Wallbuilders

A few weeks back, we posted a series of videos taken from David Barton's two-week stint on "Gospel Truth" with Andrew Wommack.  In one of those videos Barton explained how a "Jewish Rabbi friend" helped him understand that the Biblical story about the Tower of Bable was really about how God hates socialism.

Barton's "Jewish Rabbi friend" was Rabbi Daniel Lapin, a Religious Right activist who was deeply tied to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. 

Today, Lapin was the guest on "Wallbuilders Live" radio program and it became clear why he and Barton are such good friend when he explained that God hates government welfare so much that, in fact, it makes him cry: 

When it's time to vote, I evaluate candidates on the basis of where they see the limits of constitutional government. Do they, for instance, believe that the entire moral structure of charity in the Bible is something that God intends governments to do coercively? That is simply a very false and, dare I say, frequently self-serving explanation of the Bible's view on charity . It's simply not so.

The idea is for individuals to give charity. And, as a matter of fact, I don't doubt for a moment that God frowns upon government coercive charity in the form of Welfare that has now presented us the specter of hard-working American families confronting confiscatory rates of taxation in order to underwrite multi-generational dysfunctionality. If anything brings tears to the eyes of God, in my view, it would be that.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins joined David Barton and his co-host Rick Green on WallBuilders Live to discuss the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). After the Justice Department decided to stop defending the discriminatory law, finding it unconstitutional, opponents of marriage equality immediately went on the attack. Perkins said that Barton’s Christian nationalist view of history proves that more fundamentalist Christians need to become involved in politics because “we were the voice in the process as this nation was founded,” and if the courts find DOMA unconstitutional then “religious freedom will be lost.” Barton, who previously maintained that “homosexual indoctrination” is already taking place in schools, later added that a defeat for DOMA in the courts will lead to “the indoctrination of kids.”

Perkins: We’re not new to this game, this is not something we just discovered, that all the sudden we have a voice in the process. We were the voice in this process as this nation was founded. And if we don’t once again exercise that voice, I think, I know David has said it and I know you have as well and I see it, if we don’t exercise that voice now as Christians we’re gonna lose it in the very near future.

This is a prime example, because if DOMA falls, the federal Defense of Marriage Act, that’s the only thing protecting these twenty-nine states that have marriage amendments, thirty-one states have voted on it, twenty-nine have amendments, and if this falls those amendments are in jeopardy. And we have already seen that when this agenda goes forward and same-sex marriage gets taught in our schools, our children would be taught that homosexual marriage is the same as traditional heterosexual marriage and homosexuality being on par with heterosexuality, and religious freedom will be lost.

…

Barton: Tony’s right on what’s at stake here. If DOMA goes down, this thing affects not just marriage, but it also affects preachers in the pulpit, it affects education, it affects schools, it affects our children, it affects religious freedom. This is a big deal in what it impacts, it’s not just ‘oh that’s alright I’m gonna stay married’ no this is gonna change the whole culture and the indoctrination of kids and everything else, so it really is a big deal.

A few weeks back, we captured video of Mike Huckabee being introduced by David Barton at the Rediscover God in America conference in Iowa, during which asserted that he wished every American would be forced - at gunpoint - to listen to Barton's teachings.

Last night, Huckabee appeared on "The Daily Show" and Jon Stewart ended up dedicating nearly the entire interview to questioning Huckabee about his support for and praise of Barton and his pseudo-history:

During the discussion, Stewart mentioned a few of Barton's more outrageous claims by name, which we first reported here - specifically Barton's claims that Jesus opposed the minimum wage and the Estate Tax and that God set the boundaries of nations.

For more examples of Barton's absurd statements and intentional misuse of history, take a look through our archive of posts about him.

David Barton continues to demonstrate that he is an absolute joke:

A leading Christian historian told WND he believes President Obama is engaged in a pattern of "willfully, deliberately" repudiating America's Christian heritage.

As WND reported, Obama has been caught numerous times – seven, by WND columnist Chuck Norris' count – omitting the phrase "endowed by their Creator" when quoting the Declaration of Independence and misquoting the national motto "In God We Trust" in official White House communication.

Potential presidential candidate and WND columnist Herman Cain said he believes the omissions are "intentional," and historian David Barton told WND at the Iowa Renewal Project's Pastor's Policy Briefing that he agrees:

"The first time or two I thought, 'Well, he's flustered, he wasn't thinking.' But seven times? There's no way. Especially when he was called on it," Barton said. "Congressmen sent him a letter challenging him on it. There's no way it's matter of ignorance or slip or excuse at that point. I believe it's by design and by intent.

"I gave him the benefit of the doubt a few times, I waited," Barton continued, "but there's no way in a court of law that would not be seen as willful, deliberate intent."

Barton, head of Wallbuilders, an organization dedicated to presenting America's moral, religious and constitutional foundations, said unlike previous presidents – notably Founders like Washington and Adams – who publicly proclaimed God's hand in America, Obama has been going out of his way to not acknowledge the Almighty.

"You remember when he spoke at Georgetown, he had them cover the Christian symbols [behind him on the stage]?" Barton asked. "There's a pattern. When he misstates the national motto, it's not just the Declaration omission of 'their Creator.' When he became president, one of the first things that happened on the White House website was they took off the faith-based office. That kind of reaction is circumstantial, but in a court of law it would convict him."

Let's take a look at Barton's "circumstantial evidence," shall we?

First of all, Barton cites Chuck Norris' earlier WND column in which he asserts that Obama has dropped "endowed by their Creator" seven times ... but if you actually look at Norris' list, you see that several of the instances he cites were times when Obama was simply paraphrasing to make a point:

 

• On Sept. 11, 2010, at the Pentagon Memorial in Arlington, Va.:

"For our cause is just. Our spirit is strong. Our resolve is unwavering. Like generations before us, let us come together today and all days to affirm certain inalienable rights, to affirm life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

• On Sept. 10, 2010, at the president's press conference at the White House:

"With respect to the mosque in New York, I think I've been pretty clear on my position here, and that is, is that this country stands for the proposition that all men and women are created equal; that they have certain inalienable rights – one of those inalienable rights is to practice their religion freely."

It is absurd to claim that Obama was directly quoting the Declaration in these instances, so the assertion that he intentionally dropped "endowed by their Creator" is ridiculous. 

Secondly, what about all of the times Obama has, in fact, cited that passage?

Remarks by the President at United States Military Academy at West Point Commencement -
May 22, 2010

But this nation was founded upon a different notion. We believe, “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” (Applause.) And that truth has bound us together, a nation populated by people from around the globe, enduring hardship and achieving greatness as one people. And that belief is as true today as it was 200 years ago. It is a belief that has been claimed by people of every race and religion in every region of the world. Can anybody doubt that this belief will be any less true -- any less powerful -- two years, two decades, or even two centuries from now?

Remarks by the President at Independence Day Celebration - July 4, 2010

Two hundred and thirty-four years later, the words are just as bold, just as revolutionary, as they were when they were first pronounced: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Remarks by the President at Las Vegas "Moving America Forward" Rally - October 22, 2010

Look, change has always been hard in this country. This country was founded when 13 colonies came together in a revolution that nobody believed could happen, except they believed. They founded this country on ideas that hadn’t been tried before: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal -- (applause) -- that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Remarks by the President at DCCC General Reception - October 25, 2010

So don't let people tell you you’re not making a difference. Yes, it’s hard. But it’s always been hard. The history of America has been hard, starting with a revolution to found this country. The idea of America is hard, based on a document and ideas that had never been tried before: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Remarks by the President at a rally for Congressman Perriello - October 29, 2010

So don't let them tell you -- don't let them tell you change isn’t possible. Here’s what I know. This country was founded on what seemed impossible. We had 13 colonies come together and have to battle the greatest empire on Earth. And then they drafted this document nobody had ever tried before, proclaiming, “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” A son of Virginia wrote those words. (Applause.) “That all men are created equal.” (Applause.) “And they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Remarks by the President at DNC "Moving America Forward" Rally in Chicago, Illinois - October 31, 2010

You know, this country started -- 13 colonies -- who folks said didn't have a chance against the British Empire. And then they drafted this document with ideas that had never been tried before: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

You know, the first few times I saw David Barton misrepresent facts in order to further his right-wing agenda, I gave him the benefit of the dobut, thinking perhaps he just misspoke. 

But when you see him do it time and time again, it becomes impossible to see it as anything other than a willful, deliberate intent to deceive.

Earlier this year, there was a short right-wing freak-out when the State Department announced that the spaces for "mother's name" and "father's name" on passport applications will be replaced with "parent one" and "parent two."

The State Department quickly backtracked but that wasn't good enough for Rep. Randy Forbes who quickly introduced legislation to require the use of "mother" and "father" on all federal forms.

Today, Forbes showed up on "Wallbuilders Live" with David Barton and Rick Green to discuss the importance of stopping these sorts of changes at the source while Barton warned that is was an example of the unholy contaminating the holy:

Barton: And it really is important. A little bitty deal like changing the mother and father designation on a passport, those are not small deals.

Green: Even though it sounds small, isn't it a fundamental change? It's really at the heart of this question of is the family going to continue to be the major nucleus of our culture and is there a definition of family and marriage that we're going to stick with or are we going to go to anything counts?

Barton: Well, it becomes death by a thousand paper cuts, is what it amounts to. Nothing really enough to cut to the bone, but you just bleed to death a drop at a time. And that's what this is because you say "man, we're so busy with the President trying to get DOMA defended, we don't have time to mess around with what they're writing on passports." Well, when it comes at you from a hundred directions, you may repel ninety-eight of the attacks, but if two of them get through, that's two more than you had when you started this thing. And those are attacks that you have to push back on every single one of these fronts one hundred percent of the time. You cannot give ground.

The minor prophets talked about the fact that if you take something holy and put just a drop of unholy in there, does the holy make the unholy become holy? Or does the unholy make the holy become unholy? And the answer is: the unholy contaminates the holy.

Forbes: The other big thing that we're worried about is, as you know, the slippage of these kinds of things and how they work their way in and then ripple throughout all of government. If we let this stand, the next thing we know is there's going to be another agency that does it and then another agency and then before you know it they're going to come back and say "we've done this with the State Department and we did it with such and such. We ought to make it in all federal documents everywhere." And that's the way these things happen unless you try to put them out at the source.

And the other thing, imagine with children. You know, for how long have we said "who's your mothers?" and "who's your father?" and now we're going to say "well, who's your parent one and who's your parent two?"And these are the kinds of things that have huge ripple effects through the federal government if gone unchecked.

Rick Green of WallBuilders hosted Elizabeth Swanson of the Protect Kids Foundation, a virulently anti-gay group that opposes programs to protect children from bullying and harassment in schools. Like other groups such as Focus on the Family, the California Family Council, Mission America, and the Family Research Council, the so-called Protect Kids Foundation claims that gay-rights proponents “indoctrinating kids to accept and adopt LGBT lifestyles, starting in kindergarten.” David Barton, the head of WallBuilders, himself said that public school students “are getting homosexual indoctrination” and manufacturing the bullying problem.

According to the Protect Kids Foundation, gay-rights advocates are “obsessed with power” and “are determined to transform schools, kids, and culture into their hedonistic vision of a new utopian America…radically transforming society by using our children as pawns for social change.” The organization believes that the immense bullying faced by students who are gay or perceived as gay in schools is not a significant issue, accusing supporters of anti-bullying policies of “fabricating an issue and claiming victim status to gain power” and “indoctrinating impressionable school children.” In their words, the establishment of anti-bullying programs “stigmatizes the normal and normalizes what has for centuries been deemed deviant” and somehow takes away the rights of heterosexuals who don’t support attempts to “homosexualize their children”:

The civil rights issue actually runs in favor of the estimated 96% of the population who are not homosexual. Having LGBT activists homosexualize their children will trample upon their civil rights. For the first time in our history, America is faced with a powerful movement that defines its alleged “rights” in terms of the deprivation of the fundamental rights of others. As a result, the homosexual movement is depriving other Americans of civil liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

Swanson told Green on WallBuilders Live that people should “reclaim” the word 'homophobic,' which she believes, has unfairly become a “pejorative” and a “racial epithet.”

Rick, you said a very key word, 'tolerance,' that we're going to teach tolerance. But the redefinitions of the words go even further. So when you look at the definitions that GLSEN has put forward, there’s a document called Tackling LGBT Issues in the Schools, and it’s a document prepared jointly by GLSEN and Planned Parenthood. And interestingly, the definition that they use of the word “homophobe,” “homophobia” or a “homophobic level of attitude,” which is a word I do not normally use because that word in itself was created by an activist who wanted to get back at people that were disagreeing with homosexuality as a moral good. So to me the term is a pejorative term, a racial epithet if you would, that should not be used because you’re basically name calling people right there if you say ‘Oh, they’re homophobic,’ so that’s a word that needs to be reclaimed and not used in our every day vernacular when talking about this issue.

I don't put much faith in the accuracy of anything that David Barton says, but nonetheless I do want to highlight this email he just sent out from Wallbuilders refuting the Right's claims that President Obama's decision to stop defending DOMA is unlawful:

Earlier today, David Barton tweeted that he was just about to start speaking at the Connect 2011 Pastors Conference, along with a link to watch him live.

So I clicked over and found him discussing how even though most Americans claim to be Christians, the culture is not being changed accordingly.  Barton cited a time in the past when the Chicago Tribune had published a new version of the New Testament and lamented that something like that could not happen today.  The solution, Barton asserted, is for Christians to take control of the culture and media so that "guys that have a secular viewpoint cannot survive" because Christians will "chop that kind of news off": 

At the end of his address, Barton urged those in attendance to go to his Black Robe Regiment website where they would find countless sample sermons on various issues so that they could speak out on every issue of the day.  The website also contains a video of Barton explaining just what sorts of sermons pastors of the Founding Era delivered, saying today's pastors need to follow their lead and deliver sermons on everything including voting, the military, taxes, health care, transportation, architecture, and even eclipses and earthquakes because the Bible has answer to everything:

As we have mentioned several times before, John Stemberger of the Florida Family Policy Council, was an early and central player in the Rifqa Bary saga when she turned up in Florida in 2009.  His actions during that case have now resulted in misconduct complaint being filed against him by the Florida Bar as well as a $10 million defamation lawsuit from the attorney who represented Bary's parents.

As such, Stemberger has set up a legal defense fund to cover his mounting legal expenses that has the support of Jerry Bokin, Newt Gingrich, Tony Perkins, Lou Engle and David Barton. 

And today, Barton had Stemberger on his "Wallbuilders Live" radio program where they, along with Rick Green, alleged that the lawsuit and misconduct complaint are an attempt by radical Muslims to destroy anyone who dares to criticize them. [I would like to point out that none of the claims made by Bary about her parents or the claims Stemberger asserts in this interview were ever substantiated by state investigators who examined them]:

Barton: The message is don't talk about us or we'll come after you the same way.

Green: It's an intimidation factor.

Barton: We're showing you what happens to people who talk about us or people who come after us in court - we will make you pay. And they may eventually lose, but that's only if you have enough money to outlast them. And so it really is a bad thing and we've got a good friend of ours on today that's in the middle of one of these things were Islamic groups have come after him because he stood and actually won a court for justice. And because he won, now they are going to make him pay a price.

Stemberger: Well, as your listeners may remember the name Rifqa Bary was a former Muslim teenager who made international headlines in about the summer and fall of 2009 when she ran away from her parents in Ohio to Florida, to a Methodist pastor and his wife after her parents threatened her life for not renouncing her Christian faith.

You know, she knew the repercussions of this so she was very, very careful to be discreet with it. But then when the parents, when the [leaders] of the mosque confronted the parents, that's when they began to blow up and the father specifically threatened her, demanded she denounce her faith, said that "you'll be dead to me" and that, according to her affidavit which is public knowledge, made some really specific threats ... But when they found a book on Esther in her bedroom, that's when they just said "we're going to send you back to Sri Lanka" and she knew she would just be a walking dead girl at that point.

Just weeks after [Rifqa turned 18] the lawyer who opposed Rifqa in court and who represented Rifqa's parents, Mr. Omar Tarazi, whose family has deep ties with CAIR, which is the Council on American Islamic Relations, he filed a grievance against me.

Green: This is their typical game plan. You mentioned CAIR, this is how they strike back, they trump up these kind of things and just give you a barrage of quote "ethical complains" so that you have to spend your time, energy, and money defending those instead of fighting the real fight, right?

Stemberger: Well, there is a clear growing trend of malicious lawsuits and other legal actions which are filed by adherents of radical strains of Islam and they're designed to punish, silence, and to chill legitimate speech and public discourse about Islam.

Barton: That's Islamic lawfare. I mean, they're coming after you to make him an example and say "don't anybody else every try to intervene ..."

Green: Whether they win or lose, they example is made that we're going to cost you money ...

Barton: And if there is every a time to step up and help a brother, this is it. We're not going to bring a BB gun to a tank fight. We're going to show up and we're going to take you toe-to-toe on this thing.