Can Capitalism and Democracy Coexist?

Journalist Chris Hedges interviews political philosopher Sheldon Wolin, who says democracy requires continuous opposition and vigilance by the citizenry.

Will The Real Rand Paul Please Stand Up!




Rand Paul

" Libertarian" Rand Paul supports a federal bill that would arrest marijuana users. Typically this type of statement from a right-wing Republican would not be newsworthy. However, in the case of known flip-flopper ' any which way the wind blows' politician Rand Paul this is a complete about-face from previous statements made by the senator from Kentucky.



Seems this self-proclaimed Libertarian Republican politician who has positioned himself  as the champion of the anti-government crowd has no problem with big government [Federal Government] from intruding the rights of states to regulate marijuana use.  Matter of fact, he's all for it. Very quietly, as in the " hush of the night," senator Paul supported the Republican-controlled House of Representative's measure called ' Enforce The Law Act." This bill would allow Congress to sue the president for not faithfully enforcing laws. In this case Federal law. The type of rules these so-called Libertarians loathe.

“We write laws and he is just deciding willy-nilly if he likes it he enforces it, if he doesn’t, he won’t enforce it, and we really think he needs to be chastened, rebuked, and told that he needs to obey the constitution,” Paul said. 

This position  is a complete departure from previous comments from Rand Paul where he indicated support for the states to set their terms regarding marijuana use. On March 24, 2013, he[Paul] told Fox News,

“The main thing I’ve said is not to legalize them [marijuana and synthetic recreational drugs] but not to incarcerate people for extended periods of time.” [See Source]



Rep.Bob Goodlatte (R-Va)

Our staff here at the House of Public Discourse are well aware of Rand Paul's knack for playing of words. His base made up mostly of uneducated poor white people, and anti-government and white-supremacist groups don't catch these contradictory statements, or they don't care.

Paul, cannot claim ignorance for this flip-flop. One of the senators that introduced the bill Bob Goodlatte (R-Va) submitted a committee report citing President Barack Obama failure to enforce federal marijuana laws as an example of his federal overreach. 



Back in 2013, the Justice Dept.,[ See Source] proclaimed it would not contest states marijuana laws. According to multiple sources many in Congress, support the president's action or inaction regarding this subject matter.



 Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon)

“It doesn't seem right to me to continue to waste our limited resources punishing people for doing something when it's legal under state law, the majority of Americans want it to be legal, and much more dangerous drugs like heroin are making a comeback,”

This bill passed the House with 228 Republican votes. 181 Democrats voted against the bill. At first, it was doubtful that Rand Paul would have a chance to vote on this with a Democratic majority in the legislature. However, with the results from the 2014 election giving the majority to the Republicans and impeachment of Barack Obama swirling around this bill could and very likely will be revisited. If the bill does come before the senate,  it will be one of those moments that beg the question, " Will The Real Rand Paul Please Stand Up!"

Is Capitalism A Threat To Democracy?

It is stunning following the Wall Street crash, how there has been no expression from any key player from Wall Street of regret or apology for having brought down the entire economy. Nor is there any sense of shame or embarrassment in their continuance to extract exuberant bonuses for producing nothing for the whole of society. There are even traditional conservatives who hold this view. This writer comes from a traditional conservative background. I grew up in a small community in North Carolina called Rosewood. My family raised me to believe in local control, community responsibility, and community values.

However, over a period, I came to realize there are two different definitions of conservatism in the Untied States. One is about the aforementioned traditional values that my family raised me up to believe. I can honestly say for the most part they brought me up focusing on the positive aspects as opposed to the hate element we see in conservatism of today.

What Are True Conservatives Like Today?

The traditional meaning of conservative is a monarchist. One which advocates monarchical rule.[Source: Dictionary.com] The word originated when the term democracy took root in America. The Conservatives were the ones defending the monarchy and central control.  Tension has developed among Conservatives who believe in  global elitist government and those who believe in local and state control. In many ways based on this "writers" understanding of conservatism, there is reason for concern when you see a concerted effort to centralize control.

The world today is all about globalization. The global economy. Huge corporations are parading as a person. The whole dynamic that we have been introduced to as globalization is a process driven by these companies for their corporate interest. They want to eliminate national boundaries, and reduce the capacity of governments to create regulation that maintain a sense of community interest and national interest in the economy. Companies have consolidated their power to rule the world without any democratic accountability. What is interesting is the counter to this corporate globalization. The behavior of these corporate entities has awakened the American people and restored the desire to return to a time when community values and keeping the local, state, and national economies close to home. There is now a globalization of people power. In my view, within this framework we must learn as a society how to work together collectively regardless of  one's political ideology.

You Cannot Have A Capitalistic Democracy! 

Milton Friedman

In many ways, capitalism and democracy are a contradiction of terms. Think about the Milton Friedman's and Ron Paul's and the whole Libertarian babble about free markets and freedom. At best, their sense of freedom is restrictive. It's not the freedom of the working person to control their lives as they see fit.[See Source]  The Libertarians don't like democracy. The freedom they speak of is the freedom to submit oneself to control by a higher authority.[Free Markets] [See Article] The reason the Libertarians don't like democracy is because they are Capitalist. Libertarianism in the United States is, in fact, an extreme example of what true Libertarianism is not. They are in favor of private  tyranny. The worst kind of tyranny!Tyranny by unaccountable concentrations of wealth. When they [Liberitarians] say we don't want government interference in the markets, they mean it. The type of intervention they want to block is the kind that would permit constraints on the utterly irresponsible behaviors of the super-rich.

Corporations are a prime example of private tyranny.

It's worth bearing in mind how radical in opposition this is to classical liberalism.         

Modern-day Libertarians love to invoke Adam Smith.  But, if you read Adam Smith he said the opposite. Libertarians claim Adam Smith was opposed to any form of government control. This presumption is not valid. Adam Smith was in favor of government regulation as he put it "when it favored the working man." He [Adam Smith] was against interference when it benefited the masters. That is classical liberalism. Libertarianism as called in the United States is a concocted methodology which is a complete contradiction to classical liberalism principles. It is astonishing the amount of people especially young people who are attracted by this complete fabrication by design. They say Adam Smith; they invoke him all the time. He was an icon of his time. Many factions considered Adam Smith a radical in his day. Why? Adam Smith was very much an anti-capitalist. Smith condemned the vile maxim of the masters of mankind. All for ourselves and everyone else could just " fend for themselves." Sound familiar! It was Adam Smith who championed the phase and doctrine called the invisible hand.

What is Meant By The Term " Invisible Hand."

Adam Smith rarely even used the term invisible hand. The term is mentioned once in his signature literary work " The Wealth of Nations." The context is an argument against Neoliberalism. Smith argued that if a company in England invested abroad and imported from abroad it might  be profitable for the business but would be harmful to the people of England. Sound familiar! However, they will have enough of a commitment to their country. [home-bias] That if by a. " invisible hand," they will keep to the less-profitable actions, and England will survive what we now call neoliberal globalization. To summarize, England was at the time an agriculture producing nation. Suppose some landlord accumulates an enormous amount of land. This reality creates a situation where everyone else has to work for the owner. Smith held the position that this would not turnout to badly because the landlord will be motivated by his natural sympathy for other people that he will make sure the essentials of life will be equally distributed. This practice in turn will create an equal distribution of wealth as by some invisible hand.

In Wealth of Nations, in the first couple of pages Smith talks about the butcher and his interest. The baker and his interest and this conflicting interest created what came to be known as a division of labor. However, how many have read a couple hundred pages into the work where Smith bitterly attacks the division of labor. Smith pointed out if you pursue the division of labor people will be directed to actions that they will repeat the same mechanical operation over and over. What this reality does is deskill a person. Smith advocated this would turn people into stupid and ignorant as a human can get. Therefore, in any civilized society the government will have to intervene to protect the will of  " We The People." This view is very different than the one held by Libertarians today. A Capitalistic Democracy would self-destruct and for the most part did during the Bush II administration and after decades of Reagan's trickle-down economic theory which mirrored the invisible hand concept. And, with the current time disparity in the distribution of wealth this hand has surely been invisible.

Reagan's Trickle Down Was A Prime Example of the Invisible Hand Debacle!

Why Is It Important To Vote? Your Country Needs You Too, That's Why!

In the mid-term elections traditionally, the president's party doesn't do well. Low voter turn-out has been the reality of modern-day politics for the Democratic Party in off-year elections. The Republicans are still reaping the benefits from the last mid-term elections held in 2010. Not only, did the Republican's gain in the House and Senate. They also gained control in the state and local governments in the South especially. What resulted? Gridlock!

Now that the Republican's have power look what they have done. They have ruined state economies with their policies prime example Gov. Sam Brownback from Kansas.[ See Article]

Republicans have been able to control agriculture and education policy.
They have completely gerrymandered political safe zones creating a major uphill fight for the Democrats, in the House especially. The reality of this is the Democrats taking back the House in the for-seeable-future is at best vague. The Republicans have been able to " tip the playing field."

This Is Why Its Important To Vote!

In addition, the Republican Party backed by deep-pocketed factions like the Koch Brothers and others have waged a flat-out-assault on Voting Rights. Since the 2010 mid-terms, 18 Republican-controlled states acted to restrict voting.[See Source] So, in 18 states it is now harder to vote because of the Republican Party. For example, in the state of North Carolina you can no longer enjoy same day voter registration. In Wisconsin, lawmakers there passed new laws making it much harder to vote. Just recently, those laws were overturned by the Supreme Court. 

Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI)

Wisconsin Is One Walker Of A Mess!

Something has happened on the Voting Rights front that never has happened in the past. The Government Accountability Office [GAO] which is a non-partisan arm of Congress. Reported, once these republican states starting changing these voting rules  five U.S. Senators wrote the GAO requesting a study of state legislative actions that may affect voter registration or voting. In states where these type voter suppression laws have passed there was a clear indication that it lowered the voter turnout. The GAO looked at six states. Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Kansas, Maine, and Tennesse. They looked at these states from 2008 to 2012. Between the two presidential elections, the overall turn-out declined in 2012 from 2008. In Kansas and Tennesse the turn-out dropped more than the other mentioned states. During the study period, it was both Kansas and Tennesse who enacted very strict voting laws. The study found  voting suppression measures effected young voters and African-American voters between the ages of 18 and 23 the most.

This Is Why Its Important To Vote!  

How do young voters tend to vote? Democratic. How do African-American voters tend to vote? Democratic. The finding of this study was more verification than surprising. What is ridiculous is that the purpose of these laws were to stamp out a non-existent voter fraud problem. These new over the top voter ID laws are being reversed in some states. However, even so, they will be allowed to stand in this coming election in particular states that puts the Democrats at a disadvantage. It is the position of the House of Public Discourse if you are an eligible voter and a duly registered voter you should not be weeded out of the process by some new over and beyond voter ID requirements. These actions are not fair, legal, or American. In America, we encourage people to vote, not to disenfranchise themselves from the process. It is clear the Republican Party does not want a fair system of voting. They want a system that tips the scale in their favor in spite of the Constitution. Honestly, we must call this for what it is, 'cheating, because using political power to change the rules and disrespect our Constitution is not in the best interest of this nation.

Democrats Need To Grow A Backbone!  

As a progressive liberal, this writer is perplexed on how Democrats have just sit back and let the Republicans "getaway" with this behavior. By not getting out to vote we play right into a political design that has worked for the Republicans time and time again. What we have seen over the last six years is a consequence of disenfranchisement from the process. Gridlock, Obstruction, Dysfunction have been the order of business in Washington D.C. Yes, Democrats have put up some resistance, but; for the most part, we have watched them do it. So, as we near the 2014 mid-terms no matter what, we will still feel repercussions from our lack of involvement in 2010. It is enough to make one swear. Democrats must get engaged and stop taking things for granted. Democrats must take a let's do something as opposed to nothing approach, and take back our country from radical right-wing factions who are running rough-shod in the present. Why is it important to vote? Your country needs you too that's why! Take part in the process. Get out to vote.
               

Who Are These People; Taking Over The GOP?

Order Here

Who Are These People; taking Over The GOP? They are not strangers to the American political experience. The Radical Right. The Christian Coalition! The John Birch Society! The Tea Party. These people are the Radical Right. There are many faces to these politically extreme people.  Sadly, these people desperate as they might be to hold power often win.

"We are not coming up against just human beings to beat them in elections. We're going to be coming up against spiritual warfare." (Pat Robertson at a 1994 Christian Coalition national strategy conference)[Source: Theocracy Watch]

With the mid-term elections upon us, we here at the House of Public Discourse could not help but notice that many politicians on the upcoming ballot for November 4th, are products of the Radical Right.

The most notorious of these is  long-time Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, who is being opposed by Alison Lundergan Grimes. McConnell's campaign manager has already resigned amid a allege bribery deal. " The ole Washington two-step [See Article]

Alison Lundergan  Grimes

According to the latest polls, Grimes holds a slim lead over McConnell. Grimes is the current Secretary of State in Kentucky. 

The Progressives  know Mitch McConnell well. There is a history. Being from North Carolina, I liken McConnell a modern-day Jesse Helms look-a-like. Its has been McConnell that has led the charge of obstruction against the Obama Administration. It has been McConnell who has been caught with his " pants-down," lying in bed with the Koch Brothers.

Case In Point.






It was McConnell who wasted the money of tax-payers on the bogus IRS scandal and was a washout when questioned by the press. The big question now is, are the people of Kentucky fed up with McConnell enough to show him the door at the ballot box. With the overall approval rating of Congress somewhere in the low-teens and McConnell being the face of that disapproval, many feel this could be the end of the line for McConnell.  So, with all this said, who supports a guy like Mitch McConnell? The Radical Right that is who? The Koch Brothers. It's time for the people of Kentucky and say no to these politics by mob in Kentucky. To many Progressive Democrats and Independents alike feel that Mitch McConnell's behavior and actions during the Obama years has bordered on sedition. One thing is for certain the outcome is still very uncertain. Which begs the question, who are these people taking over the GOP!

Why Understanding The John Birch Society Is Important

Order Here

What is the John Birch Society? Founded, in Indianapolis, IN in 1958, it was chartered under the general laws of Massachusetts. The society presented itself as a non-profit educational organization. The John Birch Society made no bones about who they were, and their sense of entitlement to the American way of life. They were the molders and shapers of public morality. Some early declarations made by the JBS were false. The JBS was inclusionary to all races. Not true. They insisted their membership reflected the cross-section of America on all social and economic levels. Not true. The JBS marched around proclaiming themselves an individualist. However, the JBS never minced words when it came to the common thread of. " defeating communism."

"I knew how much my father hated John Kennedy, and Kennedy was not the first or last Communist my father hated. With the help of his arch-right-wing friends, in and out of the JBS.  Dad could recite a list of " dirty Reds." [Wrapped In The Flag Author, Claire Conner]

 In a nutshell, the John Birch Society over the years till this present day has been the leader of the anti-federal government movement. They are the faction that all modern-day factions aspire to. They were clear and upfront about their desire to control public morality. [See Article]

Less Government---More Responsibility---A Better World 

The JBS set the organization up as a vocal grass-roots stopgap against the spread of Communism. When Sen. Joe McCarthy went on his famous political witchhunt, in the 1950s. McCarthy became an instant superstar with the now growing JBS. When McCarthy announced, he was naming names about 200 total who were all commies he [McCarthy] became JBS hero. The JBS wanted it known they were taking the lead on the fight against Communism. The JBS proclaim themselves the protectors of western-civilization.

         
The JBS was the most useful, best-funded largest radical right-wing group in the history of America. The JBS was not the first radical right-wing organization and has not been the last. However; the JBS did something no other such group had ever done before which involved a coordinated effort to get all of its members doing the same thing at the same time. The JBS got a populist political activism organization started and organized by mail-order for lack of term. The JBS has a top-down authoritarian approach. Robert Welsh, the founder of the John Birch Society, always proclaimed that the JBS is monolithic. He often boosted there will be " no democracy here."

   So, let put Welsh's comment into perspective. A political faction claiming to be both the defender and avenger of our democratic way of life will have none of it within their organization. This element begs the question; what type of government would these people run?  In digging to find the answer to the question, our research ran dead into the question now slogan. " we are a republic, not a democracy." Is this mindset not the rallying cry for many Americans today. What is very interesting is this political philosophy question is the very one many people have said turns on the light switch that these people may have it wrong.

Why Understanding The John Birch Society Is Important?

Right now, the question of voter turnout and the rights of people to vote have been- challenged across the country. We have seen right-wing radical groups that have infiltrated every level of local-state, and federal government, control legislation and legislative bodies as well. The JBS from its inception has proclaimed everyone does not have the right to vote. 

For example, the JBS advocated the repeal of the 17th amendment.

The JBS believed there was a secret communist around every corner and in every facet of government. At the time, the 1950's there was a very real fear of communism and the spreading thereof. This fear was used by the JBS to make everyone afraid of the Reds. McCarthy started naming names. Do we see a return to McCarthyism in the Republican Party today? The JBS felt that 70% of the Federal Government had to go. So, what does that mean what would have to be cut and in what order?

• Social Security, right off the bat.
• Unemployment Benefits
• Welfare Programs 
• Public Education

 This hatred of the Federal Government would put cuts on many less-publicized departments of government as well. Like, Dept of Highways, the JBS were against the repeal of the " Jim Crow," laws in the South. The JBS held a position that the government had no place in the enactment of civil rights laws. With the JBS, any thought of government regulation goes ' down the drain.' The overall rallying cry of the Bircher is the Federal Government is evil. The JBS solution was the dismantling or privatization of the Federal government. We are seeing these solutions being implemented in many states across the country. We have seen a move to privatize prisons and education. Most of this radical legislation has passed in bright red legislatures. Public funds being diverted from public schools to charter schools has turned into a disaster.

There are myriad of reasons why we should understand the mindset of the radical- right-wing and the crazy proposals they put forth. I think an insider's view of this subject matter is invaluable. From Wrapped In The Flag, Author: Claire Conner.

 

In closing, it is important [in this writer's view] to be aware of the motives of these rogue elements of our political sphere. There is a connection between people who are " Birch minded," and the Dominionist. They both quest to dominate or lord their mortality over us to the point of censorship and unconstitutional laws being passed. That why it's important to understand the John Birch Society.

James Madison On Church and State

There is one thing for certain when reporting on the issue of church and state; there will be those people no matter the evidence will insist that the American Constitution is founded on Christian principles. These same people are the very ones who totally disregard the existence of the separation of church and state. In our past reporting, here at the House of Public Discourse. We have provided evidence and quotes from our founding fathers that show clearly and without any ambiguity that their empathic intentions were not to co-mingle government and religion. We intend on taking a look at one of our most prominent founding fathers James Madison and go where the research takes us on his position regarding this much in the spotlight effect of our modern times.[See Source]

Who Was James Madison? 

James Madison  is widely known and recognized as the " Father of the Constitution." Madison more than any other founding father is responsible for the construction of the First Amendment. Our first example of Madison position on church and  state is his, "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments"    document. This document was in response to him opposing a bill  that would have allowed tax-support for Christian ministers in the state of Virginia.

Here is James Madison first point of a fifteen-point memorandum concerning this proposed legislation.

Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.
This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign. We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance. True it is, that no other rule exists, by which any question which may divide a Society, can be ultimately determined, but the will of the majority; but it is also true that the majority may trespass on the rights of the minority. [ Source: James Madison]

There are many sources that give us a window into the mind of James Madison concerning the separation of church and state. One such source is his letter to Jasper Adams.

Jasper Adams was president of the College of Charleston. He had sent Madison a copy of his pamphlet, The Relation of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States, and requested Madison's comments. Adams contested the view "that Christianity had no connection with our civil government." Rather, he argued, "the people of the United States have retained the Christian religion as the foundation of their civil, legal, and political institutions." Adams sent the pamphlet to numerous other statesmen, including John Marshall and justice Joseph Story. Marshall replied, "The American population is entirely Christian, and with us, Christianity and religion are identified." Story went further, writing, "I have read it with uncommon satisfaction. I think its tone and spirit excellent. My own private judgment has long been (and every day's experience more and more confirms me in it) that government can not long exist without an alliance with religion; and that Christianity is indispensable to the true interests and sold foundations of free government."
Madision, of course, disagreed. In his reply, Madison argues that history demonstrates that religion flourishes most freely when it is not supported by the state, and that the state should not impose religion on its citizens.

Madison Argued That Religion Should Survive on Its Own Merits.

In fact, James Madison advocated a strict separation of church and state because he felt distrust for the appeals of irrational sources of authority in the American Republic.[(James Madison on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, p. 150] [See Source]
   



It's important to remember that James Madison considered himself a Christian. Whereas Franklin, Jefferson, and Thomas Paine did not. So, we here at the House of Public Discourse have chosen a founding father who, in fact, considered himself to be of the faith. Madison's summary of the First Amendment clearly pointed out that Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by any law. [See Source]  Madison went on to express that no act of Congress should compel anyone to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience. Moreover, no one sect of religion might obtain a pre-eminence over another. That no religion should be established that would force the citizenry to conform too. [Annals of Congress, Sat Aug 15th, 1789 pages 730-731] [See Source] What James Madison has expressed over and over is that religion is and should be distinct from civil government and exempt from its cognizance.

"The settled opinion here is that religion is essentially distinct from Civil Government, and exempt from its cognizance; that a connexion between them is injurious to both; that there are causes in the human breast, which ensure the perpetuity of religion without the aid of the law; that rival sects, with equal rights, exercise mutual censorships in favor of good morals; that if new sects arise with absurd opinions or over-heated maginations, the proper remedies lie in time, forbearance and example; that a legal establishment of religion without a toleration could not be thought of, and with toleration, is no security for public quiet and harmony, but rather a source itself of discord and animosity; and, finally, that these opinions are supported by experience, which has shewn that every relaxation of the alliance between. " [James Madison]

The Tyranny of Religion.

How many heads have been chopped off by the Catholic church in the name of God.? How many blacks in America have been hung on a tree limb in the name of God? How many millions of souls have died in so-called Holy-Wars in the name of God? How many people have been swindled by so-called preachers of the faith in the name of God? How many children have been molested by clergy representing themselves as agents of God? Concerned.  I am.

I am very concerned about the behavior and the actions of the Christian Right in our country. In our exhaustive research here at the House of Public Discourse, we have uncovered the fact our founding fathers were concerned about religious fanatics of their times as well. There is such a widespread misconception among the populist on what the founding fathers like James Madison intentions for America would be. Ever since the implementation of the Southern Strategy[ See Article] by the Republican Party to garner support from the social conservatives we have seen nothing but a downward slope of radical Christian dogmas manifest.

 Much of this manifestations took the form as political " faith-based- programs," for example George Bush's, Sr. thousand-points of light.

Bush, Sr. program was nothing more than a request to give our tax dollars to religious groups. The same exact thing that James Madison rebuke back in Virginia that we aforementioned in this article. I can remember Jerry Falwell being with hands out. Pat Robertson was there with hand out. Truth be told both Falwell and Robertson got rich off this religious facade.  To the point, they got rich off the government money. Now, in the present we are giving tax- payer money to religious schools were wide-spread misallocation of said monies is commonplace. Many of these religious schools are indoctrinating our young people with  misinformation based on interpretation of the agendas of the "religions "denominational mandates. In fairness, Bill Clinton continued the program cause the bottom-line this entailed votes. When George Bush, II got into office he put these religious terms on super-steroids.[See Article] And, current president Obama has inherited all this religious hog-wash. As, of the rendition of this article has done nothing to stop it. We have a far-reaching problem in this country, and this problem all harkens back to the very fears many of our founding fathers had like James Madison. What was that fear?

That Religious Zealots Were Going To Get Inside Of Government!

With these false man-made religious doctrines flourishing and being propagated by people with questionable motives, it is apparent there is a tranny being opposed on the minds of the people. As we reported in our last article which highlighted David Barton. When it comes to quoting the Bible to apply it to a secular situation context is everything. Radical right-wing preachers and pundits like David Barton, John Hagee, Glenn Beck, and Pat Robertson have made a living on quoting our founding fathers and the Bible out of context.

In closing its time to put the sources to the side and write from the heart. It is not our mission here at the House of Public Discourse to bash religion. In fact, we feel we are doing what God's unabated word instructs us to do. As liberal thinkers, it's not our intentions to bring you to Christ. We are not qualified or do we have the authority to do so. Our motives are to make one aware that our present day society is being over-ran with what our research reveals to be false teachings, and out and out fakes preaching from the pulpits. Moreover, that these people through their very design have infiltrated our government in direct contradiction to our Constitution.

People are sitting in church Sunday after Sunday. Year after year. Listening to the pastors in every aspect of religion from the little brown church in the dale to massive mega-churches set up in old basketball arenas. These modern day religious quacks are, in fact, fulfilling a Bible prophecy.

Jesus Explained:

When you are being preached to and are following false teaching according to Jesus, these so-called holy-men are leading you to your self-destruction. It's the blind leading the blind. People love their pastors and churches. The facts tend to show that many love their pastors and churches more than Jesus. Just because a person is standing behind a pulpit or has a TV ministry does not mean they are preaching in spirit and truth.

Modern Day Pastors Pervert God's Word For Their Purposes.

And the burden of the Lord shall ye mention no more: for every man's word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the Lord of hosts our God. [ Jeremaih 23:36]

The Bible instructs us not to believe every spirit, but to examine the motives and pay attention to their actions.[See Source] Because many false prophets have gone unto this world to prey on the vulnerable. Be aware of these priests who want to preach a message of prosperity by following them to Christ. Be aware of preachers who say following them will be your means of self-improvement. If a pastor approaches you with a message of following, him will teach you life-skills in a word, run.
In this writer, five-year study of the Bible I independently documented how many of the most famous preachers in modern-day Christendom follow their teachings and not that of the Bible. Naming names would only inflame the topic and take away from the overall goal and motivation from the House of Public Discourse, which is to encourage one to examine what their preachers are teaching them. 

See, their motivation is clear. They want to have large congregations and massive amounts of TV followers to contribute to their ministry and then claim their good fortune is due to their diligence in Christ that backs up this bogus prosperity ministry hearsay. Our mission is to shake the apple tree, to awaken the mind to this misleading religious dogma.

What these modern-day brood of vipers are doing in practice is spoiling man salvation based of the Bible with vain philosophies and deceit after the traditions of men. The Bible fore-told of these men and that because these priests, pastors,  reverends, and self-proclaimed prophets speak of things of this world that many will fall to their snare.

What is very troubling is that this is the very thing our founding fathers were afraid would happen. Religious organizations would find its way into our governance. We have seen this religious cancer grow over the years. We have seen these factions use and abuse and misrepresent the intentions of our founding fathers. Let us not be fooled any longer.