Daily Archives: February 4, 2020

February—4 The Poor Man’s Evening Portion

And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age.—Luke 3:23.

How marvellous in all things are the ways of God to us! Was Jesus indeed in the world, and the world made by him, and the world knew him not? And did he remain hid away, and unknown, for the first thirty years of his life? Did the Son of God come on earth to do away sin by the sacrifice of himself, and yet enter not upon the full purpose of his mission until so large a portion of his life upon earth had passed away? O wonder-working God! how true is it, that thy ways are not our ways, nor thy thoughts our thoughts! Yet, my soul, though thy Jesus did not engage in his public ministry in the more open display of it by his miracles and preaching, yet surely those thirty years were of vast importance on the score of redemption. No doubt Jesus spent them in obedience to his Father’s law, manifesting a life of holiness and purity, suited and corresponding to the immaculate perfection of his nature, who did no sin, neither was “guile found in his mouth.” Convinced as I am, my honoured Lord, that the body thy Father gave thee, and thy human nature which thou didst assume for the purpose of salvation, was not produced in the ordinary method of generation, but by the miraculous influence of the Holy Ghost; so am I equally convinced that during the whole of thy life, from the manger to the cross, every act, and word, and thought of thine, manifested that thou wast holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. And shall I not then believe, that these thirty years were of some sweet, though to us secret importance, in thy covenant engagements as our surety? Can I suppose that the thirty years of my Redeemer’s life, before his being publicly made manifest to Israel, were spent in nothing in relation to the great work which he came purposely to do? Did not those seasons minister also to the cancelling the sin of his people, taking away the curse by bearing it, and by dying for it: and may we not suppose that God the Father had an eye to every minute act in the life of his dear Son, whom he had called to the work of salvation, and given as a covenant to his people, to be their head and mediator, their law-fulfiller and sin-offering? Precious Lord! silent as the Scriptures are on this great portion of thy life, yet is not their silence a call upon thy people to meditate on the subject? Give me grace, then, my honoured Lord, to be often contemplating the infinite condescension of Jesus in this part, as well as in others, in which thou must have “endured such a contradiction of sinners against thyself.” And let not this be the smallest improvement of this sweet and interesting view of my Lord, that when I call to mind how thy holy soul must have felt, during the thirty years, from the open displays of sin, in the blasphemies and daring defiances of God, the reproaches of the ungodly, and the torrent of evil all around, yet nothing stopped the gracious purposes of thine heart, in executing the errand on which thy whole mind was bent: “in dying, the just for the unjust, to bring sinners unto God.”[1]

 

[1] Hawker, R. (1845). The Poor Man’s Evening Portion (A New Edition, pp. 40–41). Philadelphia: Thomas Wardle.

February 4 Streams in the Desert

I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth.” (Isa. 58:14.)

THOSE who fly through the air in airships tell us that one of the first rules they learn is to turn their ship toward the wind, and fly against it. The wind lifts the ship up to higher heights. Where did they learn that? They learned it from the birds. If a bird is flying for pleasure, it goes with the wind. But if the bird meets danger, it turns right around and faces the wind, in order that it may rise higher; and It flies away towards the very sun.

Sufferings are God’s winds, His contrary winds, sometimes His strong winds. They are God’s hurricanes, but, they take human life and lift it to higher levels and toward God’s heavens.

You have seen in the summer time a day when the atmosphere was so oppressive that you could hardly breathe? But a cloud appeared on the western horizon and that cloud grew larger and threw out rich blessing for the world. The storm rose, lightning flashed and thunder pealed. The storm covered the world, and the atmosphere was cleansed; new life was in the air, and the world was changed.

Human life is worked out according to exactly the same principle. When the storm breaks the atmosphere is changed, clarified, filled with new life; and a part of heaven is brought down to earth.—Selected.

Obstacles ought to set us singing. The wind finds voice, not when rushing across the open sea, but when hindered by the outstretched arms of the pine trees, or broken by the fine strings of an Aeolian harp. Then it has songs of power and beauty. Set your freed soul sweeping across the obstacles of life, through grim forests of pain, against even the tiny hindrances and frets that love uses, and it, too, will find its singing voice.—Selected.

“Be like a bird that, halting in its flight,

Rests on a bough too slight.

And feeling it give way beneath him sings,

Knowing he hath wings.”[1]

 

[1] Cowman, L. B. (1925). Streams in the Desert (pp. 39–40). Los Angeles, CA: The Oriental Missionary Society.

How Do I Know God Loves Me? — The Blazing Center

How do we know if God loves us? Do we know he loves us when we have a nice house or a new car?

Do we know he loves us when we get a good job or good grades? Do we know he loves us because he gives us children or grandchildren? Or sunny days?

What if we don’t have these things? What if things aren’t going well for us? Are we sure that God loves us? If we lose our job does that mean God doesn’t love us? If we get sick or If things don’t go well with our children does that mean God doesn’t love us?

None of these things are proof that God loves us or doesn’t love us. There is only one unshakable unchanging way of knowing that God loves us. And that is that he gave his only Son to die for us while were sinners. While we were spiritually dead and blind, with no interest in or love for God at all.

Obviously John 3:16 is a good starting place:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

Obviously a fantastic verse. But maybe God gave his Son for us because we were so lovable. Nope. The Bible says God gave his son for us while we were sinners, living in rebellion against him, completely uninterested in him, with no desire to know or love him or to be saved.

It says in Ephesians 2:

But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— Ephesians 2:4-5

Our God was RICH in mercy to give his Son for us. And he gave Jesus for us because of his GREAT LOVE for us. His love was so great he made us alive together with Christ “even when we were DEAD in our trespasses.” Dead – we had no spiritual life at all. No interest in God. No love for God. No desire for him. All we loved was our trespasses. All we desired was our sin and our selfishness. There was no reason at all for God to love us, but he had such great love and mercy that he saved us by his grace and made us alive in Christ.

Now that is great love.

But not only did the Father love us so much that he gave his Son, but Jesus himself loved us.

I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. Galatians 2:20

Jesus couldn’t love us any more. His love for us is infinite. There could be no greater love than the love Jesus has for us. He himself said:

Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. John 15:13

And walk in love, as CHRIST LOVED US and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God. Ephesians 5:2

Not only did the Father love us, but Jesus loved us when we were lost, dead, and wrapped in the filth of our sin.

AND the Father and Jesus loved us LONG before we were even born.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ…Ephesians 1:3-5

God chose us in Christ before he created the world and “in LOVE he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ.”

Not only have the Father and Jesus loved us from all eternity, but nothing will ever be able to separate us from their love:

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it is written,

“For your sake we are being killed all the day long;

we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.”

No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 8:35-39

NOTHING will ever be able to separate us from God’s love in Christ. EVER.

Notice this passage says that we may go through tribulation and distress. We may go through persecution. We might experience famine or nakedness. Christians of all ages have experienced these things. But if we suffer, or are distressed, that will not mean that God has stopped loving us. If we lose our job or get sick that won’t mean God has ceased to love us.

We won’t always FEEL God’s love. If you don’t feel like God loves you, that doesn’t mean it’s true. Feelings are real, but they aren’t always the truth.

We have rock solid proof that God loves us because Jesus came to earth, demonstrated that he is God over and over again, died on the cross to pay for our sins because he loves us, then rose from the dead and was seen by all kinds of people over and over after he rose (1 Corinthians 15:3-11).

We have God’s word. God tells us again and again that he loves us in his Word, and God does not lie.

God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it? Numbers 23.19

God loves you and me. He tells us he loves us. He has demonstrated his love for us. And nothing will ever separate us from his love – whether we feel it or not. Believe God’s word. Thank him and praise him for his love. Rejoice in his love. And regularly call to mind his love:

But THIS I CALL TO MIND, and therefore I have hope: THE STEADFAST LOVE OF THE LORD NEVER CEASES;his mercies never come to an end; they are new every morning; great is your faithfulness. Lamentations 3:21-23

If you have believed in Jesus, and called upon him to be your Lord, God’s steadfast love for you will never cease!

via How Do I Know God Loves Me? — The Blazing Center

February 4th The D. L. Moody Year Book

From within, out the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness.—Mark 7:21, 22.

IF a man should advertise that he could take a correct photograph of people’s hearts, do you believe he would find any customers? There is not a man among us whom you could hire to have his photograph taken, if you could photograph the real man. We go to have our faces taken, and carefully arrange our toilet, and if the artist flatters us, we say, “Oh, yes, that’s a first-rate likeness,” and we pass it around among our friends. But let the real man be brought out, the photograph of the heart, and see if we will pass that around among our neighbors! Why, we would not want our own wives to see it! We would be frightened even to look at it ourselves.[1]

 

[1] Moody, D. L. (1900). The D. L. Moody Year Book: A Living Daily Message from the Words of D. L. Moody. (E. M. Fitt, Ed.) (pp. 28–29). East Northfield, MA: The Bookstore.

Donald Trump Snubs CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and Jake Tapper from State of the Union Preview Lunch

Traditionally, the president invites top journalists to an off-the-record lunch to talk about his goals for the State of the Union address.

Source: Donald Trump Snubs CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and Jake Tapper from State of the Union Preview Lunch

Hillary blames 2016 loss on Bernie Sanders

(WASHINGTON EXAMINER) — Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shifted blame for her loss against President Trump in the 2016 general election to Sen. Bernie Sanders. “There was no question about who was going to be the nominee,” Clinton said in an interview last week. “But unfortunately, you know, his campaign and his principal supporters were just very difficult and really, constantly not just attacking me but my supporters … it had an impact.” Clinton won the 2016 Democratic nomination for president following an acrimonious convention in which Sanders supporters loudly voiced displeasure with the former secretary of state.

Source: Hillary blames 2016 loss on Bernie Sanders

Does Alcoholics Anonymous really have “Christian” roots?

The Word Like Fire

When it comes to A.A.’s “Christian” roots, God’s people have been—to use a technical term—snookered.

Scripture is clear. We were never meant to be part of an all-gods religion. It is not “legalism” to point out that the Lord will absolutely not be seen as one higher power among many. It is not “legalistic” to state that His people are absolutely to remain separate from non-Christian spirituality. (2 Corinthians 6:14-17, Galatians 1:8-9, Isaiah 42:8, 1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 9-11, Matthew 10:32-36, 1 John 2:23, John 14:6)

We should no more participate in A.A. because of alcohol addiction than we should attend the Mormon church to get help with family issues.

Bluntly stated, many Christians have ended up with more faith in the power of the twelve-step program than in Jesus Christ. We have disobeyed the Scriptures, and we are bearing the consequences.

If ye love me, keep my commandments…

View original post 7 more words

NBC: Iowa Chaos ‘Wasn’t the Russians,’ Dems ‘Did It to Themselves’

On NBC’s Today show Tuesday morning, correspondent Cynthia McFadden seemed to mock Democrats for Monday night’s Iowa caucus debacle as she declared: “I think the headline is it wasn’t the Russians in this case. It appears to be the Democrats who did it to themselves.”

Source: NBC: Iowa Chaos ‘Wasn’t the Russians,’ Dems ‘Did It to Themselves’

McConnell Mocks ‘the Same Democrats Who Want to Take Over Everyone’s Healthcare’ for Botching Iowa Caucus — National Review

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell delivered a harsh rebuke to the Democratic Party on Tuesday after the Iowa caucus descended into chaos.

via McConnell Mocks ‘the Same Democrats Who Want to Take Over Everyone’s Healthcare’ for Botching Iowa Caucus — National Review

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: FBI Claims Previously Undisclosed Peter Strzok and Lisa Page Emails on Seth Rich Are Redacted to Protect Investigation They Claim Never Happened! — The Gateway Pundit

After getting caught lying to the Courts and claiming there were no documents related to Seth Rich, emails between fraudsters Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were uncovered.

Now FBI claims these emails are redacted to protect the investigation they claim never happened.  Christopher Wray’s FBI gets caught again.

As we reported last week, Attorney Ty Clevenger reported to the courts on Monday that despite numerous assurances from the FBI that they had no information related to Seth Rich, the FBI had been caught and therefore was lying to him all this time. (See timeline below).

In response, the DOJ immediately stepped in with a letter to the judge. In this letter the DOJ claimed the FBI had met its burden and its search would have located emails “of investigative significance”:

The DOJ next says that after the Mueller sham, Hillary’s email exoneration, the Ukraine Hoax, Fast and Furious, FISA Warrant abuse and much more, the FBI is “entitled to a presumption of good faith”:

The DOJ says that the FBI was not investigating Seth Rich’s death and it has said so and there is no related case:

The DOJ then says that the FBI never said it had searched everyone’s emails and claims it didn’t identify the emails it later released because they were not “substantive” emails:

Now we can report that yesterday, Clevenger filed a motion for evidentiary hearing as a result of the government’s response:

In his response, Clevenger shows that the FBI argues that they redacted the emails related to Seth Rich that were recently found and sent to Judicial Watch because they don’t want to disclose investigative or prosecutorial activities.  However, Clevenger argues that the FBI claimed that there was no investigation or presecution related to Seth Rich – how can they redact for this reason when they claim there was no investigation?

Another material point that Clevenger makes in his response is that the emails that were found were between FBI fraudsters Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.  He says that these two have shown how they will lie and cheat to cover up their misconduct:

The FBI and DOJ currently cannot be trusted. Sorry, but this is because of their recent record. The courts simply cannot accept the FBI and DOJ on their word.

This is how we got here – we reported on September 19th

Texas businessman Ed Butowsky filed a lawsuit where he outed reporter Ellen Ratner as his source for information on Seth Rich. The DNC operative [Rich] was murdered in the summer of 2016 in Washington DC. His murder was never solved. According to Butowsky’s lawsuit, Seth Rich provided WikiLeaks the DNC emails before the 2016 election, not Russia.

This totally destroys the FBI and Mueller’s claims that Russians hacked the DNC to obtain these emails.

Butowsky claims in his lawsuit:

Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange told her that Seth Rich and his brother, Aaron, were responsible for releasing the DNC emails to Wikileaks. Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange wanted the information relayed to Seth’s parents, as it might explain the motive for Seth’s murder.

On November 9, 2016 Ellen Ratner admitted publicly that she met with Julian Assange for three hours the Saturday before the 2016 election. According to Ratner, Julian Assange told her the leaks were not from the Russians, they were from an internal source from the Hillary Campaign.

We later reported that Butowsky and his attorney, Ty Clevenger, requested and obtained documents from the FBI related to their case which we were able to analyze.

According to the duo, they obtained the transcript from former FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki where he states that the Obama White House was the entity that was pushing the Russia conspiracy as early as October 2016 –

Rybicki was corrupt cop James Comey’s Chief of staff –

Clevenger stated in a post online that –

Newly released documents from the FBI suggest that the Obama White House pushed intelligence agencies to publicly blame the Russians for email leaks from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.

This afternoon I received an undated (and heavily redacted) transcript of an interview of James Rybicki, former chief of staff to former FBI Director James Comey, that includes this excerpt: “So we understand that at some point in October of 2016, there was, I guess, a desire by the White House to make some kind of statement about Russia’s…” and then the next page is omitted.

Roger Stone’s Indictment

Trump friend Roger Stone was indicted after being charged by the Mueller gang based on this key question – who provided the DNC and Podesta emails to WikiLeaks?

The corrupt FBI and Mueller team claim the emails were hacked but neither entity inspected the DNC server which was supposedly hacked. They have provided no proof of this.

The DNC instead hired a firm Crowdstrike, with connections to Mueller and former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who provided a redacted report to the FBI and Mueller stating the emails were hacked by Russia.

Former NSA whistleblower Bill Binney claims he has evidence the DNC emails were not hacked but copied most likely on to a flashdrive or something similar.

Bill Binney, is more than an expert, he is “A Good American”. Binney developed a system for the NSA that would have identified the 9-11 terrorist attack before it occurred, but the NSA shut down his project. This is all documented in Oliver Stone’s “A Good American”. We encourage you to watch this video about Binney’s work with the NSA and their subsequent follow up after 9-11 below –

We also reported –

When Ty Clevenger requested documents from the FBI related to any investigation into the death of Seth Rich, they replied that they never investigated Seth Rich and they don’t have any records on him –

But when documents were requested from the NSA, they replied that they won’t release their records regarding Seth Rich because it’s a matter of national security –

USC 552(b)(1) states: This section does not apply to matters that are—

(A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order;

We didn’t believe the FBI never investigated the Seth Rich murder even though the NSA said the case was a matter of national security.

Attorney Ty Clevenger requested documents again from the FBI related to any communications related to the death of Seth Rich –

Clevenger claimed that the FBI did not perform its search in good faith after first declaring that they did not have to perform the search. Clevenger also claims that his client, Ed Butowsky, has information that the Seth Rich’s devices were inspected and he wants the results of those investigations –

Clevenger wants the FBI to continue their search and not cover things up because their first review for documents related to Seth Rich was inadequate.

Next we reported on October 10, 2019 ==>>

Clevenger has requested that the US Department of Justice provide him documents he is requesting based on some new information and Clevenger also asked the court to allow him to compel the FBI to produce Mr. Hardy (the individual at the FBI who has not provided documents requested) and the chief of CART as witnesses at an evidentiary hearing –

Clevenger made his request based on some new information that he obtained related to actions the FBI took related to Seth Rich. According to Michael Isikoff who is formerly with Newsweek and now with Yahoo (yes, the same individual involved in the Russia collusion hoax) the FBI had numerous activities related to Seth Rich. On page two of Clevenger’s motion, Clevenger notes the following discussion that can be heard on Isikoff’s podcast

So according to Deep State hack Isikoff –

1 The FBI had been contacted by the DOJ about Seth Rich
2 The FBI had been examining Seth Rich’s computer
3 The FBI was looking into Seth Rich’s gmail account
4 The FBI investigated an attempt to hack into Seth Rich’s computer
5 And, finally, confirmed liar Andrew McCabe from the FBI said there was nothing to the stories regarding Seth Rich!

Next on October 17, 2019, we reported the following ==>>

Ty Clevenger reported that he received a response from the FBI and they basically said that the DOJ was lying. Clevenger writes –

Now, back to today’s events. In the response filed this afternoon, the FBI attacked the statements of Mr. Isikoff and Ms. Hines as “unsworn” and “hearsay,” and insisted that it did not need to conduct any more searches for records about Mr. Rich. Mind you, I’m just asking the FBI to pick up the phone and call its Computer Analysis Response Team (“CART”) and ask whether CART has any records about Seth Rich. The FBI refuses to do that, even though it has twice called the Washington Field Office (“WFO”) to ask whether WFO had any records about Mr. Rich.

According to the FBI, any CART records would have shown up in the index search of the FBI’s Central Records System (“CRS”). As I explained in a September 17, 2019 motion, however, the FBI had already admitted that not everything gets entered in the CRS. And now we’ve got the former prosecutor who was assigned to Seth Rich’s case admitting that the FBI investigated his electronic devices… yet the FBI refuses to search for records in CART, the place where such records would most likely be found. Suspicious, no?

Clevenger requested a meeting with the FBI but he was out of luck. The FBI’s denials stuck. It looked like the FBI was trying to hide something and either the FBI or the DOJ are a bunch of liars, or maybe both?

On Monday, January 27, 2020, we had a stunning update ==>>

After previously claiming no FBI records could be found related to Seth Rich, emails were uncovered. These emails weren’t just from anybody. These emails were between FBI lovebirds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two most corrupt individuals involved in the Russia Collusion Hoax.

In a set of emails released by Judicial Watch on January 22, 2020, provided by a FOIA request on Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, multiple emails were found referring to Seth Rich:

The emails are heavily redacted but we do know that Jonathan Moffa was also involved in the email exchange:

What’s also unreal is that the individual releasing the emails to Judicial Watch, David M. Hardy, is also the Deep State crook who claimed he couldn’t find any emails related to Seth Rich to Ty Clevenger. Per Clevenger, he was never contacted by Hardy or the FBI to notify him that Seth Rich emails have been found.

Clevenger has prepared an email and he will notify the court tomorrow and will provide the following complaint to US Attorney Durham, US Attorney Donoghue and DOJ Inspector General Horowitz:

In a post yesterday, on Wednesday, January 29, 2020, we noted the following about the emails coming out over the weekend ==>>

The initial response to the query from the Public Affairs Office of the Washington Field Office is telling. The Agent could have responded very simply–The FBI was not involved in any facet of the Seth Rich investigation. This was a local matter handled by the DC Police.

But that is not how the Agent responded. And then he took the step of adding in people at FBI Headquarters. How do we know this? The message from the Washington Field Office at 7:09 pm was sent to the Criminal Division to Agents Moffat and Strzok.

Ty Clevenger now has ample ammunition to return to court and insist that the FBI be required to identify all agents involved in these email chains and to discuss what they knew about the Seth Rich case. David Hardy declared under the penalty of perjury that there were no such emails. I doubt that the two judges involved in the relevant cases on this matter will be happy to learn that the FBI stonewalled a valid FOIA request.

Christopher Wray’s FBI is still corrupt and dishonest and no effort has been made to clean house. There is likely no reason for the redactions in the emails to Judicial Watch as well.

The FBI continues to lie and cover up its criminal deeds. Director Wray is doing nothing to clean house. He is part of the problem. The Deep State must go. Americans demand the truth!

via BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: FBI Claims Previously Undisclosed Peter Strzok and Lisa Page Emails on Seth Rich Are Redacted to Protect Investigation They Claim Never Happened! — The Gateway Pundit

FIGURES. App Created by Tech Firm Run by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign Officials Linked to Iowa Caucus Train Wreck — The Gateway Pundit

The Democrat Iowa caucus was a total train wreck from the start.

Monday night it was reported that the secretive Iowa Democrat Party app stopped working hours before the caucuses.

It is now Tuesday afternoon and the Democrats still have no caucus results.

The Iowa Democrat Party Chairman blamed the delay on a “coding error.”

It gets worse…

The app used in Monday night’s Iowa caucus train wreck was created by a tech firm run by officials of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Los Angeles Times reported:

Results from Monday’s caucuses could not be transmitted to Iowa party headquarters, and state Democratic Party Chairman Troy Price blamed the problem on a coding error. “While our plan is to release results as soon as possible today, our ultimate goal is to ensure that the integrity and accuracy of the process continues to be upheld,” he said in a statement Tuesday morning.

Confusion among caucus organizers over how to use the app also seemed to contribute to the problem.

The firm behind the app reportedly is Shadow, an affiliate of ACRONYM, a Democratic nonprofit founded in 2017 “to educate, inspire, register, and mobilize voters,” according to its website. Shadow started out as Groundbase, a tech developer co-founded by Gerard Niemira and Krista Davis, who worked for the tech team on Clinton’s campaign for the 2016 Democratic nomination.

Vladimir Putin and Russian bots haven’t been blamed yet for the train wreck, but Democrat candidate Andrew Yang blamed President Trump for the delay.

via FIGURES. App Created by Tech Firm Run by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign Officials Linked to Iowa Caucus Train Wreck — The Gateway Pundit

The People Who Want To Run The U.S. Economy Can’t Run A Simple Caucus — The Federalist

The meltdown in Iowa serves as a useful reminder: systems are complicated. It’s a lot easier to promise you’ll fix major problems than to actually do it.

Today, I broke my morning routine. Normally I shower, dress, wake kids, brush teeth, and make coffee before I pick up my phone. This morning I couldn’t wait. I had to see the results of the Iowa caucus. Unfortunately, we still don’t have them. There were, um, issues.

“A systemwide disaster,” said Derek Eadon, a former Iowa Democratic Party chairman, speaking more bluntly to The New York Times.

It’s fair to say everyone is still trying to figure out what happened. There were problems involving the new app the Iowa Democratic Party rolled out to help report results, although it’s unclear if the issue was with the app, as The New York Post reports, or user error, as the Times reports. (Precinct captains apparently were not trained on the app.)

News reports make it clear there were suspicions there would be app problems, so there was a backup plan: phone in results to state party headquarters. That failed, too.

A precinct captain, on live TV with CNN, was hung up on while trying to report voting results. A party chair who also had problems phoning in results took pictures of the vote and directed his executive director to drive them to Iowa Democratic Party headquarters in Des Moines. She was turned away. It’s clear that some data got reported, while other data did not, which led to at least three different sets of voting results.

“We found inconsistencies,” admitted Iowa Democratic Party Communications Director Mandy McClure. “In addition to the tech systems being used to tabulate results, we are also using photos of results and a paper trail to validate that all results match and ensure that we have confidence and accuracy in the numbers we report.”

Now there are whispers of conspiracy, as Sen. Bernie Sanders appeared poised for a stunning victory. There is talk that Iowa will now lose its precious spot as the first caucus. While problems always get magnified in the modern news cycle, everyone pretty much agrees last night was a disaster.

The meltdown in Iowa serves as a useful reminder: systems are complicated. We often forget that. We show up at the grocery store and shelves are packed and there’s fresh meat and produce. We need a lift and we pull out our phone and press a button; an Uber shows up. Our car makes a weird sound, and we drop it off and the mechanic takes care of it.

All of this happens on its own. No one is directing the mechanic to be open and service my car. The Uber driver isn’t giving me a lift out of altruism. The grocery store owner doesn’t have fresh produce brought in every morning because she knows how much I love organic peaches right off the tree.

The mechanic, grocery owner, and Uber driver are part of a vast, complicated system that operates with an efficiency the human mind cannot fathom. It’s a system that is directed by no one, and it involves billions of people working in invisible concert. Acting in their own interests, they serve the whole.

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest,” the economist Adam Smith famously observed in “The Wealth of Nations.” “We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages.”

Last night, Iowa caucus goers were voting on a field of candidates that contains many who are seeking to vastly expand government control of health care, wages, emissions, agriculture, education, finance, and many other parts of the U.S. economy.

It’s amusing to see candidates who have the hubris to claim they possess the knowledge to effectively regulate an entire economy are running for president in a party that appears unable to effectively manage a simple caucus. A rich irony indeed.

via The People Who Want To Run The U.S. Economy Can’t Run A Simple Caucus — The Federalist

Impeachment Gets 77x More TV Time than Trump’s Economic Successes

According to a new Media Research Center study, for each minute the broadcast evening newscasts spent talking about the President’s successful economic programs, viewers heard 77 minutes about the Democrats’ impeachment push, a massive disparity. Overall, coverage of the President was 93% negative during the last four months, reaching 95% negative in January 2020.

Source: Impeachment Gets 77x More TV Time than Trump’s Economic Successes

Like David McCullough, Americans’ Ignorance Of History Should Keep Us Up At Night

In academia, including teacher education, an illiberal secular fundamentalism severs connections between schools and religion, morality, and knowledge.

Source: Like David McCullough, Americans’ Ignorance Of History Should Keep Us Up At Night

February 4, 2020 Afternoon Verse Of The Day

13 This caution against idolatry summarizes all the divine precepts given above: literally, “in all things that I have said to you.” “Do not let them be heard on your lips” is paralleled by (lit.) “you shall not cause [all these things] to be remembered” (lōʾ tazkîrû; NIV, “do not invoke”). The Hiphil form of zkr (“to remember”) has the meaning “to invoke” in the Psalms; so also here. A “day” will come when God will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they would “be remembered” no more (Hos 2:17; Zec 13:2). This is the practice of David in Psalm 16:4 (note Ex 20:3; Jos 23:7).[1]


Be careful to do everything I have said to you. Do not invoke the names of other gods; do not let them be heard on your lips (23:13). It is not immediately evident why it is put here. It may come out of the associations of the Sabbath with worship. Though that would fit this general context, it is the humanitarian aspect of the Sabbath that is mentioned here. Another possibility is that it comes from the mention made of ‘the alien’. While consideration was to be given to their welfare, there was to be abhorrence for, and avoidance of, their false worship. ‘Invoke’ is ‘cause to be remembered’ and would cover use in ordinary speech as well as in worship and in taking oaths in law courts. It was indeed an act of treason even to utter the names of these false gods lest it should seem that they were being given a status comparable to that of the Great King (Ps. 16:4).

The Three Annual Festivals (23:14–19). The inhabitants of Canaan had their religious festivals, generally at significant points in the agricultural year because their deities were principally nature gods and goddesses conceived of as having power over the elements and the harvest. Israel too is to have annual religious festivals, but they were to be conducted as the Lord laid down. In large measure these festivals also followed the agricultural year: Unleavened Bread in the spring at the time of barley harvest; Feast of Harvest in the early summer when the wheat was harvested; and Ingathering in the autumn when the produce of orchard and vineyard was gathered. By celebrating them the people were acknowledging the Lord as the one who had in his goodness blessed their fields.[2]


23:13 do everything I have said to you. Do not invoke the names of other gods. The covenant requires the Israelites to give their exclusive allegiance to the Lord. In the polytheistic world of antiquity, the expectation that the Israelites should be monotheistic is radically different.[3]


13. The names of other gods. The Hebrew says ‘name’ in the singular, so perhaps we should translate ‘another god’s name’. It is probably a reference to swearing by another god’s name instead of by the name of YHWH: this would of course indicate lack of faith in YHWH. Paul seems to refer to this verse in Ephesians 5:3.[4]


Ver. 13. Be circumspect.—Circumspection:

  1. In general. “In all things.” Moses is drawing to the close of these precepts, and looking back upon them, he says—“Be circumspect.” The original suggests—
  2. That we should be fully awake to the importance of the Divine commands.

(1) Give them intelligent and reverent examination.

(2) Store them up in the memory.

(3) Study them in their beneficent operation.

  1. That we should be on our guard against temptations to break the Divine commands. Temptations are

(1) sudden;

(2) insidious;

(3) deceiving.

  1. That we should be careful “to remember His commandments to do them.”

(1) There is a danger lest an exaggerated estimate of human weakness should lead to despair on the one hand, and recklessness on the other.

(2) God would not command the impossible.

(3) There is “grace to help in time of need.”

  1. In particular, “make no mention,” &c. Because—
  2. That would be uncircumspect in the first and greatest commandment.
  3. That would be to forfeit the help promised to the circumspect.
  4. That would be to yield to a tendency to be uncircumspect in everything. Christians—
  5. “Watch and pray, lest ye enter into, temptation.”
  6. Live so as “to adorn the doctrine of God your Saviour in all things.” (J. W. Burn.)

Circumspection needed:

The mysterious perturbation of a ship’s compass is reported in a scientific journal. It appears that the compass of the ship Penguin, recently anchored off Australia, was deflected fifty-five degrees, and had a dip of eighty-three degrees. After the ship left the anchorage and proceeded on her voyage the disturbance ceased. At two miles from the point the variation was quite normal. The captain spent a day in investigating the phenomenon. He passed two or three times over the point where he had anchored, and found that whenever the ship crossed it, the compass was disturbed as before, and recovered when at a distance of two miles in any direction. This satisfied him that the centre of the submarine disturbance was limited to a circle of less than two miles magnetic minerals at the sea bottom. The journal reporting his observation says: “Great as is the gain to the navigator to be thus warned of a formidable danger in certain places, it lays upon him the imperative duty of being always on his guard against such sources of disaster elsewhere, and of promptly reporting any new magnetic disturbance, as he would a rock or shoal.” Similar vigilance is necessary on the part of every voyager through life.[5]


[1] Kaiser, W. C., Jr. (2008). Exodus. In T. Longman III & D. E. Garland (Eds.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Genesis–Leviticus (Revised Edition) (Vol. 1, p. 503). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] Mackay, J. L. (2001). Exodus (pp. 403–404). Fearn, Ross-shire, Great Britain: Mentor.

[3] Alexander, T. D. (2016). Exodus. (J. H. Walton, Ed.) (p. 136). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books: A Division of Baker Publishing Group.

[4] Cole, R. A. (1973). Exodus: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 2, p. 187). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

[5] Exell, J. S. (n.d.). The Biblical Illustrator: Exodus (pp. 439–440). New York: Anson D. F. Randolph & Company.

A Failed Coup Of A Failing Establishment | ZeroHedge News

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

It has been a bad few days for the establishment, really bad.

In a 51-49 vote, the Senate refused to call witnesses in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump and agreed to end the trial Wednesday, with a near-certain majority vote to acquit the president of all charges.

As weekend polls show socialist Bernie Sanders surging into the lead for the nomination in the states of Iowa, New Hampshire and California, the sense of panic among Democratic Party elites is palpable.

Former Secretary of State and Joe Biden surrogate John Kerry was overheard Sunday at a Des Moines hotel talking of the “possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole.”

Tuesday, Trump takes his nationally televised victory lap in the U.S. Capitol with his State of the Union address, as triumphant Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and a humiliated Speaker Nancy Pelosi sit silently side-by-side behind him.

Democrats may declare the Trump impeachment a victory for righteousness, but the anger and outrage, the moans and groans now coming off the editorial and op-ed pages and cable TV suggest the media know otherwise.

History, we are told, will vindicate what Pelosi and the Democrats did and stain forever the Republican Party for voting to acquit.

Perhaps, but only if some future Howard Zinn is writing the history.

Reality: The impeachment of Trump was an attempted — and failed — coup that not a single Republican supported, only Democrats in the House and their Senate caucus. The impeachment of Trump was an exercise in pure partisanship and itself an abuse of power.

What was the heart of the Democrats’ case to remove Trump?

Trump failed to invite Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to the White House, and held up military aid to Kyiv for several months, to get Zelenskiy to hold a press conference to announce that Kyiv was looking into how Hunter Biden got on the board of a corrupt energy company at a retainer of $83,000 a month while his father was the chief international monitor of corruption in Ukraine.

The specific indictment: Trump’s suspension of military aid imperiled “our national security” by denying arms to an “ally” who was fighting the Russians over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here.

And what was the outcome of it all?

Zelenskiy got his meeting with the president. He got the military aid in September. He did not hold the press conference requested. He did not announce an investigation of the Bidens.

No harm, no foul.

How did President Obama handle Ukraine?

After Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea and intervened to protect pro-Russian secessionists in the Donbass, Obama’s White House restricted U.S. lethal military aid to Kyiv and provided blankets and meals ready to eat.

What punishment did House and Senate Democrats and anti-Trump media demand for the pause in sending weapons for Ukraine?

Capital punishment, a political death penalty.

Democrats demanded that a Republican Senate overturn the election of 2016, make Trump the first president ever impeached and removed, and then ensure that the American people could never vote for him again.

Nancy Pelosi’s House and the Democratic minority in the Senate were demanding that a Republican Senate do their dirty work and keep Trump off the ballot in 2020, lest he win a second term.

For four years, elements of the liberal establishment — in the media, “deep state” and major institutions — have sought to destroy Trump. First, they aimed to smear him and prevent his election, and then to overturn it as having been orchestrated by the Kremlin, and then to impeach and remove him, and then to block him from running again.

The damage they have inflicted upon our country’s institutions is serious.

U.S. intelligence agencies are being investigated by U.S. Attorney John Durham for their role in instigating an investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign. The FBI has been discredited by exposure of a conspiracy of top-level agents to spy on Trump’s campaign.

The media, by endlessly echoing unproven claims that Trump was a stooge of the Kremlin, discredited themselves to a degree unknown since the “Yellow Press” prostituted itself to get us into war with Spain. Media claims to be unbiased pursuers of truth have suffered, not only from Trump’s attacks, but from their own biased and bigoted coverage and commentary.

The NSC and State Department have been exposed as employing individuals with an exaggerated view of their role in the origination and the execution of foreign policy. Disloyalty and animosity toward the chief executive appear to permeate the upper echelons of the “deep state.”

Not in our lifetime have the institutions of government and the establishment been held in lower regard.

Almost all now concede we have become an us vs. them nation.

How we accomplish great things again, giving our seemingly unbridgeable differences, remains a mystery.

Source: A Failed Coup Of A Failing Establishment

DHS Offered To Test Iowa Voting App, Democrats Declined | ZeroHedge News

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

The Iowa Democratic Party declined to have a new voting application vetted by the Department of Homeland Security, the agency’s Acting Secretary Chad Wolf said on Tuesday.

The app, developed by Shadow Inc., was blamed for some of the problems during the Democratic caucuses on Monday night. The issues led to the results of the caucuses being delayed.

Our cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency has offered to test that app from a hacking perspective,” Wolf said during an appearance on “Fox & Friends.”

“They declined, so we’re seeing a couple of issues with it.”

There was no evidence of a hack, Wolf said.

“Right now, we don’t see any malicious cyber activity going on. No one hacked into it. This is more of a stress or a load issue as well as a reporting issue that we’re seeing in Iowa,” he said.

“Given the amount of scrutiny that we have on election security these days, this is a concerning event, and it really goes to the public confidence of our elections.”

The Iowa Democratic Party didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about how the party tested the app. Party officials declined to provide details about the app when asked by multiple outlets before the election. Troy Price, the chairman of the state party, told NPR that the state party worked with the national party’s cybersecurity team and Harvard University’s Defending Digital Democracy project.

We as the party have taken this very seriously, and we know how important it is for us to make sure that our process is secure and that we protect the integrity of the process,” Price said.

“We want to make sure we are not relaying information that could be used against us.”

Party spokeswoman Mandy McClure said late Monday that the election results were delayed due to “quality checks” and inconsistent reporting, but said the app developed by Shadow did not go down and was not hacked. Ballots provided a sound paper trail that was being used to tally the results, she added.

No email addresses or phone numbers were listed on Shadow’s website. The company is full of “campaign and technology veterans” who have built and put into place technology for Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s campaigns as well as Google, the Democratic National Committee, and the AFL-CIO union, the company said.

“Our passion is to create a permanent advantage for progressive campaigns and causes through technology,” it stated. No staff members were named on the site.

Supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) cheer next to an Iowa flag at his rally in Des Moines, Iowa on Feb. 3, 2020. (Jim Bourg/Reuters)

Several high-level Shadow executives, including CEO Gerard Niemira, worked on Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Niemera was previously the chief technology officer and chief operating officer at ACRONYM, a nonprofit digital strategy firm.

Shadow was created in part from investments by ACRONYM, founder and CEO Tara McGowan said in January 2019.

In a statement issued overnight, the nonprofit attempted to distance itself from Shadow, noting it was one of multiple investors into the company.

“We are reading confirmed reports of Shadow’s work with the Iowa Democratic Party on Twitter, and we, like everyone else, are eagerly awaiting more information from the Iowa Democratic Party with respect to what happened,” ACRONYM spokesman Kyle Tharpe said in a statement.

ACRONYM did not provide any technology to the DNC, Iowa Democratic Party, or presidential campaigns, the statement said.

Robby Mook, Clinton’s 2016 campaign manager, also distanced himself from the app on Monday night after people drew attention to the Des Moines Register reporting last week that Mook and experts in a number of fields “simulated the different ways that things could go wrong on caucus night.”

“Sorry, folks,” Mook wrote on Twitter.

“I did NOT have anythjng [sic] to do with building the Iowa caucus app. I dont know anything about it, had no role in it, and dont own a company that makes mobile appa [sic].”

Shadow was paid $58,000 in August 2019 by the Nevada Democratic Party and the Iowa Democratic Party paid the company over $63,000 in late 2019. The Nevada Democratic Party didn’t respond to a request for comment. Former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s campaign also paid Shadow over $42,000 last year for “software rights and subscriptions.”

Buttigieg said early Tuesday that “all indications” showed that he won the Iowa Democratic caucus.

Source: DHS Offered To Test Iowa Voting App, Democrats Declined

VIDEO of fake chemical attack in Syria already complete, White Helmets co-produced footage – Moscow | RT – Daily news

The White Helmets have shot a new fake video of ‘Assad’s chemical attack’ in Syria’s Idlib, the Russian MoD has said. The movie, co-produced by the notorious White Helmets, is expected to be released shortly on social media.

Production of the new film was concluded on Tuesday in the village of Zerba, located in the militant-controlled part of Syria’s Idlib province, the Russian Center for Syrian Reconciliation has said, citing several independent sources.

The video, shot by the notorious White Helmets group in cooperation with local terrorists, purports to show the aftermath of a “chemical attack” on civilians by Syria’s government troops.

The footage, according to the MoD, shows ‘rescuers’ wandering around in a thick plume of “mustard-colored gas” and attending to the ‘victims’ of the staged “attack.”

Also on rt.com

White Helmets are ‘preparing chemical attack false-flag’ in Syria’s Idlib, Russian military tipped off

According to the Russian military, the video is set to be released shortly on social media to be picked-up by the pro-militant news outlets in the Arab world and the West. A number of “chemical attacks” in Syria have been blamed on the country’s government by the militants over the course of the war, which has been raging in the country since 2011.

The alleged “attacks” usually occur during rapid advances of the Syrian Army against anti-government militants and terrorists. In the recent days, the Syrian military has broken through jihadist defenses in Idlib and has been rapidly liberating territory that was under militants’ control for years.

The UK and US-funded White Helmets group, that advertises itself as an “impartial” humanitarian organization seeking to save Syria’s civilians, has been a media darling for years. A Netflix documentary about it has even won Oscar award back in 2016. The group, however, has also operated almost exclusively in jihadist-held parts of Syria, and is believed to have strong ties with the local Al-Qaeda offshoot. Russian military had previously accused the group of participating in staged videos of supposed chemical attacks.

Also on rt.com

‘Brazen disinformation’: Syria narrative managers defend Douma chemical weapon hoax as OPCW comes under attack

Source: VIDEO of fake chemical attack in Syria already complete, White Helmets co-produced footage – Moscow

Dershowitz says he’s lost friends, family members after joining Trump’s impeachment team | The National Sentinel

By Jon Dougherty

(TNS) Liberal Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz has said repeatedly that he is not a supporter of President Donald Trump and did not vote for him.

But he’s also been a voice who spoke out regularly against the deep state’s attempts — ongoing — to overturn the 2016 election results via the “Spygate” probe, as well as a strong opponent of the president’s impeachment

In a recent interview with The Hill, Dershowitz noted that he’s not only suffered professionally since taking the president’s side in a number of current issues, he’s suffered personally as well.

“This is the worst controversy I have ever been in politically,” Dershowitz, 81, said. “I have some family members who won’t talk to me, I have some friends who have refused to have anything to do with me. But it shows me who my real friends are.”

Though Dershowitz defended other high-profile people, like OJ Simpson, Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein, he said he had “mixed feelings” about taking part in Trump’s impeachment trial.

“In O.J., people hated what I did. With Trump, people hate who I am,” Dershowitz told The Hill. “And there’s a big difference.”

He has especially faced backlash from other lawyers and constitutional scholars for his differences of opinion in opposing the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in the late 1990s as compared with his opposition to the Trump impeachment.

The Hill:

Dershowitz now says that criminal-like conduct is required for an act to be impeachable, a complete shift from his Clinton-era take that Dershowitz attributes to his having refined his views after extensive study.

Trump’s inclusion of Dershowitz, who is an opinion contributor to The Hill, proved controversial from the beginning. His arguments in defense of the president earned praise from the White House and are likely to give cover to some Republicans seeking a rationale for acquitting the president while making him a pariah among Democrats and some legal analysts, underscoring the risks and rewards of making him part of the team.

Additionally, Dershowitz was attacked for arguing the president’s conduct involving Ukraine, even if he sought to help himself politically, did not rise to the level of impeachment because it wasn’t criminal, which is what the Constitution proscribes:

At the height of his argument on the Senate floor Monday evening — a finale of sorts for the day’s proceedings — Dershowitz asserted that even if Trump had withheld security assistance to Ukraine for help with political investigations, it would not constitute an impeachable offense. 

Following that argument, Dershowitz said he received a phone call from Trump. “Just thanking me, and that was it,” he recalled. 

Dershowitz upped the ante on Wednesday when he asserted anything a president does to win reelection is not impeachable as long as it doesn’t involve a criminal act and they believe their election is in the public interest.

That argument has dominated headlines and cemented Dershowitz’s role as a central figure in Trump’s impeachment trial given his extraordinary view of protections for the executive branch. It also stunned Democrats and threatened to leave Dershowitz further isolated in legal circles. …

Dershowitz’s Wednesday presentation was perhaps more jarring because he had delivered what Republicans, legal scholars and even some Democrats viewed as a cogent and convincing argument just two days earlier that the Constitution requires that impeachable offenses be based on “criminal-like conduct akin to treason and bribery.” 

“It is true that the vast majority of academics reject this theory, but that doesn’t mean this is a frivolous or moronic interpretation,” said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor who testified as a Republican-called witness during the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment proceedings.

“I think after Monday his arguments became increasingly untethered,” Turley added. “I think he did on occasion allow his rhetoric to outrun his reasoning.”

Turley’s assertion that a “majority” of academics don’t believe that presidents have to have violated statutes — “high crimes and misdemeanors” — could be due to the company he keeps, as he, like Dershowitz, is a liberal. Other scholars believe the language of the Constitution, the language approved by our founders, means what it says, since anything less would indicate a president can be removed for purely political reasons.

As for Dershowitz, he can at least proceed with a clear conscience.

“What happened since 1998 is that I studied more, did more research, read more documents, and, like any academic, altered my views,” Dershowitz said during the trial.

Source: Dershowitz says he’s lost friends, family members after joining Trump’s impeachment team

And We’ve Got the Evangelicals…Why Mark Galli Doesn’t Speak For Me — Christian Research Network

“Something about the way he said “We’ve got the evangelicals” struck me as significant. I did some research and what I found troubled me. Obama’s White House had ‘reached out’ years before to select, self-described evangelical leaders and organizations which came to be known as The Evangelical Immigration Table.”

(Jim Jenkins – Herescope)  We have short memories. Those who make a living creating narratives bank on this fact. In following the current politically-charged impeachment drama, I have been struck by the fact that the co-opting of language and the bastardization of the meanings of words has the effect of bringing about harmful  cognitive dissonance in those whose sensitivities are assaulted by the barrage.

It has become painfully clear that those attempting to impeach the President are using tactics which are spelled out in the book Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky. Alinsky’s methods key off the fact that most folks have a sense of fair play and at least a modicum of respect for one another. His tactics call for ruthless pragmatic ‘whatever works’ bullying. Facts be damned, the object is to throw the opponent into confusion and — once they are on their heels — to use whatever means necessary to destroy. David Horowitz is spot on in this observation:

Stigmatizing one’s opponent is a classical radical tactic. It is the thirteenth rule of Saul Alinsky’s Rule for Radicals: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.” Attack your opponents personally and cut them off from any possibility of sympathy. That is why radicals paint their opponents as homophobes, xenophobes, and Islamophobes. They’re not just good-but-misguided people whose religious convictions have led them to a contrasting viewpoint. They are bad people possessed by irrational fears of “the others” because they are different.”  View article →

Research

Jim Wallis

Progressive (Social Justice) “Christianity”

via And We’ve Got the Evangelicals…Why Mark Galli Doesn’t Speak For Me — Christian Research Network