship? As Pastor Chuck Baldwin just wrote in his weekly newsletter:

Think of it: in the name of the 9-11 attacks, the United States is being transformed into the kind of despotic countries that we are told we are being protected from!

There was at least one small voice for common sense, expressed by Rep. Zoe Lofgren – a Democrat from California! – who said: “I think the government needs to comply with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution all the time [what a concept!]. We can be safe while still complying with the Constitution of the United States.”

Accurate and persuasive. But not enough to persuade the Tea Partiers to vote against it.

Already Made Up Your Mind About Paul Ryan? Read This!

Chuck Baldwin: Paul Ryan is More of the Same

It has happened again. We go through this every four years, and every four years the vast majority of “conservatives” fall for it. This is such a broken record. What did Forrest Gump say: “Stupid is as stupid does”? And wasn’t it P.T. Barnum who said, “There’s a sucker born every minute”? Well, here we go again.

English: This is a photo of Dr. Charles "...

This is a photo of Dr. Charles “Chuck” Baldwin, the 2008 Constitution PartyPresidential candidate. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

If you’re still with me, then you’re still open to talk about Ryan. Before we do, however, I need to tell you a little more about Chuck Baldwin. Once you know his background then you’ll understand why he is credible and why what he says is important.

I’m going to take a couple of quotes from Wikipedia’s entry about Baldwin which I think fairly presents the man. First, from Wiki’s general introduction:

Charles Obadiah “Chuck” Baldwin (born May 3, 1952) is an American politician and founder-pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. He was the presidential nominee of the Constitution Party for the 2008 U.S. presidential election and had previously been its nominee for U.S. vice president in 2004. He hosts a daily one-hour radio program, Chuck Baldwin Live, and writes a daily editorial column carried on its website, on News with Views, and on VDare.

As a Republican Party member, Baldwin was state chairman of the Florida Moral Majority in the 1980s. However, during the 2000 campaign of Republican George W. Bush for U.S. President, Baldwin left the party and began a long period of criticism of Bush. Baldwin endorsed U.S. Representative Ron Paul for the 2008 Republican nomination for president, and Paul in turn endorsed Baldwin for the presidency in the 2008 general election.

Baldwin supports ending U.S. involvement in the United Nations, reducing U.S. income taxes, and repeal of the Patriot Act. He would withdraw troops from Iraq and seek to end illegal immigration by enforcing immigration laws. He supports the gold standard, the right to keep and bear arms, homeschooling, and the proposed Sanctity of Life Act, which would define “human life” and legal personhood as beginning at conception, and prevent federal courts from hearing cases on abortion-related legislation.

This entry from Wiki illustrates his character. He quit his church in Florida and moved to Montana. He thinks he will be more effective in the freedom fight there.

Think about this: here is a successful pastor, highly regarded by his flock, who gives it up to get more involved in the fight to preserve our freedoms. Name another pastor like that. I can’t think of one. My own pastor never said one word about the freedom fight from the pulpit during his seven years of preaching. Talk about a disconnect from reality! I love the man and his message. And I miss him (he just left our church to teach young pastors how to preach). But he never said one word, ever, about the approaching totalitarian storm that is gathering about us. And neither will his students.

Here’s the Wiki entry about his move to Montana:

In 2010, Baldwin retired from his position as pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church and announced his intention to move to Montana, because he believed God had told him that the Mountain states were the “tip of the spear in the freedom fight…”

In a June 9, 2011 article, Baldwin outlined his reasons for choosing the Flathead Valley of Western Montana for his family’s home. He cited Montana’s freedom-loving people, its recognition of the right to keep and bear arms, and a feeling of strong conviction, following prayer.

That’s why, when he has something to say, I usually listen closely. Here’s what he has to say about Paul Ryan:

Let’s just get this on the record: since 1960, there have only been two Presidential nominees (from the two major parties) who were not controlled by the globalist elitists. One was a Democrat, John F. Kennedy; the other was a Republican, Ronald Reagan. Kennedy was shot and killed; Reagan was shot.

Every other President, Democrat or Republican, has been totally controlled, which is why none of them have done diddly-squat to make a difference in the direction of the country. On the issues that really matter, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are just more of the same!

Here’s what you don’t want to know if you still think Ryan is a true conservative:

Jane Aitken wrote an excellent synopsis of Paul Ryan’s voting record that appeared on LewRockwell.com. She noted that Ryan voted for federalizing rules for driver licenses; voted to make the Patriot Act permanent; voted to allow electronic surveillance without a warrant; voted to authorize military force in Iraq; voted to spend an “emergency” $78 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; voted to declare Iraq part of the “War on Terror” with no exit date; and voted against redeploying US troops out of Iraq.

Aitken also wrote, “Congressman Ryan supports the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, federal bailouts, increased federal involvement in education, unconstitutional and undeclared wars, Medicare Part D (a multi-trillion dollar unfunded liability), stimulus spending, and foreign aid.”

There it is. Ryan is just one more kept politician working to fool conservatives into thinking he’s one of them. He’s not.

One Lonely State Representative Opposes Indefinite Detention

UPDATE 1/17/2012: Correspondence with Daniel Gordon

Dear Rep. Gordon:

It was my privilege to write this article about your efforts which appeared yesterday at The New American. I hope you find it a fair treatment.

May I call you in a day or so to do a follow-up on your resolution?

Respectfully,

Bob Adelmann

 

Dear Mr. Adelmann,

The article you penned on the topic was nothing short of outstanding, and I am proud to have had my efforts published by you and your excellent publication. Please do feel free to call for a follow up. There has been some very exciting developments over the past couple of days. The number in my signature is my cell and you are free to use it. Thank you.

Best Regards,

Dan

A cell inside the detention facility in the Pa...

Rhode Island Representative Daniel Gordon has drafted a resolution to express his opposition to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) “that suspended habeas corpus and civil liberties” under Section 1021.

That section of the act, signed into law by President Obama on New Year’s Eve:

provides for the indefinite detention of American citizens by the military on American soil, without charge, and without right to legal counsel and [the] right to trial.

Given the fact that the constitutions of Rhode Island and that of the United States are replete with guarantees of individual liberties, right to habeas corpus, and right to freedom of speech, the offending sections of that law are repugnant to the sensibilities of anyone [who] has a basic understanding of the foundation of this country….

When I took the oath of office, I swore that I would support the constitutions of Rhode Island and the United States. And before one constituent of mine is snatched up in the dead of night, without due process under our laws, they’ll have to pry those documents from my cold dead hands.

Gordon has a lot of company in his opposition to the NDAA. Pastor Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party’s candidate for President in 2008, wrote: “Americans should realize that, coupled with the Patriot Act, the NDAA, for all intents and purposes, completely nullifies a good portion of the Bill of Rights, turns the United States into a war zone, and places US citizens under

Keep Reading…

Is Everything “Commerce?”

Chief Justice John Marshall established a broa...

Image via Wikipedia

Law professor Robert Natelson wrote that because Congress has stretched its definition of “commerce” so far beyond that originally intended by the founders, “it is up to the people to recall the federal government to its constitutional limits.” Known as the “Commerce power,” Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says that “the Congress shall have Power…to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states.”

And up until 1937, that power had been relatively tightly construed to mean what the Founders intended: to regulate trade—the buying and selling across state lines. By using false arguments, however, the Supreme Court during Roosevelt’s New Deal ruled in general that Congress was free to “control manufacturing, wages, agriculture, crime, mining, land use, firearm possession, and a [wide] range of other activities.”

Keep Reading…

Rush Limbaugh as GOP Kingmaker?

Rush Limbaugh

Cover of Rush Limbaugh

Zev Chafetswriting an op-ed for the New York Times, concluded that radio show host Rush Limbaugh “is the brains and the spirit behind [the conservative] resurgence.”

The writer claimed that “when the Tea Party movement emerged, Mr. Limbaugh welcomed it”:

The movement’s causes—fighting against health care reform, reducing the size and cost of government, opposing the Democrat’s putative desire to remake America in the image of European social democracies—were straight Limbaughism. A very high proportion of Tea Partiers listen to Mr. Limbaugh. Sarah Palin’s biggest current applause line—“Republicans are not just the party of no, but the party of hell no”—came courtesy of Mr. Limbaugh. Glenn Beck…calls Mr. Limbaugh his hero.

Keep Reading…

The Income Tax and Sovereignty

Portrait of John Locke, by Sir Godfrey Kneller...

Image via Wikipedia

April 15th is the day when American taxpayers must file their income tax returns, and Tea Partiers are protesting those taxes all across the country. One question not being raised is: If these citizens are sovereign over their government, who can explain the income tax? How did this happen? Are the citizens not sovereign after all?

When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, he clearly relied on the thinking of his mentors, especially including John Locke. According to Jim Powell,writing for The Freeman, Locke “expressed the radical view [at the time] that government was morally obligated to serve people, namely by protecting life, liberty, and property. He explained the principle of checks and balances to limit government power. He favored representative government and a rule of law.”

Locke published two treatises on government in 1689 in which he said:

Keep Reading…

ObamaCare: The Final Nail, or the Last Straw?

Barack Obama addressing a joint session of Con...

Image via Wikipedia

In responding to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) incredulous “Are you serious?” about the constitutionality of Obamacare, many have written persuasively that the healthcare law is in fact unconstitutional.

Michelle Morin in her blog reminded her readers that Article 1, Section 8 limits the federal government to specific and enumerated powers, with all other unenumerated powers being left to the states or to the people. Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center analyzed the purpose of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as limitations and restrictions on the power of the federal government. He concludes his analysis with these words:

Keep Reading…

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.
Copyright © 2018 Bob Adelmann