Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Elmer Gantry Economics

Fleecing the Faithful on behalf of the Fed: Gary Bauer, prophet of the plunderbund.

A vast potential for infernal mischief can be found in some otherwise harmless adverbs. Let us examine the specific case of the seemingly inoffensive modifier "normally."

Incorrigible cynic that I am, I've long believed that any sentence that begins with the word "normally" is an exercise in deception, generally taking the form of special pleading. Whatever follows the word "normally" is something morally objectionable that I should summarily reject, but am being asked to countenance just this one time. Or so I'm being told to believe.

In a radio commentary for Focus on the Family broadcast yesterday before the congressional vote on the Economic Dictatorship Enabling Act, Gary Bauer quite generously vindicated my belief.

"Normally, we would not want to bail out people that made wrong decisions," Bauer began in his familiar tone of adenoidal sanctimony. In terms of making his case, Bauer lost me at "normally" -- but I listened anyway, as my enraged disgust took control of my jaw and put two very expensive dental crowns at risk.

"This crisis, if left unattended, could hurt people that made right decisions," Bauer simpered. "This [bailout] is not rewarding bad decisions. This is an attempt to prevent those bad decisions from hurting people that had no part in them."

Actually, those of us who had no part in those "bad decisions" are already being hurt. And we're in for much greater pain in the future. That much is out of our hands. The Uber-Bailout would do nothing to protect the relatively innocent and powerless. However, it would greatly palliate the deserved pain of those who are powerful and guilty. And it would end -- "temporarily," which in the lexicon of government power is a functional synonym for "forever" -- the ability of the common people to compel elected representatives to combat the schemes of the Bankster Elite.

The FED's counterfeiting press (or its digital analog) has been tirelessly churning wealth siphoned from our paychecks and savings into the butter it slathers on the bread of the corporate elite. This pilferage will continue whether or not Congress actually passes a bailout measure, as it probably will (most likely in a post-election lame duck session).

The Paulson Plan simply proposed to sever the one thin, fraying thread of accountability still connecting the economic elite to the people it is plundering. That thread is Congress's constitutional role in appropriating funds and overseeing the executive branch personnel who spend them.

Paulson, acting on behalf of the corporatist plunderbund, wanted to snip that thread decisively, albeit with a grave sense of agonized reluctance amid a unique financial crisis.

Bear in mind, of course, that this is something Paulson would not normally propose. Heh.

Bauer's moral reasoning, such as it is, dictates that while it's a sin to steal a hundred dollars to feed your family, stealing $700 billion to salve the bank accounts of wealthy criminals is an act of Christian statecraft. Both of those acts are sins and crimes, of course. And it's important to remember that the Christian Gospels --regarded as the truth, or merely an interesting collection of moral teachings -- make it clear that Jesus didn't define sin on a sliding scale favoring the rich and powerful.

The remedy for sin, in all circumstances, is repentance -- acknowledgement of the evil one has done, an attempt to make restitution, and an earnest effort fully to turn away from the sin. None of this would be accomplished by the Uber-Bailout whose purported necessity provided Gary Bauer with an opportunity to display his utter moral idiocy.

Joining Gary Bauer in offering a sermon on the supposed virtue of shaking down the poor to comfort the rich was Christian financial advisor Rob West.

"I really believe that we will see most of this money returned to the taxpayer," West began in the unctuous tone of a practiced con-man, "because as they buy up these loans at a discount the government will use their balance sheet to hold these loans and then sell them once market prices recover and stabilize.... There really is good evidence that the government can get most of this back." (Emphasis added.)

This is an exquisite example of a multi-layered lie -- a veritable Napoleon pastry of prevarication, in fact.

Let's begin with the italicized words "taxpayer" and "government." When West began this exercise in artful dishonesty, he assured the anxious listener that the money spent to provide a cushion for corrupt financial institutions would be returned to the taxpayers from whom it would be taken. By the end, we're told that the money would actually be "returned" to the government. Obviously, this not the same thing as returning it to those from whom the money would be stolen.

In the middle of this noxious confection we find a blend of two related and thoroughly toxic untruths. The first is that government, through coercive redistribution of wealth, can inject "value" into something innately worthless, such as a pile of irredeemably corrupt mortgage securities. The second is that the inflated prices that we saw during the housing bubble were normal, and that the ongoing decline is an aberration.

What West doesn't explain is this: If these feculent mortgage bonds are such a spectacular bargain, why aren't they being snapped up by contrarian investors?

"Rob West? Yeah, right --
the guy's a flippin'

Behind West's assurances we can find the tacit understanding that the purpose of the Uber-Bailout is to continue the process of inflation, the ongoing theft of the value of what we earn and save through adulteration of the currency. Yet West -- whose advice is worth at least as much as, but no more than, a Zimbabwean dollar -- maintains that the Bailout would have no inflationary impact:

"Certainly the American family has already felt increased prices at the gas pump and the grocery store. And I don't think necessarily that we'll see a marked increase in that just based on this proposal alone[.]"

Here we see West taking refuge in another mischievous adverb -- "necessarily" -- while pretending that "this [$700 billion] proposal alone" would be the sole and final act of larceny.

Like so many other sycophants in saintly guise, West couples his solicitude for the powerful with stern advice for the weak. It may be a moral duty to relieve the super-rich of their self-inflicted burdens, but the poor and struggling are owed no similar succor.

"One of the messages for the American Christian is that we have to heed the counsel of scripture," cooed West. "Take the opportunity now to make sure you live within your means. Take the opportunity to start paying off your debt and shoring up your financial foundation. Make sure you have some long-term plans."

All of this is impeccably sound advice, but it is difficult to see how any of us can reinforce our financial foundation when the FED and its accomplices can fatally undermine it through inflation. West is demanding that people support a policy that will bring their conscientious efforts to nought, and nullify any long-term plans they make.

The ever-deepening financial crisis presents us with an opportunity and necessity to do something that is no fun at all: Repent.

Blessing the Mad Bomber: Gary Bauer (the gnomish figure in the center of the assembled Republican luminaries) puts in face time at a John McCain campaign event as a representative of Dr. James Dobson. McCain is a foul-tempered, abusive serial adulterer and unabashed warmonger, so naturally he received the support of Dr. Dobson, the nation's foremost Christian family counselor.

To repent, once again, is to turn completely away from one's present course. As individuals and as a nation we cannot continue to live on debt (or on "credit," as it's commonly called). There are already plentiful indications that American households are reining in their spending, foregoing luxuries of various kinds, and "hoarding cash." Banks are engaging in the same behavior. All of this is good and necessary -- and, admittedly, painful. In other words, it is a species of repentance, one the Big Bailout (and the subsequent interventions) would be intended to discourage, if not reverse.

Economic repentence, to be effective, can't be merely the private affair of the public. The government ruling us cannot continue the imperial foreign policy that has received the conspicuous benediction of Palace Prophets like James Dobson and Gary Bauer -- the latter being Dobson's representative in the neo-"conservative" warmaking network.

Why would a Christian political spokesman such as Gary Bauer miss such an obvious opportunity to preach repentance? Why would he choose to placate the powerful at the expense of the poor?

I suspect the answer may have something to do with Bauer's other affiliations.

Bauer was a founding member of the Project for a New American Century, the Beltway camarilla that was the womb in which the Iraq war gestated for several years. He is on the board of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a group that wishes to organize the entire world around the nucleus of U.S.-Israeli military domination.

A similar ambition animates the Jerusalem Summit, an organization on whose international advisory board sits the same Gary Bauer. The Jerusalem Summit's chief objective is to create an Israel-centered, armed "League of Democracies." That proposal that has been taken up by John McCain, the deranged, senescent, foul-mouthed adulterer who won the endorsement of James Dobson -- the country's foremost self-appointed Christian family counselor -- by convincing a mother of five children, including a newborn infant with a serious handicap, to forsake home and hearth for the vice presidential hustings.

Like too many "Christian" Right leaders, Dobson and Bauer are devout servants of the War Machine, which cannot operate without the fiat money system inflicted on our nation in 1913. They profess to worship Christ, while serving Mars and Mammon. That may explain the double-mindedness displayed by Bauer and West in their homily in support of the post-Housing Bubble Heist.

On sale now!

Dum spiro, pugno!


Anonymous said...

typo: "wouyld"


Note: I recommend Decoding Da Vinci presented by Voddie Baucham for a very good answer to "Why do you believe the Bible?" It is on YouTube.

William N. Grigg said...

Thanks for both the editorial help, and the video recommendation!

Anonymous said...

I loath John McCain for a variety of reasons (arrogance, berilligerence, & stupidity for 3)...but is having a violent temper and a foul mouth really that bad...I'd hate to think I'm disqualified from your open support for public office should I ever run - for 2 such minor foibles.....

Anonymous said...

AP had an article yesterday stating that the FED pumped in another $600 billion into the economy. This despite the vote to not give out $700 billion (at a time). I suspect that this was done to show Congress that it doesn't need their permission and to make the situation worse so that voting against the bailout would appear to be the cause.

Can someone tell me again what Congress is good for?!?

Great article, as usual.


Anonymous said...

The word "however" ranks right up there with "normally". How often have you heard politicians say things like "I'm in favor of free markets however..." No matter how irrefutable the concept rest assured that it can be twisted, diluted or abandoned completely if politicians find it politically expedient to do so. Ron Paul appears to be the only exception and that is what makes him so outstanding.

Anonymous said...

I too read that Bush via the Fed pumped $630 billion before the vote in Congress was even in.

What a dog and pony show. Makes no difference what Congress does, Bush will have his way. Congress is just there for the sake of looking like something is "being done"

I long ago gave up the Dobson propaganda hour. I have given up on my "Dobson hero", "bible based", church. I find few who beleive that torture and killing innocents is wrong.

John McCain left 1200 POWs in Vietnam and said that everyone was out. He then later wrote legislation to block anyone for further investigation. A wonderful Christian.

Greg said...

I once appreciated Dobson and Bauer, and in fact have supported both financially from time to time.

With Dobson, I believe he changed, he was once a voice of sanity for the family, but is no longer.

With Bauer, it was I who changed, when I learned what liberty really meant.


Anonymous said...

Please, for the love of God, pull that ANP video link! I have to scroll down to the previous article to silence it.

William N. Grigg said...

I'm genuinely sorry I left the matter of the ANP link unattended for so long.

Mimi said...

Truly a wise and thoroughly perceptive post. Your blog is one of my favorites--thanks for today's, in particular. As for McCain, maybe his personal foibles aren't as important as the fact that the fundamentalists have embraced him. I just can't understand that, considering he blatantly cheated on his first wife to pursue current one, Cindy.

Anonymous said...

I think that it is at least possible you are being unfair to Dr. Dosbson. It's possible that he is ignorant and well intentioned like so many other Christians out there, and he is taking the "lesser of two evils" approach. I know too many ignorant people who support John McCain, but are more like Ron Paul in their actual politics. They are busy, productive people who don't like the overt socialism, strident pro-abortionism, gun banning, homosexual celebrating rhetoric of the Democrats they see on NBC, but don't ever learn enough to realize how evil the Republicans actually are.

Anonymous said...

And David Ramsey comes out with a nonsensical "plan". Ack.

Anonymous said...

I love the article and the perspective. I've tended to be a Dobson sycophant in the past, especially as I try and follow Christ. But your blog and other Christians with your perspective let me know that it is actually ok to disagree with Dobson. I know it sounds silly, but such is the influence of Dobson and his ilk. A recovering former military officer, I'm only recently discovering that allegiance to Christ doesn't require allegiance to the State and its Military. Blogs like yours are helping provide the intellectual base that will foment a return to TRUE conservative constitutional principles. Thanks so much for the always timely and cogent analysis of the issues.

Anonymous said...

Dear Will,

A great article. Makes me mad. I hope it makes everyone else mad too.

Normally, bloodsuckers like Bauer, Dobson, West, Paulson, Bernanke et.al. would be arrested and sent to jail for their thefts and extortions committed behind the smokescreen of "religion" or "public service." In prison, normally, their soft white backsides would attract a wide circle of acolytes eager to worship at their holy shrines.

What a satisfying outcome (so to speak) that would normally be for us untermenschen.

However, "religion" is just politics by another name, i.e. another circus provided by the overlords to distract the populace while their wallets are being lifted. Same everywhere - Christianity, Islam, Judaism - all the same.

As for West, just look at him - loose fat pink lips, thin neck, kinky red hair, watery dead pale blue eyes - this creature (whom I googled and could find no background on) is a Khazarian Jew. No doubt about it. He is bamboozling the blogsite he writes for by posing as a Christian, but his genetics give him away.

These Jesus freaks and their Jewish fellow-leeches - I watch their antics and cannot help asking - which one is using whom? There is no honor among thieves.

There is a nice limerick:

There was a gay man of Khartoum,
Took a lesbian up to his room.
But they spent the whole night in having a fight,
Over who should do what, and to whom.

That describes the fundamentalists and their Jewish cohorts - which of them is doing it and to which of them it is being done is hard to figure out.

Amusing, really, if they were not both of them robbing us blind.

Kind regards,
Lemuel Gulliver.

The Militant Pacifist said...

I now believe this is typical of the FoF leadership.

Political power is a razzle-dazzle that few can resist.

I opined about it awhile back at Are you okay friend?.

As usual, a great piece of writing Mr. Grigg.

Anonymous said...

Zach writes:

"I know too many ignorant people who support John McCain, but are more like Ron Paul in their actual politics. They are busy, productive people who don't like the overt socialism, strident pro-abortionism, gun banning, homosexual celebrating rhetoric of the Democrats they see on NBC, but don't ever learn enough to realize how evil the Republicans actually are."

This shallowness and mental laziness is the hallmark of America's evangelical subculture, which is always implicitly (and often overtly) authoritarian and anti-intellectual. When it comes to politics, I observe that most churches diligently reinforce the habits of servility and willful ignorance inculcated by the state schools. They are not places where the Christian mind can grow in grace, except within three permissible realms of discussion (which I like to call the Iron Triangle): home, church, and workplace.

Profound, honest Christian political thinking must take place outside of the churches, where its expressions cannot be stifled, or cleverly sidetracked into irrelevance with recitations of pious sounding bromides.

Anonymous said...

Focus on the Family receives a large amount of money from the Prince family - owner/founder of Blackwater. That in large part explains his unabashed support for all neocon Empire building. Follow the money it always leads to the roaches and rats.

William N. Grigg said...

Anonymous @ 11:18 AM --

As my hero Spenser would put it, "Ho-HA!" (That's his amalgam of "Ah-HA!" and "Oh-HO!" when he stumbles across a really important clue.)

How utterly dense I've been not to be looking into that obvious connection. Thanks so much for compensating for my mental lapse.It's good to associate with so many terribly bright and commendably cynical people.

Anonymous said...

The only recorded violence
committed by Jesus
(using a homemade weapon no less)
was when he drove the moneychangers
out of the Temple.

Even the Lord has a special hatred
for thieves.

Anonymous said...


There are exposes about Dobson and his enterprise on the web if you go looking. Above is one of them.
Years ago I listened to a tape by a man who had been employed by FOF. He wrote about his experiences. The above URL is another. Dobson is not a theologian, he is a psycho-babbler.

Anonymous said...

"Normally" -- as cliched as "but under the circumstances."

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Dobsons and Bauers would crucify the Klintonz for such situational ethics.

Anonymous said...

Lemuel Gulliver wrote: "However, "religion" is just politics by another name, i.e. another circus provided by the overlords to distract the populace while their wallets are being lifted."

While I often take issues with Lemuel's positions and I know Will's (and many who follow his work) disposition towards religion, I have to say it is refreshing to see someone else express this position. I usually characterize gov't as the bastard stepchild of religion as I view it from a purely historical/anthropological perspective. And, I suppose keeping with that theme that even a stopped clock is correct twice a day - Marx wrote "religion is the opiate of the masses"; probably one of the few things he got right.

Every now and then the plunderbund reveals a nugget of truth . . .

The only good bureaucrat/gov't employee is one who is stretching a rope (and for the greenies out there - rope is re-usable).

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Mister Spock said...

If ANYONE personifies the word weasel, it's Gary Bauer.

Anonymous said...

How low can you go when even "comedian" Pauly Shore refers to Gary Bauer as a weasel!

Anonymous said...

"The Paulson Plan simply proposed to sever the one thin, fraying thread of accountability still connecting the economic elite to the people it is plundering. That thread is Congress's constitutional role in appropriating funds and overseeing the executive branch personnel who spend them."
Excellently said.

liberranter said...

This shallowness and mental laziness is the hallmark of America's evangelical subculture, which is always implicitly (and often overtly) authoritarian and anti-intellectual. When it comes to politics, I observe that most churches diligently reinforce the habits of servility and willful ignorance inculcated by the state schools. They are not places where the Christian mind can grow in grace, except within three permissible realms of discussion (which I like to call the Iron Triangle): home, church, and workplace.

Profound, honest Christian political thinking must take place outside of the churches, where its expressions cannot be stifled, or cleverly sidetracked into irrelevance with recitations of pious sounding bromides.


Beautifully and perfectly stated! One of the saddest and most exasperating experiences I find myself repeating on a regular basis is my attempt to get Reichschristians (my preferred name for those who are members of congregations that practice “the Great National Religion”, to borrow a Joe Sobran phrase) to wake up and realize the obvious - that these secular preachers of the State who have mesmerized and bamboozled them and who are co-opting the Christian faith are acting and speaking in a manner transparently contrary to Christ’s teachings as set forth in the Gospels, the very foundation of the Faith. The inevitable result is usually a combination of one or more of the following:

- Hysterical ranting that I am the devil’s spawn, damned to hell, or something to such effect (true, but beside the point in this case).

- A reflexive regurgitation of Romans 13, usually before my point even finishes exiting my mouth.

- A stream of ad hominem attacks accusing me of being a liberal/communist/socialist/pagan/raghead lover/traitor/[insert other pro forma epithet here], usually in some mutually exclusive combination.

- An abrupt refusal to even discuss the issue at all upon realizing that I disagree with the “evangelical” perspective, even though it was the individual himself that first launched the discussion of “Christian” politics. (This is by far the most common response).

- Sticking a finger in each ear and chanting “la-la-la-la-la!” at the top of the lungs. (Well, okay, I’m speaking figuratively here, but the effect is the same in the other four examples).

The conclusion that I find myself having to accept is that there are almost NO genuinely Christian churches in Ameri[k]a today (at least not among those that are formally organized and incorporated) that put the word of God firmly above temporal authority, as did the original First Century church. To find such a church today, one must drop in serendipitously on a private home on a Sunday morning in which a gathering of close friends and neighbors are studying the Word of God in an informal setting (hint: these people probably also home school their children, have stocked up on gold bullion and non-perishable food, and are probably on some DHS watch list), or travel to parts of the world where Christians are a violently persecuted minority without the backing of the temporal State to weaken and destroy their faith. A visit to any other congregation is akin to visiting a Reichskirche of 1930s Nazi Germany or a party-approved church in one of the Old Warsaw Pact nations or Maoist China; in other words, front organizations meant to entrap true believers as treasonous traitors to the secular regime or to inculcate the state-approved distortion of “Christianity” into the pliable masses. What the Emperor Constantine started almost exactly 1,700 years ago has just about reached its apex.

How ironic that the “false prophets” that so many evangelical “ministers” harangue about from the pulpit on a given Sunday morning will in the end turn out to be the people they see in the mirror each Sunday morning while putting on their Pierre Cardin suits.

May God save us in the end from such.

Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous @ 8:51 pm:

Glad you agree. Every religion has its examples, just like this below, but here is the origin of the corruption of the Christian religion:

In 319 AD the Emperor Constantine (mostly at the urging of his mother Helena, who had become a Christian) made Christianity the principal religion of the Empire. He did not ban other religions, (he was too astute a politician to make that mistake,) but announced his preference for Christianity.

In 325 AD he called a council of Christian bishops at Nicea, from which originated the Nicene Creed. There were some 50 churches in the Roman world, (Corinth, Ephesus, Antioch, Damascus, Rome, etc. etc,) which for 300 years had had very little contact with each other - travel was difficult and dangerous, and so their beliefs had diverged widely over three centuries. (I'll cite a notable example of this later.) Constantine said to the churches: "If this is going to be the state religion, it has to be the same everywhere in the Empire, so you have to agree on a common belief."

So the Council assembled - about 40 to 50 bishops, (who were usually elected by the faithful in their own region - there was no central church in Rome, remember,) each bishop attended by an entourage of theologians, scribes, philosophers, and personal servants - probably some 500-600 people altogether. The council lasted for several months, about 4-6 months in all. Some arrived late, and some left early, so the time span and numbers are not exactly determinable.

During that time, Constantine would come down from Constantinople every 2-3 weeks to visit and check on progress. He would ask what they had decided, and pass comment: "Yes, I like that. No, I think you should reconsider this, please go back and discuss it some more," and so on. This was the Emperor speaking. The bishops were heavily influenced by his wishes, especially since the days of persecution and oppression were so recent. So much so that we might as well call the result "Constant-inanity" instead of "Christ-ianity."

Here is an example of the result: The belief in the reincarnation of the soul was widely held among the Christian churches of the ancient world. At Nicea, this doctrine lost by TWO votes. Just two! Otherwise, like the Buddhists, Christians would today believe in reincarnation. Whether it is a correct belief or not I cannot say - it is up to you to decide for yourself.

When the Council was done, they had not only formalized the Christain dogma, they had also selected a canon of Scripture for the Old and New Testaments. Hundreds of books were rejected by the bishops and their advisers, and orders went out from the Emperor that on pain of death, all copies of those books should be destroyed. There were no printing presses in those days - books were written out by hand, and few people could read and write - only professional scribes - and so when the handful of extant copies of a book were burned, it was gone. Forever.

By accident, one trove of a few of those books was rediscovered at Nag Hammadi in Egypt several years ago, a trove which had been buried instead of being burned. Scholars are still studying them. They include the Gospels of Thomas, Philip, Judas, Mary, James, and many others of Jesus' disciples whose recollections and words had been collected by their followers. Some of them were known to exist from a page or a fragment of a page which had survived elsewhere, but for the first time at Nag Hammadi we had complete or nearly complete texts of those gospels.

And if you study old copies of the official Nicene New Testament, from the fourth century, the sixth, the ninth, the twelfth, which still exist in some numbers, you will see a progression of additions and deletions over the centuries, as copyists decided they should change a word or leave out a phrase, or that some parable or story needed to be expanded for dramatic effect.

That alone is an extraordinary study. It appears that in the earliest copies of the Gospels there is no explicit claim that Christ was resurrected from the dead. The disappearance of his body is left as a mystery. The whole story of Doubting Thomas and the visions of Jesus after his death were added later. Put that in the Pope's pipe and let him smoke it.

Even so, if you know what to look for, the truths of Jesus' teachings are all still there in the New Testament, in all their beauty and power, in spite of all the efforts by the priests, theologians, and politicians over the centuries to edit them out or expand upon them to suit their needs: Controlling the faithful masses, keeping them docile in their misery, and bilking them of their money.

Lemuel Gulliver.

Unknown said...


I find it terribly interesting that the Church which has historically been most maligned as attempting to wed politics and religion is the one organized Church in America (and the world) that still officially preaches an independence from the state. True, there are many Catholics (sadly, far too many) whose allegiance is still swayed by their training as good citizen subjects of the secular government. But there is, at the same time, a crying out within the Catholic Church that something is horribly wrong with the current state of the world. The Church hierarchy, which has been consistently accused of being an evil power, is in many ways the one voice of religious reason left - calling for peace, for liberty, for an end to pointless wars and hideous crimes against the right to life. The Catholic Church is not necessarily a libertarian voice, but there is much wisdom in her teachings. There is much to be said for the idea that Charity should drive our every action, that life should be respected, whether it be the life of an unborn child, a handicapped grandmother, or an innocent Muslim civilian. There is something to be said for that.

Anonymous said...


So you know about Constantine. I just wrote an exposition for the enlightenment of the intellectually curious.

Your words:"....there are almost NO genuinely Christian churches in Ameri[k]a today (at least not among those that are formally organized and incorporated)..."

...put me in mind of one of the French Enlightenment philosophers (I do not know which one, and if anyone can give me the name I would be most greateful...perhaps Voltaire?) who pithily said:

"Dans toute l'histoire, il y avait un seul vrai Chretien, et il etait un Juif."

"In all of history, there has only ever been one true Christian - and He was a Jew."

Long live the French sense of humor.
- Lemuel Gulliver

Anonymous said...


Please do not take my discussion of the Council of Nicea as a criticism of the Catholic Church, which you obvioulsy love deeply. I happen to agree with you 100%. Of all the Christian sects, the Roman Catholic Church (and the Greek Orthodox Church too, but less so) are the only real, genuine, serious Christian churches in existence. The rest are all touchy-feely secular organizations led by dweebs, emotional cripples and intellectual gymnasts trying to decide for themselves what it was God was saying to them when they were having a conversation with their reflection in the mirror that morning while shaving.

The Catholic Church is magnificent and a real force for goodness and holiness in this mad, mad, mad, mad, mad world.

Lemuel Gulliver.

Unknown said...


Thank you for that. I am not a historical scholar... history is merely a hobby of mine, and Church history is something into which I have not yet been able to delve. Therefore, I can't say anything to your discussion of the council of Nicea other than what you must already know, which is that I doubt many of your premises and conclusions and prefer to err, for the nonce, on the side of the teaching authority and tradition of the Church. That of course will seem foolish to many, let it appear so.


Anonymous said...

Excellent interview on Scott Horton's show, Will. I'll second the suggestion of one of the commentors on his site (www.thestressblog.com)

" John Delano posted the following on October 1, 2008 at 4:17 am.

Grigg should do his own podcast. Tell him I suggested it. I guess that would mean even more competition for you, Scott."

Here's a link to the interview for folks that missed it:




Great job Will, keep it up!

Anonymous said...

Thank you for this wonderful blog! Erudite, insightful, essential!

D. Braybrooke

Anonymous said...

Joe Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock (MADE IN JAPAN) for 6 a.m. While his coffeepot (MADE IN CHINA) was perking, he shaved with his electric razor (MADE IN HONG KONG). He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE) and tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA).

After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA) he sat down with his calculator (MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA) he got in his car (MADE IN GERMANY) and continued his search for a good paying AMERICAN JOB.

At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day, Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL) poured himself a glass of wine (MADE IN FRANCE) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA), and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in.....AMERICA.....

Anonymous said...

Joe Sixpack cannot find a good job in America because, Joe Neckbone, protectionism doesn't work. It is ridiculous to suggest that Americans should be sewing shoes together when it is more economically profitable for everyone (foreign workers and Americans, who benefit from lower prices and freed capital.)

To support protectionism is to subsidize shoddy workmanship. Harley-Davidson, Ford, GM, all have been bailed out by the Federal government in one form or another, whether through money forcibly taken by the government to prop them up and reward their poor quality work and ameliorate the market's rejection of their products, or through tariffs, to artificially prop up "demand" by ensuring higher-quality foreign imports had higher prices. I feel bad for those who lose their jobs overseas due to technological advances in the U.S. and other countries, on one hand. On the other hand, would you have been one of the people who lamented the passing of whale-oil hunters whose profession disappeared with the advent of petroleum products? Knowing what you know now, would you detest the invention of the light bulb, because gas and kerosene lampmakers were put out of business? Do you lament the passage of the wagon wheel maker, who was bankrupted when the automobile came along? All of these professions became economically impossible due to technological advances made possible through education and innovation. We are witnessing the same phenomenon in the international sphere.

I'm not seeing huge breadlines due to Indonesians having taken upon themselves the task of sewing Fruit of the Looms. The nation is not experiencing tremendous unemployment due to a lack of Skechers factories in the U.S. Labor that is laid off will eventually find new work in other fields: services that Americans actually demand here and now.

I buy products based upon a combination of my need, and the price and quality of said products. I do not buy products based upon the nationality or color of the skin of a product's manufacturers.

I think it is racist and patronizing to support a company whose products are inferior, solely because the manufacturers happen to be American. You may have some other rationale for "buying American." I don't see it. Such a personal policy is nationalistic and economically foolish.

-Sans Authoritas

Anonymous said...

Liberranter writes:

"The inevitable result is usually a combination of one or more of the following:

- Hysterical ranting that I am the devil’s spawn, damned to hell, or something to such effect (true, but beside the point in this case).

- A reflexive regurgitation of Romans 13, usually before my point even finishes exiting my mouth.

- A stream of ad hominem attacks accusing me of being a liberal/communist/socialist/pagan/raghead lover/traitor/[insert other pro forma epithet here], usually in some mutually exclusive combination."

Yeah, those are the common, blood-and-iron tirades and catechisms. But I've also encountered effeminate reactions of the postmodernist/gnostic variety: "We cannot know what is really going on the world. Only our President knows, because he has access to secret knowledge from the intelligence services. If he launches wars or claims vast powers, then we must assume these measures are for our own good."

Anonymous said...

"The Catholic Church is magnificent and a force for goodness ande holiness..." One hardly knows whether to cry or laugh at such an uninformed and fantastic claim. Shall we trot out the sodomite Bishop of the diocese of the area where I live as a fine example to bolster your claim? Shall we interview the hundreds of molested altar boys to have them support your claim? Why not let's all assemble for the annual Altar Boy run at St Pedophila's Church?! And these references are of course limited to the mid to late 20th century. The Catholic Church that is fictionally depicted in films like "Becket" or "Shoes of the Fisherman" never has, and never will, exist.

Anonymous said...

anon 5:48
Thanks. I just didn't have the energy to write what you did. I also know it's a waste of time to try to make them face the truth. But thanks.

liberranter said...

Anonymous 6:21 said:

I also know it's a waste of time to try to make them face the truth.

That's the most important life lesson I've learned in the last eight years. I now just walk away from any incipient discussion of "Christianity" and Ameri[k]an politics. It's a time-wasting, soul-rending exercise in futility of which nothing good ever comes.

Anonymous said...

Many may not know that the IRS has
threatened every Church in America
with tax evasion should they engage
in political speech from behind the

Of course the Church should resist
but not at the risk of silencing
the Gospel.

America is now a country which
suppresses the true exercise of
religious faith. The Saints are
not being properly prepared to
face a state that will not be
seconded even by Christ Himself.

Those of you who smear the Church
are only playing along with the
powers and principalities you
profess to abhor but are instead
complicit with those same powers
in the work of scattering and
destroying the blessings of God.

Slander the Church if you wish,
but don't forget who it is that
you are really criticizing.

Hebrews 10:31
It is a fearful thing to fall into
the hands of the living God.

Anonymous said...

Slandering the Church is not the same as exposing the false church.

Anonymous said...

To correct and rebuke, yes.
Exposing the hypocrisy of its
leaders, yes.

Doubting or judging the worth of
those who gather (under any
denominational title) who profess
the name of Christ, no.

Acts 19:15
And the evil spirit answered and said, “Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?”

Anonymous said...

Will Blalock writes:

"Many may not know that the IRS has
threatened every Church in America
with tax evasion should they engage
in political speech from behind the

Of course the Church should resist
but not at the risk of silencing
the Gospel."

The government cannot silence the Gospel. At worst it can persecute Christians, but the good news of Jesus will go forth all the same. There is certainly the risk of losing status with Caesar and/or your caesarist church congregation, but that is a different matter.

R.S. Ladwig said...

Since comming to a more Libertarian/Constitutional view of government I have certainly felt out of place in much of the Church. It grieves me to no end to hear Christians defend the war, torture, and now pilfering for "stability". I sincerly believe the ax needs to be laid to the root of the tree of this false lef v. right paradigm, until that is shattered people will continue to engage in cognitive dissonance.

For example when I mention torture, people who are trapped in the false 2 party mindset either say "there is no torture going on...we don't do that, that's lefty propaganda" Or, they say, "Well, water boarding isn't torture, it's enhanced interragation..."

It's one thing to hear John Q Public say such rubbish and delude themselves, it is another level altogether of grief to hear my brothers in Christ put their Christian ethic in Schaeffer's "upper story" and approve the unconscienable.

Excellent post as usual William. BTW at Infowars there is an article/interview with a congressman who has stated that if they don't pass the bailout he has been told the markey will plunge 3000 points and martial law will be declared.

Anonymous said...

I know it's pointless but...The Bible already informed us that many will claim to be Christians but they will not actually be Christians. The LORD will tell them, " Depart. I never knew you." There is a large apostasy, a falling away. Not just leaders are part of the apostasy. Many of their followers are also.

Anonymous said...

Jesus said "It must needs be that scandals come, but woe to him by whom they come." Are there pedophiles (if you call men who go after 16-year old boys "pedophiles," and not homosexuals) who have high positions in the Church? Absolutely. Did Jesus choose Judas as a disciple? Yes, yes he did. Did he approve of what he did? Absolutely not. Has the Church as an institution ever approved of taking advantage of young boys (or girls?) Absolutely not.

It was Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen who said, "The fact that the world is a thousand times more scandalized when a Catholic does something wrong is only proof that the world expected so much more."

I apologize for those who have committed heinous acts. The molesters should have been (and should still be) strung up from the highest trees, as they have proven themselves grave and immediate threats to innocent human beings. So should the bishops who shuffled them from parish to parish. It disgusts me that anyone could defend the actions of either the molesters or the Bishops. Their actions are not, nor have they ever been, in accord with the teachings of Jesus Christ or of His Church.

Despite the horrible heresies and scandals that plague her, I am still a faithful member of the Catholic Church. Just because some of her members failed horribly to uphold even the most basic teachings of the Church does not mean that these teachings of the Church do not exist or are not worth believing in and worth upholding.

-Sans Authoritas

Anonymous said...

Dear Will and Friends,

Let's try and resolve some of this religious discussion. It is all very Christo-centric, even though Christianity is the religion of only about 20% of the world's population, so let's talk about that religion specifically.

I talked a bit - only a bit - about the Council of Nicea. The problem is, once you tell a lie, you have to keep adding more and more lies to justify the earlier ones, until you have a house of cards which outrages the common sense of anyone with half a brain in their head.

So the lies and distortions of Christ's pure teaching which were introduced at Nicea have compounded over 1,700 years until today it has resulted in millions of people rejecting what they are TOLD is Christ's teaching, because in this day and age of scientific rationality, it makes no sense.

Why is there evil in this world? The Church has no answer.

What happens to all the good people in China who never had the opportunity to hear Christ's word? The Church has no answer.

How are we supposed to follow a Church leadership which on the one hand tells us it holds the keys to salvation, and on the other are pedophiles and practicers of incest? The Church has no answer.

(And I do not just mean the Catholic Church. There are scores of evangelistic Christian preachers whose souls are marinated in evil and whose works are darkness upon darkness, sheer evil incarnate.)

Let me pose a question which the secularists can understand: Considering what George Bush, Alberto Gonzales, and Dick Cheney have done to the Constitution of the United States, should we condemn the Constitution and tear it up?

I think they would say not.

Then, considering what the many Christian Churches have done to the original teachings of Jesus, should we condemn those teachings as nonsense and throw them out?

Ah so.

It is my firm belief and hope, which I will not live to see fulfilled, that about 100-200 years from now, science will progress to the point where much of what we are now taught as religion will become science and be accepted as normal everyday laws of physics. And much of the fantasy mumbo-jumbo of religion will be completely discredited and purified by a rediscovery of the truth.

There IS a God. But it is NOT anything like what we have been told. It is not a person, or a spirit, or a man with a beard on a golden throne with a fistful of thunderbolts. In every age of mankind, and in every heart, we create God in our own image. But that is not what it is. It is the whole universe of multiple dimensions, which is infinitely vaster than the immensely vast universe we can see with our radiotelescopes, which itself cannot be described, and of which we know about as much as if we knew one grain of sand on one beach in one corner of the globe.

Quantum physics tels us there are many dimensions beyond this one. I could prove it to you with a piece of string, a piece of paper and a balloon, but space does not allow me to go into it here. If you try to measure or detect phenomena in a fourth dimension (plus time) with instruments which exist only in three dimensions (plus time) you are doomed to fail. It simply cannot be done.

Yet, God exists. Yet, Jesus knew this. Yet, he tried to tell a group of uneducated Jews in a corner of ancient Palestine about the multidimensional Universe. ("In my father's house are many mansions.") Yet, it was obviously impossible. Then, He died. How He died is actually unimportant. Then along came thousands of people who never saw Him, never heard Him speak, never were able to ask Him a question to try to resolve their confusions, but who, nevertheless, were quite convinced they had all the answers.

Puts me in mind of George W. Bush. My goodness, he would have made an excellent evangelist for the Christian faith, had he lived back in the first century.

And then, THREE HUNDRED and twenty-five years later, you have the Council of Nicea, overseen by - of all people - a Roman Emperor. George Bush gone wild.

You expect any truth to come out of THAT?

Yet, miracle of miracles, since they did not understand what they were doing, in their quest for untruth they failed to excise from the written record most of the truths that Jesus spoke. Too funny! Actually, from my observations over a long life, I believe God does also have a sense of humor. (Witness the current events on Wall Street.)

To all, both the believers or followers of whichever human being they have fastened their hopes upon, and those who have used their common sense and rejected so-called Christianity, I offer the words of Jesus, which are true for all of us always and everywhere, even for the Chinaman or the Arab: "Rejoice - the kingdom of heaven is within you."

There is no effort in life more rewarding than seeking the meaning and truth of those words. It will be like peeling an onion - there is layer upon layer of truth to discover - except that the tears you cry at each stage will be tears of joy, not a reaction to sufur dioxide.

Those latter tears are the tears George Bush will cry, when he reaches his final destination.*

Kind regards to all,
Lemuel Gulliver.

*(PS: The closer you come to God, the harder the world makes you laugh....Satan cannot stand humor.)

Anonymous said...

Dear Sans Authoritas @ 7:26 PM:

You say: "Joe Sixpack cannot find a good job in America because, Joe Neckbone, protectionism doesn't work. It is ridiculous to suggest that Americans should be sewing shoes together when it is more economically profitable for everyone (foreign workers and Americans, who benefit from lower prices and freed capital.) To support protectionism is to subsidize shoddy workmanship."

Let me give you an example, which will explain the free-trade fallacy.

I used to work 3 years ago in Chantilly, Virginia, with a Chinese girl of about 27 years old, who was the unmarried daughter of a retired general in the Red Army. She grew up a child of privelige in Beijing, going to the same school as the children of the Party leaders, driven there each day in a chauffeured limousine.

Deng Xiao Ping once came to her school to speak, because his son was a student, and actually spoke to her, asking her what was meant by being a Monday Morning Quarterback - showing off his knowledge of collquial English.

She told me that in these present days, once a year, when the census takers come with their clipboards to every house or apartment in Beijing to see who lives there, her parents would say she was away visiting an aunt in another province, never letting on that she was abroad working in America, because then she would lose her right of residency in Beijing, and to recover that would cost $100,000. That is US Dollars. Not Yuan or Renminbi. One Hundred Thousand.

Her father being the person who he was, I suspect the census takers were not fooled but went along with the lie.

In China, you cannot just pick yourself up and move to wherever you can get a job. It is forbidden. You must be a resident there, or buy your way in.

Now, she told me, there are businessmen who want, say, to open a factory with 300 workers in Shanghai making pencil sharpeners. They bribe the city government to give them 300 residency permits to import 300 workers from the far provinces to the city. Those workers cannot leave and get another job - they can only work in the factory where they have permission to work. They are paid about 300 yuan - about $35 dollars US, a month.


Sometimes, they are not paid at all, but their wages are withheld for months and they are just given IOU's instead.

She told me, her sister works in Beijing for Federal Express - a fabulous job by Chinese standards, and earns 3,000 yuan a month - all of $350 a month. $4,200 a year.

Note, please, that this is the priveliged daughter of a high general in the Red Army, whose position was so powerful that he actually had two daughters, in spite of China's one-child policy.

She then said, her sister prefers to go out for lunch, even though it is provided free in the FedEx company cafeteria. I said, Free? She said yes, in China, every company feeds it workers three meals a day for free, but the food is not very good. Ah so, I said.

She then told me, if those factory workers nominally earning $35 a month should despair of ever actually getting their pay, and decide to go back home to their village, the factory owner will call the police, and say, this worker owes me for their meals, for their uniform, for their lodging (three to a bed) and has run away. The police will stake out the train stations and the bus stations and seize the runaway worker and bring him back to work, where he will be docked several weeks pay (on account) for having cost the owner all that money to have him apprehended and returned to work.

It is, if you will, virtual slavery, at slave wages.

Now you understand the Chinese economic "miracle" and how you can buy goods so much cheaper when they are made in glorious China.

Now you understand why Chinese firms put ethylene glycol in toothpaste (killing 150 people in Panama) or melamine in pet food, (killing 35,000 pets in America) or lead paint on children's toys (sickening God knows how many thousands of kids in America) and melamine in milk, which finds its way into everything from chocolates in Britain to cookies in Australia, (therby causing irreparable kidney damage to tens of thousands - perhaps 100,000, nobody knows for sure - of babies.)

It saves a penny or two.

It is glorious Republican greed gone insane. Who cares if factory workers commit suicide, despairing of ever seeing their family and their village again, if the plutocrat with his Rolex watch and Mercedes limousine in his multi-million-dollar gated apartment complex can make one more penny?

Who cares if a thousand people die, just so he can make another quarter? Who cares about the pets, or the babies, or the mothers and sisters, if a nickel or even a penny more can be made here or there?

I do not think, when Adam Smith or Ricky Ricardo (or whichever economic theorist was demonstrating the benefits of free trade) made his calculations, that he was anticipating that one nation would have a tangible cost of manufacture and the other would have none. Slavery was not part of his calculations.

Enjoy your cheap free-trade goods, and ponder the cost in misery, despair, suicide and disease which brought you that savings. Be like the powdered lady of the cotton plantation, blithely playing Chopin on her grand piano in the great house, while the slaves were flogged to death and had their children taken away like litters of puppies and sold into slavery, all to buy her sheet music.

Sweet dreams, dear sir. Sleep well tonight.

Yours sincerely,
Lemuel Gulliver.

Anonymous said...

Lemuel, first, as for why there is evil in the world? C.S. Lewis answered that quite well. Essentially, there is creation. God chose to fill it with beings like himself: beings able to know and love. You cannot love if you are not free. Free will in a created being requires the ability to choose evil. Otherwise, we'd be robots. We would not love. We would not choose.

Evil itself makes no sense, does it? Evil is not a thing. It is the absence of a thing. The absence of a due good. Evil and sin do NOT make sense. To commit a sin is truly a form of insanity: failing to see things for they way they really are. You want to try to make sense of evil? It is impossible. People cannot do evil for evil's sake. It is an ontological impossibility. Humans can only do evil if they perceive it as a good. Because it pleases them to do something. Or because they think they benefit temporally.

As for what happens to the people anywhere who never heard Christ's word? I don't know why you think "there is no answer." The Church is very clear on this topic. The Catholic Catechism states: "Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation."

As for how we can listen to men who speak the truth, yet sin themselves? Really? Do you need me to elaborate on this point? Jesus himself said of the Pharisees, "Therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it; but do not do as they do, for they do not practice what they teach." Jesus was telling men to follow the truth, from whatsoever mouth it was uttered. It is not necessary for a man to be holy to utter truth that is worthy to be followed.

I am an anarcho-capitalist, and as such, I believe that no man has the right to initiate violence against any other man. But even I know that when Karl Marx spoke truths, or when any other villain spoke truths, they did not become less true because of the source of the statement, or because the speaker did not live in accordance with his own words. Truth cannot contradict truth.

Now, I challenge you to scientifically/logically disprove the idea that Christ was the Son of God and that He established one Church through which he desired all men to achieve salvation.

-Sans Authoritas

Anonymous said...

As for the Chinese? I did not say anything about how it was wrong to refuse to buy from China because of the disgusting government officials who rape the well-being of the people over whom they lord it over. But I will now.

First, it is no more morally evil to manufacture steel that will eventually be used to manufacture an Abrams tank that will decimate a civilian house than it is to buy products from China. The amount of cooperation is remote and minimal. The source of evil in China is not the fact that goods are made with slave labor. The source of evil in China is evil people. Their evil will never, ever be changed by refusing to buy their products. Do you suppose their government cadre suffers because you don't buy something from their country? Really? Could Saddam Hussein himself not afford to stuff a few more walls with millions of dollars and buy solid gold urinals because of U.S. embargoes? Did Fidel Castro abandon his animalistic tendencies because the U.S. refuses to trade with the people over which he lords his power? The answer to all of the above is a resounding "No!" It is the PEOPLE who suffer, and it is not because the people of another land choose to buy the products which they produce. It is because their overlords are evil. And that evil will not be suppressed by economic sanctions. A quick glance at the starving state of North Korea should dispel any lingering doubts of that fact rather quickly.

Your concept of people's economic freedom through refusing to trade with them due to evil rulers has a key pre-requisite: that the rulers of the enslaved people actually give a damn about the people over whom they rule. It is evident to all sane people that those animals do not, in fact, give even a half a damn about the people over whom they rule.

Your refusal to purchase products from China not only does nothing to alleviate their political status, it also condemns them to starvation. I shall be sleep well tonight, sir. Not because people in China are slaving to produce inexpensive products, but because every time I purchase one of those poor laborer's products, I give them half a chance at making their lives a little better.

-Sans Authoritas


Unknown said...

Have you seen Gary's "We're All Going to Die" video?

Yes! The Islamo-fascists (Men Who Worship Death) are planning to dirty-bomb a city and kill millions, as was secretly revealed to members of the Senate (and Gary Haman, who has a seat at the Queen's Banquet.)

God cannot save us from our enemies, the Islamo-fascist Men Who Worship Death. McCain is the only one who can help us now, says Gary. . .

Anonymous said...

Go figure, Dobson. Yet he has DVD's that spell out government as our forefathers saw it. From individuals up with a small government. No Federal Reserve mention tho. Probably more education needed from a loving guiding hand.

Christians learn like everyone else. Minus the church. Since most churches will not enter politics at all, for fear of church and state. They are just more self independent people so they want to do more for themselves and lean Republican for fiscal.

I wonder what is going to be said when in the near future more and more move to Democrats as enviromental and social concerns pick up by evangelicals. The movement has started in the young people and universities.

Cause I see little to no contact from the libertarians explaining their view. Needs to start at the college. Who will answer, I know one Republican who went to Liberty University presenting Libertarian views. One, HoHa.

McCain, many evangelicals did not like him. Thought he was a Democrat in sheeps clothing. Palin sounded more conservative. So where does one go? When Libertarian has not been offered, and other mouths call them derogatory names.

It is called individual liberty for a reason. Judging each man where he stands. Group judging belongs to big government.

How many think they believe in liberty, but just sheeps clothing. Not much different then many churches.