Daily Archives: October 12, 2020

October 12th The D. L. Moody Year Book

I will show him My salvation.—Psalm 91:16.

I BELIEVE we don’t learn the fringe of the subject of salvation down here. When our Master was on earth, He said He had many more things to say, but He could not reveal them to His disciples because they were not ready to receive them. But when we go yonder, where these mortal bodies have put on immortality, when our spiritual faculties are loosed from the thralldom of the flesh, I believe we shall be able to take more in. God will lead us from glory to glory, and show us the fullness of our salvation. Don’t you think Moses knew more at the Mount of Transfiguration than he did at Pisgah? Didn’t Christ talk with him then about the death He was to accomplish at Jerusalem? He couldn’t have received this truth before, any more than the disciples, but when he had received his glorified body, Christ could show him everything.[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. 180–181). East Northfield, MA: The Bookstore.

October 12 Life-Changing Moments With God

God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them.

It pleased You, Father God, that in Jesus all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Yourself. Mercy and truth have met together; righteousness and peace have kissed.

Lord God, You know the thoughts that You think toward me, thoughts of peace and not of evil. And You say, Lord, that though my sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Who is a God like You, pardoning iniquity?

Now I acquaint myself with You, and I am at peace. I work out my own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is You who works in me both to will and to do for Your good pleasure. Lord, You will establish peace for us, for You have also done all our works in us.

Lord God, thank You for sending Your Son to bridge the gap between holy You and sinful me. Thank You for that work of reconciliation and peacemaking.

2 Corinthians 5:19; Colossians 1:19–20; Psalm 85:10; Jeremiah 29:11; Isaiah 1:18; Micah 7:18; Job 22:21; Philippians 2:12–13; Isaiah 26:12[1]


[1] Jeremiah, D. (2007). Life-Changing Moments With God (p. 307). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

What Does the Roman Catholic Church Believe About Justification? — Ligonier Ministries Blog

The gospel of Jesus Christ is always at risk of distortion. It became distorted in the centuries leading up to the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century. It became distorted at innumerable other points of church history, and it is often distorted today. This is why Martin Luther said the gospel must be defended in every generation. It is the center point of attack by the forces of evil. They know that if they can get rid of the gospel, they can get rid of Christianity.

There are two sides to the gospel, the good news of the New Testament: an objective side and a subjective side. The objective content of the gospel is the person and work of Jesus—who He is and what He accomplished in His life. The subjective side is the question of how the benefits of Christ’s work are appropriated to the believer. There the doctrine of justification comes to the fore.

Many issues were involved in the Reformation, but the core matter, the material issue of the Reformation, was the gospel, especially the doctrine of justification. There was no great disagreement between the Roman Catholic Church authorities and the Protestant Reformers about the objective side. All the parties agreed that Jesus was divine, the Son of God and of the Virgin Mary, and that He lived a life of perfect obedience, died on the cross in an atoning death, and was raised from the grave. The battle was over the second part of the gospel, the subjective side, the question of how the benefits of Christ are applied to the believer.

The Reformers believed and taught that we are justified by faith alone. Faith, they said, is the sole instrumental cause for our justification. By this they meant that we receive all the benefits of Jesus’ work through putting our trust in Him alone.

The Roman communion also taught that faith is a necessary condition for salvation. At the seminal Council of Trent (1545–1563), which formulated Rome’s response to the Reformation, the Roman Catholic authorities declared that faith affords three things: the initium, the fundamentum, and the radix. That is, faith is the beginning of justification, the foundation for justification, and the root of justification. But Rome held that a person can have true faith and still not be justified, because there was much more to the Roman system.

In reality, the Roman view of the gospel, as expressed at Trent, was that justification is accomplished through the sacraments. Initially, the recipient must accept and cooperate in baptism, by which he receives justifying grace. He retains that grace until he commits a mortal sin. Mortal sin is called “mortal” because it kills the grace of justification. The sinner then must be justified a second time. That happens through the sacrament of penance, which the Council of Trent defined as “a second plank” of justification for those who have made shipwreck of their souls.

The fundamental difference was this. Trent said that God does not justify anyone until real righteousness inheres within the person. In other words, God does not declare a person righteous unless he or she is righteous. So, according to Roman Catholic doctrine, justification depends on a person’s sanctification. By contrast, the Reformers said justification is based on the imputation of the righteousness of Jesus. The only ground by which a person can be saved is Jesus’ righteousness, which is reckoned to him when he believes.

There were radically different views of salvation. They could not be reconciled. One of them was the gospel. One of them was not. Thus, what was at stake in the Reformation was the gospel of Jesus Christ. Though the Council of Trent made many fine affirmations of traditional truths of the Christian faith, it declared justification by faith alone to be anathema, ignoring many plain teachings of Scripture, such as Romans 3:28: “For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.”

This excerpt is adapted from Are We Together? A Protestant Analyzes Roman Catholicism by R.C. Sproul. Learn more by watching R.C. Sproul’s teaching series Justified by Faith Alone.

What Does the Roman Catholic Church Believe About Justification? — Ligonier Ministries Blog

October 12, 2020 Evening Verse Of The Day

11:4 The Lord is in his holy temple … his eyes examine them. The reference to the temple could be to the Jerusalem temple, but the second part (“on his heavenly throne”) seems to suggest God’s heavenly temple, unless “holy temple” is the earthly one, which reflects God’s “heavenly throne,” a symbol of his universal authority (see also 22:3; 99:2; 123:1). Reference to God’s “eyelids” or “eyes” also appears in Jeremiah 9:18. The verb “examine” (bhn) implies testing the quality of an object, as one tests metals (Ps. 66:10; Job 23:10). Here and in 11:5 it means “to subject to close scrutiny.”[1]


4. Reader, it is very true that Jehovah, in his threefold character of person, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, seeth and knoweth all the concerns of his redeemed, and his eyes are upon them for good. But is there not here a special reference to the eyes of the Mediator? Is it not Jesus as the God-man, who is here spoken of as beholding his people? For here, with a double sweetness of consolation, the people of God may find encouragement in the blessed thought, that the eyes of Jesus, as God in our nature, are always beholding and taking part in all the interests of his redeemed.[2]


Ver. 4.—The Lord is in his holy temple. David’s reply to his timid advisers is an expression of absolute faith and trust in God. Saul may reign upon earth; but Jehovah is in his holy temple (or rather, “palace,” הֵיכַל) on high—his throne is in heaven, where he sits and reigns. What need, then, to fear an earthly king? Especially when God is not inattentive to human affairs, but his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men (comp. Pss. 7:9; 17:3; 139:1). His “eyelids” are said to try men, because, when we closely scrutinize a thing, we drop our eyelids and half close our eyes.[3]


4. Jehovah is in the palace of his holiness. In what follows, the Psalmist glories in the assurance of the favour of God, of which I have spoken. Being destitute of human aid, he betakes himself to the providence of God. It is a signal proof of faith, as I have observed elsewhere, to take and to borrow, so to speak, light from heaven to guide us to the hope of salvation, when we are surrounded in this world with darkness on every side. All men acknowledge that the world is governed by the providence of God; but when there comes some sad confusion of things, which disturbs their ease, and involves them in difficulty, there are few who retain in their minds the firm persuasion of this truth. But from the example of David, we ought to make such account of the providence of God as to hope for a remedy from his judgment, even when matters are in the most desperate condition. There is in the words an implied contrast between heaven and earth; for if David’s attention had been fixed on the state of things in this world, as they appeared to the eye of sense and reason, he would have seen no prospect of deliverance from his present perilous circumstances. But this was not David’s exercise; on the contrary, when in the world all justice lies trodden under foot, and faithfulness has perished, he reflects that God sits in heaven perfect and unchanged, from whom it became him to look for the restoration of order from this state of miserable confusion. He does not simply say that God dwells in heaven; but that he reigns there, as it were, in a royal palace, and has his throne of judgment there. Nor do we indeed render to him the honour which is his due, unless we are fully persuaded that his judgment-seat is a sacred sanctuary for all who are in affliction and unrighteously oppressed. When, therefore, deceit, craft, treachery, cruelty, violence, and extortion, reign in the world; in short, when all things are thrown into disorder and darkness by injustice and wickedness, let faith serve as a lamp to enable us to behold God’s heavenly throne, and let that sight suffice to make us wait in patience for the restoration of things to a better state. The temple of his holiness, or his holy temple, which is commonly taken for Sion, doubtless here signifies heaven; and that it does so is clearly shown by the repetition in the next clause, Jehovah has his throne in heaven; for it is certain David expresses the same thing twice.

His eyes behold. Here he infers, from the preceding sentence, that nothing is hidden from God, and that, therefore, men will be obliged to render up to him an account of all that they have done. If God reigns in heaven, and if his throne is erected there, it follows that he must necessarily attend to the affairs of men, in order one day to sit in judgment upon them. Epicurus, and such like him as would persuade themselves that God is idle, and indulges in repose in heaven, may be said rather to spread for him a couch on which to sleep, than to erect for him a throne of judgment. But it is the glory of our faith that God, the Creator of the world, does not disregard or abandon the order which he himself at first established. And when he suspends his judgments for a time, it becomes us to lean upon this one truth—that he beholds from heaven; just as we now see David contenting himself with this consolatory consideration alone, that God rules over mankind, and observes whatever is transacted in the world, although his knowledge, and the exercise of his jurisdiction, are not at first sight apparent. This truth is still more clearly explained in what is immediately added in the fifth verse, that God distinguishes between the righteous and the unrighteous, and in such a way as shows that he is not an idle spectator; for he is said to approve the righteous, and to hate the wicked. The Hebrew word בחן, bachan, which we have rendered to approve, often signifies to examine or try. But in this passage I explain it as simply meaning, that God so inquires into the cause of every man as to distinguish the righteous from the wicked. It is farther declared, that God hates those who are set upon the infliction of injuries, and upon doing mischief. As he has ordained mutual intercourse between men, so he would have us to maintain it inviolable. In order, therefore, to preserve this his own sacred and appointed order, he must be the enemy of the wicked, who wrong and are troublesome to others. There is also here contrasted God’s hatred of the wicked, and wicked men’s love of iniquity, to teach us that those who please and flatter themselves in their mischievous practices gain nothing by such flatteries, and only deceive themselves.[4]


Verse 4.—The infinite understanding of God doth exactly know the sins of men; he knows so as to consider. He doth not only know them, but intently behold them: “His eyelids try the children of men,” a metaphor taken from men, that contract the eyelids when they would wistly and accurately behold a thing: it is not a transient and careless look.—Stephen Charnock.

Verse 4.—“His eyes behold,” etc. God searcheth not as man searcheth, by enquiring into that which before was hid from him; his searching is no more but his beholding; he seeth the heart, he beholdeth the reins; God’s very sight is searching. Heb. 4:13. “All things are naked and opened unto his eyes,” τετραχηλισμένα, dissected or anatomised. He hath at once as exact a view of the most hidden things, the very entrails of the soul, as if they had been with never so great curiosity anatomised before him.—Richard Alleine, 1611–1681.

Verse 4.—“His eyes behold,” etc. Consider that God not only sees into all you do, but he sees it to that very end that he may examine and search into it. He doth not only behold you with a common and indifferent look, but with a searching, watchful, and inquisitive eye: he pries into the reasons, the motives, the ends of all your actions. “The Lord’s throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men.” Rev. 1:14, where Christ is described, it is said, his eyes are as a flame of fire: you know the property of fire is to search and make trial of those things which are exposed unto it, and to separate the dross from the pure metal: so, God’s eye is like fire, to try and examine the actions of men: he knows and discerns how much your very purest duties have in them of mixture, and base ends of formality, hypocrisy, distractedness, and deadness: he sees through all your specious pretences, that which you cast as a mist before the eyes of men when yet thou art but a juggler in religion: all your tricks and sleights of outward profession, all those things that you use to cozen and delude men withal, cannot possibly impose upon him: he is a God that can look through all those fig-leaves of outward profession, and discern the nakedness of your duties through them.—Ezekiel Hopkins, D.D.

Verse 4.—“His eyes behold,” etc. Take God into thy counsel. Heaven overlooks hell. God at any time can tell thee what plots are hatching there against thee.—William Gurnall.

Verse 4.—“His eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men.” When an offender, or one accused for any offence, is brought before a judge, and stands at the bar to be arraigned, the judge looks upon him, eyes him, sets his eye upon him, and he bids the offender look up in his face; “Look upon me,” saith the judge, “and speak up:” guiltiness usually clouds the forehead and clothes the brow; the weight of guilt holds down the head! the evil doer hath an ill look, or dares not look up; how glad is he if the judge looks off him. We have such an expression here, speaking of the Lord, the great Judge of heaven and earth: “His eyelids try the children of men,” as a judge tries a guilty person with his eye and reads the characters of his wickedness printed in his face. Hence we have a common speech in our language, such a one looks suspiciously, or, he hath a guilty look. At that great gaol-delivery described in Rev. 6:16, All the prisoners cry out to be hid from the face of him that sat upon the throne. They could not look upon Christ, and they could not endure Christ should look on them; the eyelids of Christ try the children of men.… Wickedness cannot endure to be under the observation of any eye, much less of the eye of justice. Hence the actors of it say, “Who seeth us?” It is very hard not to show the guilt of the heart in the face, and it is as hard to have it seen there.—Joseph Caryl.[5]


4. The reply of the righteous. The Lord (is) in his holy templei. e., in heaven. The holiness of His abode shows His will to take cognizance of all that is holy and unholy on earth. the Lord’s throne is in heaven. The majesty of His exalted abode shows His power to do so. Cf. Ps. 102:19, 20, “From heaven did the Lord behold the earth; to hear the groaning of the prisoner.” his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. This thought of faith keeps the godly from despair. His piercing glance searches out every act, word, and thought of the ungodly; their seeming impunity is only temporary: at last they must pay the full penalty of their wickedness. The LXX. and Vulgate read, ‘His eyes behold the poor’ [עני, which may have slipped out, after the similar word עיניו]. No Hebrew MS. supports this.[6]


[1] Bullock, C. H. (2015). Psalms 1–72. (M. L. Strauss & J. H. Walton, Eds.) (Vol. 1, p. 76). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

[2] Hawker, R. (2013). Poor Man’s Old Testament Commentary: Job–Psalms (Vol. 4, p. 195). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

[3] Spence-Jones, H. D. M. (Ed.). (1909). Psalms (Vol. 1, p. 71). London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.

[4] Calvin, J., & Anderson, J. (2010). Commentary on the Book of Psalms (Vol. 1, pp. 163–165). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

[5] Spurgeon, C. H. (n.d.). The treasury of David: Psalms 1-26 (Vol. 1, pp. 137–138). London; Edinburgh; New York: Marshall Brothers.

[6] Fausset, A. R. (n.d.). A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments: Job–Isaiah (Vol. III, p. 126). London; Glasgow: William Collins, Sons, & Company, Limited.

Can a Saved Person Be Lost? — Ligonier Ministries Blog

Can true Christians fall from the faith in his final days and be lost? From one of our Ask Ligonier events, Derek Thomas responds to a startling picture at the end of John Bunyan’s beloved book The Pilgrim’s Progress. To get real-time answers to your biblical and theological questions, just ask Ligonier.

Read the Transcript

Can a Saved Person Be Lost? — Ligonier Ministries Blog

October—12 The Poor Man’s Evening Portion

The day-dawn and the day-star.—2 Peter 1:19.

And what is “the day-dawn, and day-star,” arising in the hearts of God’s people, but Jesus, “the day-spring from on high, visiting us?” Is not Jesus “the bright and morning star, the light and the life of men?” Yea, is he not “the sun of righteousness arising with healing in his wings?” And when he ariseth on our benighted minds, may he not be called “the day-dawn, and the day-star?” Pause, my soul, over the sweet thought! It was all darkness in the creation of God, until Jesus arose. And his coming was as the breaking forth of the morning, the sure harbinger of day. Indeed, Jesus was “the day-dawn, and the day-star,” in the light of redemption, before the world was formed: for in the council of peace, as man’s light and salvation, he came up, at the call of God, from all eternity. And in time, during all his eventful ministry upon earth, was not Jesus “a light to lighten the Gentiles, and to be the glory of his people Israel?” And what is Jesus now, but the “day-dawn, and day-star” of all the promises? Until we see Christ in them, they are nothing. It is he that makes them all “yea and amen;” and is “the day-dawn and day-star” of all dispensations. His word, his providences, his grace, his ordinances; all are dark, until Jesus ariseth, as “the day-dawn, and day-star,” to enlighten them. When he shines in upon them, then are they blessed and clear. When he withdraws his light, not one of them can be read. And what is the “day-dawn, and day-star,” in the hearts of his people, converting them from darkness to light, and from the power of sin and Satan to the living God, but Jesus shining by his Holy Spirit within, and bringing them to the knowledge, love, and enjoyment of himself? Say, my soul, what was the day, the ever-blessed, ever-to-be-remembered day, when God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, shined in upon thine heart; and Jesus, “the day-dawn, and the day-star,” arose, to give thee “the light of the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, in the face of Jesus Christ?” Hail, thou glorious light and life of my soul! Oh! continue thy sweet influences, morning by morning, and in the day-dawn, and evening-star of thy grace; until, after many dark dispensations, and wintry days of my blindness, ignorance, and senseless state, in which thou wilt renew me, in the precious discoveries of thy love, I am carried through all the twilight of this poor dying state of things below: for then shall I awake up to the full enjoyment of thyself in glory, to see thee in one full open day, and to be made like unto thee in thy kingdom of light, and life, and happiness, for ever and ever.[1]


[1] Hawker, R. (1845). The Poor Man’s Evening Portion (A New Edition, pp. 294–295). Philadelphia: Thomas Wardle.

October 12 – From the Serpent in the Garden to Baal in Tophet: Satan’s plan for your death — VCY America

October 12
Jeremiah 19:1-21:14
1 Thessalonians 5:4-28
Psalm 82:1-8
Proverbs 25:9-10

Jeremiah 19:3 – This wasn’t to pagan Assyria, or wayward Israel, but the Kings of Judah! They have built altars to Baal and offered their sons to Baal.

Baal idol, University of Chicago. Author’s photograph.

Jeremiah 19:9 – Baal was a fertility god – the people offered their firstborn to Baal so that Baal would grant them many more children. The LORD didn’t ask for human sacrifice, but redemption (Exodus 13:15 – The LORD drew a distinct difference between mankind and the animals). This act was a memorial of the Passover, which itself foreshadowed our Passover Lamb, the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 5:7)! But – because the firstborn has been sacrificed to Baal, they cannot be redeemed to the LORD.

Note the similarity between this and the Garden of Eden. The Tree of Life is more powerful than the Tree of Death/Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 3:22). If Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of Life first, they would live forever (Genesis 3:22). If they ate of the Tree of Life after, it would reverse the Tree of Death. But because they ate of the Tree of Death first, God put a guard at the east entrance to the way of the Tree of Life to keep them from eating it (Genesis 3:24) – because the life that comes ‘free’ must now be paid for with blood (Hebrews 9:22). Satan had a plan to keep Adam & Eve from the Tree of Life by getting them to the Tree of Death first, just like he planned to keep the kids from being redeemed by the LORD by being sacrificed to Baal (Jeremiah 19:9).

But if they will offer their firstborn to Baal, the LORD challenges Baal try to deliver the other kids from the LORD’s promised judgment that will cause not just filicide but cannibalism! Jeremiah further says (because they apparently do not value children as much as prosperity) if you go to worship by burning your children alive at Tophet (Jeremiah 19:2/Jeremiah 19:6), I’ll make your houses like Tophet as well (Jeremiah 19:13).

Jeremiah 20:2 – Well, the street preacher Jeremiah has been arrested (no 1st Amendment rights in Jerusalem!), beaten, and put in stocks.

Jeremiah 20:9 – A reluctant witness for the LORD cannot stay silent. His word is as a burning fire shut up in my bones – release it!

Jeremiah 21:9 – The only way to survive is to surrender. All to Jesus do you surrender?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2BnL_zI7uw

1 Thessalonians 5:8 – Americans consumed 7 billion gallons of beer last year. But Paul urges us to be sober!

1 Thessalonians 5:11 – Whether we live or die – our comfort is that we are with our LORD!

1 Thessalonians 5:17 – Pray on occasion? No! Pray without ceasing! (And pray for us! 1 Thessalonians 5:25).

1 Thessalonians 5:23 – from Earl Martin:

Psalm 82:3-4 – Looking at what we read in Jeremiah – who is poorer or needier than the young firstborn babies that were sacrificed to Baal? Who needs protection more than the widow, on the verge of being fleeced by the unscrupulous dealmaker?

Proverbs 25:9 – Debate thy cause with thy neighbor on Facebook… or privately? Yes discretion is a valuable tool in the Christian’s arsenal!

Share how reading thru the Bible has been a blessing to you! E-mail us at 2018bible@vcyamerica.org or call and leave a message at 414-885-5370.

October 12 – From the Serpent in the Garden to Baal in Tophet: Satan’s plan for your death — VCY America

October 12 Thoughts for the quiet hour

Surely God is in this place, and I knew it not

       Gen. 28:16

The Parish Priest, of austerity,

Climbed up in the high church steeple

To be nearer God, that he might hand

His word down to the people.

And in sermon script he daily wrote

What he thought was sent from heaven;

And he dropped it down on the people’s heads

Two times one day in seven.

In his age God said, “Come down and die.”

And he cried out from the steeple:

“Where art thou, Lord?” And the Lord replied:

“Down here among My people.”

Selected[1]


[1] Hardman, S. G., & Moody, D. L. (1997). Thoughts for the quiet hour. Willow Grove, PA: Woodlawn Electronic Publishing.

Cartoons and Memes · Oct. 12, 2020

“The Patriot Post” (https://patriotpost.us)

Read Online

Mid-Day Snapshot · Oct. 12, 2020

THE FOUNDATION

“One single object … [will merit] the endless gratitude of the society: that of restraining the judges from usurping legislation.” —Thomas Jefferson (1825)

IN TODAY’S DIGEST

FEATURED ANALYSIS

The Barrett Hearings: A Primer

Douglas Andrews

If you’re among the handful of people who’ve been diligently watching the NBA Finals, you might’ve missed the news: Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Senate confirmation hearings began this morning.

The hearings, which take place in the 22-member Senate Judiciary Committee, kicked off at 9 a.m. ET today and will run through Thursday. Today’s session began with an introductory statement by Republican Chairman Lindsey Graham and ranking member Dianne “the dogma lives loudly within you” Feinstein, followed by a 10-minute opening statement by each committee member, then an introduction of Judge Barrett by Indiana Senator Todd Young and former Notre Dame Law School Dean Patricia O’Hara.

Barrett will then deliver her opening remarks, in which she’s expected to praise two deceased giants of the Supreme Court: Antonin Scalia, who was her mentor, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whose death on September 18 made available this seat on the High Court. Barrett, a constitutional originalist in the mold of Scalia, is also expected to stress that it’s the courts’ responsibility to enforce the Rule of Law, not to solve every problem or right every wrong, and that the policies and value judgments of government must be made by the two branches of government that are accountable to the American people at the ballot box.

The full text of Judge Barrett’s opening remarks can be found here.

None of this will matter to Senate Democrats, however, as they’ve already mapped out their strategy and spoon-fed it to an eager and obedient mainstream media.

This strategy was rolled out on Sunday morning’s news talk shows. Delaware Democrat Senator Chris Coons, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, argued that the GOP’s efforts to seat Judge Barrett before the end of President Donald Trump’s four-year term constitutes — wait for it — court packing. This despite the term’s clear meaning related to expanding the number of seats on the Court and filling those seats with ideologically like-minded justices. “I’m going to be laying out the ways in which Judge Barrett’s views … are not just extreme, they’re disqualifying,” said Coons. Confirmation, he added, “constitutes court packing.”

Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin, also a member of the Judiciary Committee, likewise corrupted the meaning of the term “court packing,” saying, “The American people have watched Republicans packing the Court over the last three and a half years, and they brag about it — that they’ve taken every vacancy and filled it.”

This perversion of a particular term has a purpose. Democrats are trying to turn the tables on what has, for the past two weeks, become an uncomfortable and unanswerable question for their presidential nominee, Joe Biden. Time after time, Biden has been called upon to answer a simple but critical question: whether he’d pack the Supreme Court with liberal justices if elected. At every turn, he’s refused to tell the voters what his plans are, claiming that his answer would immediately become the focus of attention. Of course, any effort to illegitimately pack the Supreme Court, which has worked perfectly well with nine justices for the past 151 years, deserves the American people’s undivided attention.

Biden’s answer to whether the American people have a right to know his position? “No, they don’t.”

No less a Trump-hating leftist than Jake Tapper has even grown tired of the Biden campaign’s disingenuous narrative. “How is [confirmation] not constitutional?” he repeatedly asked Biden flack Kate Bedingfield. Tapper, whose facial expressions tend to betray his feelings, looked like he was eating a bag of lemons as Bedingfield continued to duck and dodge.

Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse also registered his contempt: “It’s grotesque that Vice President Biden won’t answer that really basic question,” he said. “And it isn’t just one branch of government. What [Democrats are] really talking about — or refusing to talk about — is the suicide bombing of two branches of government.”

That pretty much sums up the Democrats’ desperate game plan. The next few days will determine whether the Leftmedia allows them to get away with it.

No Durham Findings Before the Election

Thomas Gallatin

On Friday, President Donald Trump and Republicans received the bad but sadly predictable news that U.S. Attorney John Durham would not release the findings of his criminal investigation into the origins of the Russia-collusion hoax until after the election in November. So much for timing.

Trump learned of Attorney General William Barr’s reported announcement while live on Rush Limbaugh’s radio program. He frustratedly responded, “If that’s the case, I’m very disappointed. I think it’s a terrible thing. And I’ll say it to [Barr’s] face. It’s a disgrace. It’s an embarrassment.” Trump then hit the proverbial nail on the head, arguing, “See, this is what I mean with the Republicans. They don’t play the tough game.”

Like so many Americans, Trump is fed up with what he sees as the intentional dragging out of an investigation into the deep-state actions of Barack Obama’s administration. Team Obama first sought to prevent Trump’s election and subsequently engaged in an attempted coup against a legitimate and duly elected president.

Trump’s criticism of Barr and Durham is understandable, as Trump and the American people deserve to see what evidence Durham has collected before the election. This is not a call to politicize the Justice Department, as Democrats and much of the mainstream media have disingenuously claimed. Rather it’s a call for the truth to be revealed about the biggest political scandal in U.S. history. It’s a call for transparency so voters can be fully informed.

Beyond that, there’s the legitimate concern that if Trump fails in his reelection bid, Joe Biden and company will terminate the Durham investigation and either suppress or spin its most damning findings. At the same time, Biden and Democrats will work to affirm Hillary Clinton’s dubious and false narrative — which she trotted out yet again last week — that Trump’s 2016 victory “was not on the level.” Of course, Hillary is fighting to prevent the full exposure of just how corruptly she acted in creating the entire Russia collusion hoax — all in a devious effort to distract attention from her own blatant and illegal email scandal. Yet she has the gall to complain, “We still don’t know what really happened.” Without Durham’s full report, that’s more true than she intended.

Rush and Donald Have a Conversation

Nate Jackson

President Donald Trump joined Rush Limbaugh for two hours Friday in what Rush called “the largest radio rally in history.” Having received the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the State of the Union Address in February, Rush was certainly a more friendly audience than most media talkingheads. Low bar, we know.

The crazy thing is, it made Donald Trump extremely likable. To listen to him have a conversation about a great many issues over the course of two hours without being hectored, bullied, or asked biased gotcha questions gave those tuning in the sense that Trump is actually a pretty decent guy.

Who knew, right?

Well, the president has proved himself likable to anyone who loves this country instead of disdainfully viewing it as a racist backwater. He’s likable to anyone who wants lower taxes, fewer regulations, economic recovery, sane immigration policy, judges and justices who uphold their oaths to the Constitution, to defend the Second Amendment, and election integrity. He’s likable to people who want the world’s terrorists and state bad actors to know the U.S. means business. Or, as Trump put it, “They’ve been put on notice: If you f—k around with us, you do something bad to us, we are going to do things to you that have never been done before, and they understand that.”

We suppose the Iranian mullahs and anyone from the Obama Clinton Kerry School of Diplomacy may object to the “likable, decent guy” sentiment.

Trump and Limbaugh discussed all of the above topics and more. That’s important because, particularly on the subjects of immigration and the Second Amendment, there wasn’t a single question about either topic at either the presidential or vice presidential debates. And there probably won’t be in the future. The mainstream media is utterly failing to provide a simple service to the American people: Exploring what the two major presidential candidates think about the issues. They’re too busy covering for Joe Biden.

Speaking of Biden, his declining mental state should worry every American, especially those who suspect Kamala Harris is the real candidate. And, as Rush pointed out, even a COVID-recovering Donald Trump is a formidable force. “We’ve now been chatting with the president for an hour and 42 minutes, ladies and gentlemen,” he said. “We have not had a commercial break. I would thus have to say the president’s status with COVID-19 is pretty solid. The second thing that I would say is that not once during the hour and 42 minutes has the president been stumped, has he not known what he wanted to say.”

In any case, the overriding point is that anyone who’s exposed to Trump without the Leftmedia filter is left with a much different — and far better — impression of the man.

No, Women Voters Are Not the Same

Robin Smith

The woman’s vote is up for grabs in this critical election. The Left works feverishly to define the criteria of being a woman voter with its enforcement mechanisms that do little more than just add to the echo chamber: the media, faculty of higher education, and groups such as Planned Parenthood. They serve as the “Mean Girls Enforcement Squad” that swarms on Twitter, advocating censorship, bullying, and even aggressive confrontations while simultaneously calling for free speech, civil discourse, and peaceful protests, all with a straight face.

Who are the women of the political Left? As Cora Mandy put it in 2018, the feminism of Democrats defines “the ideal candidate” as someone who is “pro-abortion, anti-gun, unwilling to enforce immigration laws, and wants to socialize health care.” Further, these leftist feminists have begun taking aim at conservative women in articles, commentary, narrative, and commercials. They claim — without evidence — that conservative women are racists who affiliate with a party “indistinguishable from a hate group” and are “brainwashed by their husbands or conservative media and incapable of making their own decisions.”

Put simply, if you’re not a female who meets their “ideal candidate” criteria, you’re a “gender traitor.”

What about those women who happen to embrace the notion of life’s value, even that of the preborn, the aged, and the most fragile? What about the women who are not just interested in birth control, but in the economy, public safety, job creation, national defense, education with results, healthcare that comes with choices, competition, transparency, and freedom? These are the true women’s issues; women work to solve problems, not just foster grievances.

It’s insulting to be told that “women’s issues” must be about reproduction and abortion, opposition to the Second Amendment (which prohibits women to arm ourselves for self-defense), and government choosing our healthcare.

It’s insulting that women are assumed to prioritize personality over policies. The 2020 election is framed as a personality contest by the media because despite his effective policies, President Donald Trump can be a jerk. Reminding women that his personality is offensive is a tool of the political Left and the anti-Trump Republicans.

If you’re a top-performing athlete, do you want to play for the coach that wins or the one who tells you nice things to inflate your self-esteem? If you’re a patient seeking a surgeon, do you want the one with the best outcomes and survivability or one whose bedside manner delights you?

The fuel of today’s political machinery is to use hyperbole, rhetoric, and even lies to erase the historic economy of early 2020 that featured the record-low 3.5% unemployment rate, GDP that rose to 3% in 2018, and a record-setting median household income of $68,703 for 2019, almost 7% higher than 2018. These are issues that women understand impact their freedom, their personal worth, and increase their opportunities.

The woman’s vote is absolutely not homogenous and, contrary to the Democrat playbook, women are not emotionally incontinent dupes. But women on the Center-Right must no longer choose to be in the Silent Majority. It’s time to speak up, lead, and excel to counter the anger-driven cancel culture approach so characteristic of today’s progressive women.

While 2020 has been a year many don’t want to remember due to natural disasters, COVID-19, and all the drama that accompanies a presidential election year, it’s also the Centennial of Woman Suffrage. In 100 years, the rights and roles of women have been elevated. Yet it’s predominately women on the political Right who embrace a sense of hope that our best days are ahead and that women are, indeed, leading. Women voters may just be the ones who again lead the march to freedom.

Selling Oppression as Healthcare

Arnold Ahlert

“There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs.” —Thomas Sowell

A curious thing happened on October 2. In fact, it was so curious, America’s mainstream media completely ignored it. That’s the day Dr. Mike Ryan, director of the World Health Organization’s health emergencies program, stated that an estimated 750 million, or 10% of the world’s population, had contracted coronavirus. Furthermore, according to the WHO’s website, approximately one million people have died. Thus, according the WHO’s own data, the mortality rate for coronavirus is 0.13%.

If that rate seems familiar, maybe it’s because it’s the exact same mortally rate as the seasonal flu, according to data from the CDC — and for decades, America and the rest of world have approached the flu exactly as Thomas Sowell has described. Some people get flu shots, most stay home when they’re sick, and tens of thousands of the most vulnerable pay the ultimate price, even as the world soldiers on around them.

Coronavirus? Fear of the unknown, buttressed by lies from China abetted by a co-conspiring WHO, and wildly inaccurate death-rate predictions — every bit of which was amplified to the point of hysteria by media know-nothings — precipitated widespread shutdowns. Shutdowns that crushed our economy, engendered a wholesale reordering of our entire society, and revealed a Ruling Class more than willing to embrace double standards, stunning hypocrisy, and unprecedented levels of contempt for the Constitution whenever it served their agenda.

How controlling have they gotten? Two Saturdays ago, California Governor Gavin Newsom’s office issued an advisory, telling restaurant-goers to keep their mask on — between bites. “Do your part to keep those around you healthy,” it added.

Keeping Americans healthy is an idea that has been mutilated beyond recognition. As anyone with a halfway decent memory can recall, the entire premise of keeping America locked down was to “flatten the curve” and prevent our healthcare system from being overwhelmed. Yet when the media-generated smoke cleared, field hospitals set up for the overflow that never happened were dismantled before treating a single patient, ships sat in harbors virtually unused, and thousands of healthcare workers were laid off — all while millions of unhealthy Americans had critical tests and procedures for such illnesses as cancer, heart disease, pneumonia, tuberculosis, and a host of others indefinitely postponed.

Unhealthy Americans made so fearful that even when some semblance of normalcy has returned, many still refuse to go to the hospital or even the emergency room.

What’s the mortality rate among those people? And what’s the mortality rate among millions of Americans who have become alcoholics, drug addicts, or have been subjected to spousal or parental abuse? How many have committed suicide or even murder, or simply died of stress associated with those same lockdowns?

If we’re genuinely interested in the big picture with regard to “keeping Americans healthy,” where are those statistics? And what’s the real tradeoff with which Americans must contend? Moreover, isn’t it time the phrase “flatten the curve” is revealed for what it really meant — as in simply postponing the inevitable to a later point in time?

Last week, 40,000 people, including more than 4,000 epidemiologists, doctors, and public health professionals from around the world signed the “Great Barrington Declaration” urging people to return to return to normal life, even as the battle against coronavirus remains ongoing.

That declaration was delivered by three experts. Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, who is also a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations; Dr. Sunetra Gupta, an epidemiologist at Oxford University with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases; and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a physician and epidemiologist at Stanford University, who is also a public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.

These doctors boast an impressive array of credentials, not only as doctors per se, but expressly in the fields of medicine most germane to fighting infectious viruses. Yet in terms of a progressive political agenda, and the need to maximize the suffering of Americans to maximize progressive chances for success in the 2020 election, such a declaration amounts to pure heresy.

Then again, it’s only heresy if the public becomes aware of it. Other than The Washington Times, the major media is simply ignoring the Great Barrington Declaration.

In short, “follow the science!!” American leftists are far more invested in following the silence, lest they be forced to make a cogent and convincing counter-argument as to why the continued trampling of the Constitution — the same Constitution that doesn’t not contain a single phrase allowing for its abrogation in an emergency — remains vitally necessary.

Which brings us to the real big picture. Since coronavirus and the flu seem to have an equivalent mortality rate — but we have nonetheless “evolved” to a point where nationwide upheaval can be deemed “critically necessary” via a contemptible combination of unscrupulous politicians, their politically motivated “scientist” allies, and a corporate media that has become little more than a mouthpiece for the Ruling Class agenda — what other diseases will precipitate the same totalitarian response?

In other words, is any ailment that even looks like it could produce a mortality rate of 0.13% or greater the basis upon which our rights can be indefinitely suspended? When asked about re-instituting nationwide lockdowns, Joe Biden promised he would “shut it down” if scientists told him to do so. “I will be prepared to do whatever it takes to save lives because we cannot get the country moving, until we control the virus,” he added. “That is the fundamental flaw of this administration’s thinking to begin with. In order to keep the country running and moving and the economy growing, and people employed, you have to fix the virus, you have to deal with the virus.”

That we cannot keep the country moving until we “control the virus” might come as a shock to millions of hard-working Americans who have kept the country moving, even as hack politicians — who haven’t missed a single paycheck since the epidemic began — view that effort as a “fundamental flaw” in the Trump administration’s thinking.

Moreover, no one has asked Biden a simple question: Which scientists, Joe? Certainly not the ones routinely censored by Google, Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube for daring to violate phony “community standards” that are nothing more than an attempt to control the spread of “undesirable” information. Certainly not the ones who advocate for certain types of disease mitigation that must be totally dismissed because of a far more virulent epidemic known as Trump Derangement Syndrome.

For eight years, Joe Biden was part of an administration that warned Americans they would have to accept a “new normal” of economic impotency. Now Biden and his fellow Democrats aim to impose another “new normal” — of soft totalitarianism sold as virus mitigation.

That’s the ultimate “tradeoff” in play here. Make no mistake about it.

Reverse Racism Is Still Racism

Douglas Andrews

Whatever one thinks about affirmative action, this much is undeniable: It’s one of the most effective euphemisms ever created. If you disagree, try to come up with a sweeter sounding way to say “race-based discrimination.”

We’ll wait.

According to The Smithsonian, this politically charged term entered the presidential lexicon in 1961, when, in John F. Kennedy’s Executive Order 10925, he called on government contractors to “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin” [emphasis added].

Without regard. Thus, the affirmative action of 1961 has been turned completely on its head. For decades now, these discriminatory policies have taken from one group and given to another. And yet according to Princeton’s panicky president, things have only gotten worse.

They’ve gotten worse, too, for another Ivy League school — Yale — which the Trump Justice Department is now suing for violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and for imposing “undue and unlawful” undergraduate admissions penalties on the school’s white and Asian applicants.

As Power Line’s Paul Mirengoff writes, “According to the complaint, Yale engages in racial balancing by, among other things, keeping the annual percentage of African-American admitted applicants to within one percentage point of the previous year’s admitted class as reflected in U.S. Department of Education data. The complaint alleges similar racial balancing with regard to Asian-American applicants. It also alleges that Yale injures applicants and students because its race discrimination relies upon and reinforces damaging race-based stereotypes, including such stereotypes against Yale’s racially favored applicants.”

When affirmative action is couched in terms of “righting wrongs” or “improving diversity,” a majority of folks tend to favor it. But, as the above description of the Yale lawsuit indicates, the more people know about a particular instance of affirmative action, the less they support it. Take, for example, what Gallup Senior Scientist Frank Newport wrote in 2018 about still another case of race-based Ivy League discrimination — this time at Harvard: “Gallup polls have shown that a majority — although not a super majority — of Americans favor the broad, conceptual idea of ‘affirmative action for racial minorities.’ Responses to this question are to some degree affected by the context in which it is asked, but our most recent updates show that 54% to 58% of the public favors affirmative action for racial minorities.”

That seems pretty solid support, doesn’t it? And the Pew Research Center’s numbers are even more impressive: 71% of Americans think affirmative action is a good thing.

Or do they?

When people are polled about affirmative action, context is everything. The Pew poll got that 71% number by asking about “affirmative action programs designed to increase the number of black and minority students on college campuses.” And when it’s put in those terms, affirmative action seems like a pretty noble endeavor.

But, as Newport admits, “The Gallup question does not define ‘affirmative action’ at all, leaving that to the understanding of the respondent. The Pew question doesn’t define the specifics of the affirmative action programs beyond saying that the result would be to increase the number of black and minority students on college campuses.”

What happens, though, when respondents are given some specifics? According to Newport, Gallup in 2016 asked about a then-recent Supreme Court decision involving the University of Texas, which was worded as follows: “The Supreme Court recently ruled on a case that confirms that colleges can consider the race or ethnicity of students when making decisions on who to admit to the college. Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the Supreme Court’s decision?”

The results? Just 31% approved of the Supreme Court’s decision upholding affirmative action, while a whopping 65% disapproved.

In short, folks generally favor affirmative action in the abstract, but they generally hate race-based discrimination in the real world. Yet these two terms are synonymous. And therein lies the awful power of a well-crafted euphemism.

It’s Tougher to Support Trump Than Be Osama’s Relative

Thomas Gallatin

What’s worse — being associated with President Donald Trump or Osama bin Laden? Well, according to the late terrorist mass murder’s niece, Noor bin Ladin, it’s Trump. In a recent article entitled “Being pro-Trump has caused me more grief than being Osama bin Laden’s niece,” she asserts that her public support of the U.S. president has essentially made her as persona non grata.

Noor, whose father was Osama bin Laden’s half brother Yeslam and whose mother is Swiss author Carmen Dufour, grew up in Switzerland. Her father and mother were never associated with Osama’s terrorist organization, al-Qaida.

Earlier this year, Noor wrote a powerful article in which she endorsed Trump. She warned against the hard-leftist anti-American ideology that has captured the Democrat Party. Ironically, it was this support for Trump rather than her infamous last name that, as she notes in the above-referenced article, has caused her the most grief.

Noor, who currently lives in Switzerland, makes clear her profound admiration for the U.S. and Americans in general. “Americans are, in my experience, the warmest, most kind-hearted and open-minded people in the world. … Americans base their judgement on the content of someone’s character and actions, not on the color of their skin — or last name,” she observes. She then notes:

This was reaffirmed last month, after I voiced my love for America and support for President Trump. The response to ‘My Letter to America’ has been overwhelmingly wonderful, and I am most thankful to all those who took the time to read it and send kind messages, including Spectator readers. But in my private life, I have lost a few so-called friends for backing Donald Trump over the past five years. Coming out publicly was a step too far for some, and the vitriol I received for stating my political beliefs revealed unflattering sides to certain characters. From a sociological standpoint, it is quite interesting that in some elitist circles being pro-Trump has caused me more grief than carrying the name bin Ladin.

She also explains her support for Trump and why it’s sensible and not crazy, as so many Leftmedia talkingheads suggest:

And why do I support Donald Trump? Look at his record. He has stood up to China, kept America out of new wars, solidified ties with Israel, overturned the disastrous Iran deal and obliterated Isis. Domestically, he removed handicapping regulations to American economic growth, rebuilt a depleted military, brought back manufacturing and revamped dying industries by renegotiating trade deals and cutting taxes; he has achieved energy independence, curbed immigration — all of which contributed to setting record unemployment rates. He has tackled neglected issues such as human trafficking and unjust incarceration — and given America a chance at restoring her principles, pride, independence and true place in the world as beacon of liberty and hope for all.

For Noor, like so many other people across the globe, America remains that shining city on a hill. It is the heartbeat of Liberty, and she longs to see it preserved. “Seeing the uplifting images of Americans rallying around the President also warms my heart and lifts my spirits. I wish I could be there with them. You can be sure I’ll be on one of the first flights to America once restrictions are lifted.” Too often, Americans are subject to a Leftmedia narrative claiming that the rest of the world rolls their eyes and cringes at the “dumb Americans” who would elect someone like Trump. It’s always a breath of fresh air to hear from those who see clearly what America is all about — and love us for it.

Why Comply: Seven Steps That Will Save Black Lives

Patrick Hampton

Far too much is said about police brutality, but not enough about the importance of being a good citizen. Black progressives wax poetic about the rare, yet uncalled for instances of mistreatment by law enforcement. Never do they address the myriad cases of how the citizens themselves make these situations more complicated, more violent, and more deadly than they have to be.

Mainstream media will play scenes of police brutality on repeat, perhaps to traumatize Americans into a certain frame of mind with nary a solution in sight. Meanwhile, Democrat lawmakers gaslight their own police forces, restructuring and reforming without doing their research. LEOs are now hesitating to respond, yet still, not a single word is said about the people being arrested and their bad choices in the heat of the moment. From reaching for weapons, to running from the police, it’s as if this new generation has never even heard of the show “COPS.” But I have a solution: seven steps to keep in mind that will work for all people who encounter the police.

  1. Remove hats and sunglasses: Making eye contact with the officer is critical. Eye contact helps build trust in many instances, but especially when interacting with law enforcement. After all, much can be said about a person by looking into their eyes. To hide your eyes is to hide the truth.
  2. Listen: Hearing the officer’s command is important. If you are talking, yelling, or screaming, you can’t hear. There is a science behind the notion of the human brain not being able to receive and transmit messages at the same time. And when encountering a scenario that involves your safety, listening skills are critical. Allowing your fear and prejudice for law enforcement to drown out reasoning skills can be lethal.
  3. No sudden moves: Running away puts you at higher risk of a physical altercation, as we witnessed in the case of Rayshard Brooks in the Atlanta Wendy’s parking lot. Again, putting fear over reasoning can be risky. Besides, if you have nothing to hide, there’s no need to run. Sadly, if you believe what the mainstream media tells you about LEOs, you will risk much more than a ticket for a minor infraction.
  4. Keep hands visible: Don’t reach for a phone — a la Stephan Clark — to record. Don’t reach for a knife — like Jacob Blake. Don’t reach for anything at all. LEOs are always watching your hands, and if your hands are free, you are not a threat to them.
  5. Obey commands: When we are young, we learn to respect authority by obeying the authority, especially when the request is reasonable. Putting your hands on the steering wheel is a reasonable request. Getting out of the car is a reasonable request. Taking your hat off and providing license and registration information are reasonable requests. What isn’t reasonable is acting irrational due to fear.
  6. Proper Address: We all know how to say “Yes, sir or no, sir.” Language is important. This signals to the officer that you are not a threat. You have home training or possible parents that taught you respect. Calling an officer names, being rude and challenging the officer sends signals that you are on the offense. And an offender to law enforcement is an offender to the public’s safety. Be respectful.
  7. Be kind: A Bible verse says soft answers turn away wrath. Kindness has power. Kindness still works.

If I could add one more thing, I’d say being honest is crucial. A person living an honest life fares better than someone with something to hide. Either way, innocence is not for us to decide alone. This is why we leave crime investigation up to our LEOs. Perhaps you may not know that your actions are illegal. Since ignorance of the law is not an excuse, officers are here not to hurt but to help correct and redirect offenders. They want you to stay alive.

Ultimately, the overarching concept that will help save more black lives in the face of law enforcement is a good choice. Simply put, if an officer pulled me over for a broken tail light, I’d comply and take the fine. If I acted irrationally and irritably with him, reaching for things and resisting reasonable commands, an LEO could take my life. It’s pointless to disagree, reject or rebuke this reality. We’ve witnessed the result of this. Instead, try kindness. Try respect. Try obedience. But most importantly, choose life.

NEWS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Top of the Fold

  • Barrett to praise Scalia in opening hearing statement, say court should not make policy (Fox News)
  • Biden says voters don’t deserve to know his position on court packing (The Washington Free Beacon)
  • Democrats collude to accuse GOP of “court packing” ahead of Barrett hearings (Washington Examiner)

Politics

  • Barr tells Republicans Durham report won’t be ready by election (Axios)
  • Hillary Clinton maintains 2016 election “was not on the level,” and “we still don’t know what really happened” (National Review)
  • Trump preparing new $1.8T coronavirus relief package, urges Congress to “go big” (Fox Business)
  • Trump picks up another Nobel Peace Prize nomination from Europe after diplomatic victories (Fox News)
  • Dem group spends millions on Fake News Facebook stories in key districts (National Review)
  • Nearly 50,000 Ohio voters receive wrong ballots (The Washington Free Beacon)

Annals of the “Social Justice” Caliphate

  • One dead after leftist BLM-antifa groups clash with Patriot rally in Denver (The Federalist)
  • Planned Parenthood audit shows accusations of multiple incidents of racism (The Daily Wire)
  • Lakers win NBA title; no one watches (Washington Examiner)
  • Washington Post blames “systemic racism” for George Floyd robbing a Latino woman at gunpoint (Front Page Mag)
  • Security guard hired by local NBC News station charged with murder of right-wing protester (The Daily Wire)

The Latest on COVID-19

  • Trump is no longer a COVID-19 “transmission risk,” says the White House doctor (National Review)
  • Trump says he seems immune to COVID, Twitter labels his tweet “misleading” (Washington Examiner)
  • Coronavirus: WHO backflips on virus stance by condemning lockdowns (News.com.au)

Closing Arguments

  • Policy: How China is overtaking the U.S. with the world’s No. 1 navy (The Daily Signal)
  • Policy: Nationalizing 5G is the wrong way for the U.S. to compete with China (The Daily Signal)
  • Humor: Biden: “I won’t reveal whether I plan on abolishing the Constitution and establishing a glorious communist utopia until after I’m elected” (The Babylon Bee)

For more of today’s editors’ choice headlines, visit In Our Sights.

The Patriot Post is a certified ad-free news service, unlike third-party commercial news sites linked on this page, which may also require a paid subscription.

VIDEOS

Celebrating Columbus — Michael Knowles sets the record straight regarding the famous explorer.

Six Whoppers Harris Dropped at the Debate — As if the lies weren’t bad enough, the media’s silence is deafening.

Humor: If Pandemic Thinking Was Applied to Everything — JP Sears offers a spoof of some people’s irrationality toward the coronavirus.

Satire: Trump Catches COVID — Leftists don’t apply “even if it just saves one life” to the president.

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.

SHORT CUTS

Terrible answer: “No, they don’t.” —Joe Biden on whether “voters deserve to know his stance on packing the Supreme Court

The BIG Lie: “Look, the only court packing is going on right now — it’s going on with the Republicans packing the court now.” —Joe Biden

The BIG Lie II: “The American people have watched the Republicans packing the court for the past three and a half years, and they brag about it.” —Senator Dick Durbin

The BIG Lie III: “I’m going to be laying out the ways in which Judge Barrett’s views … are not just extreme, they’re disqualifying. It constitutes court-packing.” —Senator Chris Coons

Fake news: “[Montana Senate candidate Steve] Bullock said that if Coney Barrett was confirmed, he would be open to measures to depoliticize the court, including adding judges to the bench, a practice critics have dubbed packing the courts.” —Associated Press (Packing the court, which Democrats want to do, IS politicizing the court because it adds justices as opposed to just filling vacancies.)

From the Department of Corrections: “This story has been edited to make clear that it is Bullock’s opinion, rather than a fact.” —AP, which changed its coverage to this: “Bullock said that if Coney Barrett was confirmed, he would be open to measures including adding justices to the bench, a practice critics have dubbed packing the courts.”

The BIG Rebuttal: “Claiming that court-packing is filling open vacancies — that obviously isn’t what court-packing means.” —Senator Ben Sasse

Flashback: “President Roosevelt clearly had the right to send to the United States Senate and the United States Congress a proposal to pack the court. It was totally within his right to do that. He violated no law. He was legalistically, absolutely correct. But it was a bonehead idea.” —Joe Biden … in 1983

Upright: “It’s grotesque that Vice President Biden won’t answer that really basic question [about court packing]. And it isn’t just one branch of government. What they’re really talking about — or refusing to talk about — is the suicide bombing of two branches of government. What they’re talking about is blowing up the deliberative structure of the United States Senate by abolishing the filibuster and making it possible to turn the Senate into just another House of Representatives where every two years by a 51-49 majority major portions of American life change. And they’re going about doing that to pack the Supreme Court.” —Ben Sasse

Alpha jackass: “The terrorist Trump must be defeated, must be destroyed, must be devoured at the ballot box and then he and his enablers and his supporters and his collaborators and the Mike Lees and the William Barrs and the Sean Hannitys and the Mike Pences and the Rudy Giulianis and the Kyle Rittenhouses and the Amy Coney Barretts must be prosecuted and convicted and removed from our society.” —Keith Olbermann

And last: “If Mr. Biden has this thing in the bag and Democrats are on the cusp of sweeping this election, why are [the Obamas], the two most popular standard-bearers in the party, so angry? And so afraid?” —Charles Hurt

TODAY’S MEME

For more of today’s memes, visit the Memesters Union.

TODAY’S CARTOON

For more of today’s cartoons, visit the Cartoons archive.

Read Online

“The Patriot Post” (https://patriotpost.us)

Southern Baptist Elites Moore, Akin, Prior sign wicked political statement — Capstone Report

Evangelical Elites including Southern Baptists Daniel Akin and Karen Swallow Prior at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (SEBTS) and Russell Moore of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) released a new statement For the Health of the Nation that justifies Christians voting Democrat. It is another wicked attempt to legitimize the sinful casting of votes for baby murder candidates.

We invite all followers of Jesus — whether Democrats, Republicans or Independents — to join us in seeking the health of the nation for the good of all people,” the statement declares in its preamble.

Wait, a Democrat is not a follower of Jesus. To imply that is to deny the clear fact that no baby murderer is a true disciple of Jesus. To vote Democrat is to aid and abet baby murder. It is sinful.

In fact, anyone voting Democrat should be under church discipline.

If they have made clear by voting Democrat they do not have God for a Father, then why should they have the church for a mother?

They should not.

Anyone voting Democrat should be excommunicated pending their repentance.

But Big Evangelicalism refuses to be blunt about Democrats. So, it falls to men like Pastor John MacArthur to tell the truth—No Christian can vote Democrat.

And we’ve repeatedly argued church discipline is the only response to any church member voting Democrat.

The statement has over 1,300 signatures as of Monday, October 12, 2020. Signatures include Big Eva names like three top leaders of World Relief along with Leith Anderson, the President Emeritus of National Association of Evangelicals, and Dan Darling, a former ERLC employee and current Senior Vice President of Communications, National Religious Broadcasters.

The statement argues for a “a biblically balanced agenda” that embraces what appears to be womb-to-the-tomb type social programs to help the poor and other favored identity groups. The statement engages in typical anti-Christian, Democratic Neo-Marxist rhetoric about unjust systems and helping other classes favored by Democrats including immigrants (illegal ones?), refugees and the poor.

“Despite the example of Jesus and the teaching of Scripture, many of us have not adequately opposed the unjust systems that fail people of color, women, children and the unborn. We have not always fulfilled God’s commands to protect the immigrant, refugee and poor. We have not always treated those who hold different opinions — both inside and outside of our faith — with dignity.”

This is what Southern Baptist churches are supporting as long as men like Russell Moore are paid by the Cooperative Program of the Southern Baptist Convention. He attempted to derail Donald Trump’s election in 2016 and continues to promote these types of wicked statements that refuse to condemn Democratic voters.

If you are wondering just what they are teaching at Southern Baptist seminaries, then you should check back later—we will post a little about the Woke Hermeneutics infecting Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Southern Baptist Elites Moore, Akin, Prior sign wicked political statement — Capstone Report

Powell: The Obama Admin Was Complicit – “They Pushed the Disinformation” Against Trump and Flynn… — The Last Refuge

Appearing on Fox Business with Maria Bartiromo, Michael Flynn’s defense counsel Sidney Powell cuts through the parseltongue to note the Obama administration was not tricked into allowing a smear campaign against Donald Trump and Michael Flynn; the Obama administration was participating in the creation and pushing of the smear campaign.

  • July 26, 2016 – ¹Brennan informed by campaign operative that Hillary Clinton, political allies and agents were using and pushing Trump-Russia smear.
  • July 28, 2016 – ²Brennan briefs President Obama about smear campaign in White House.
  • July 31, 2016 – FBI Agent Peter Strzok opens Trump investigation (Crossfire Hurricane) based on Trump-Russia collusion smear.
  • FBI begins using Steele-Dossier created by Fusion-GPS and Clinton Campaign as primary justification for ongoing Trump investigation.

Everyone knew exactly what they were doing. No-one was tricked into participating.

Remember, the four-year democrat narrative (pushed relentlessly by media) was how the professional intelligence community worked diligently to verify the Trump-Russia intelligence, and that every aspect briefed to President Obama went through the highest levels of “by-the-book” verification and authentication. Now those same democrats and media voices are claiming the Brennan briefing material was “Russian disinformation.”

The accuracy of the 3-year-old CTH graphics has withstood the test of time. – That’s and example of how brutally obvious this scheme was from the outset.

.

Powell: The Obama Admin Was Complicit – “They Pushed the Disinformation” Against Trump and Flynn… — The Last Refuge

October 12 Surrender!

My son, give me your heart and let your eyes keep to my ways.
(Proverbs 23:26, NIV)

Have you heard about the old Scottish lady who earned her living by peddling her wares along country roads? Each day she’d go out, and when she came to an intersection, she’d toss a stick into the air. Whichever way the stick pointed when it landed was the way she went. One day a man saw her tossing the stick into the air, once, twice, three times. He asked, “Why are you throwing your stick like that?” She said, “I am letting God show me which way to go by using this stick.” “But why did you throw it three times?” he inquired. She replied, “Because the first two times He was pointing me in the wrong direction!” When you pray, if you don’t like what He tells you, do you pray again, hoping He’ll say what you want to hear? If so, you’ve never exchanged your will for His!

Jesus said, “I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15:5). When you stay “connected,” you bear fruit spontaneously and naturally. There’s no striving and straining; it’s just an outgrowth of your intimacy with Him. Just as the life flows from the vine into the branches, so power flows from the one who dwells within you and begins to affect every area of your life.

Martha spent time working for Him, but Mary spent time listening to Him, and Jesus said, “She hath chosen that better part” (Luke 10:42).[1]


[1] Gass, B. (1998). A Fresh Word For Today : 365 Insights For Daily Living (p. 285). Alachua, FL: Bridge-Logos Publishers.

October 12 The Return of George Lucas

Romans 12:19 tlb

Dear friends, never avenge yourselves. Leave that to God, for he has said that he will repay those who deserve it.

The third movie in the Star Wars series was originally titled Revenge of the Jedi. Several months prior to the release of the film, many promotional materials were sent to movie theaters and chains across the country.

Then someone suggested to director George Lucas that if the Jedi knights were indeed agents of goodness and peace, they would not be motivated by revenge. Lucas thought about it, then agreed. Even though a title change would mean a substantial cost in redesigning film titles and replacing promotional materials, Lucas retitled the film Return of the Jedi.

In our culture, vengeance is not an uncommon concept. When someone does us wrong, our immediate reaction is to want to get back at them. If we are to be Christlike, though, we must give up our vengefulness.[1]


[1] Jeremiah, D. (2002). Sanctuary: finding moments of refuge in the presence of God (p. 299). Nashville, TN: Integrity Publishers.

Biden-Harris joint appearance in Arizona draws no spectators — as in ZERO attendees – American Thinker

Who are you going to believe – the polls or your lying eyes? With apologies to Groucho Marx, we now have the answer to the question: “What if they held a Biden-Harris rally and nobody showed up?”

With nobody visible on the street outside, the reporter said, “Pretty much all the people we saw who pulled into the parking lot about 45 minutes ago were with the Biden-Harris campaign or the pool reporters.”  And she noted that because both halves of the ticket were appearing, it was “technically, a big event.”

Not big enough to draw a crowd.

— Read on www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/10/bidenharris_joint_appearance_in_arizona_draws_emno_spectatorsem__as_in_zero_attendees.html

When Science Conflicts With Politics, WHO Chooses Politics

Our guess is that growing public opposition to the lockdowns, and news of a return to normal in places like Sweden, made WHO’s support for the measures untenable. 

— Read on thefederalist.com/2020/10/12/lockdown-reversal-shows-that-when-science-conflicts-with-politics-who-chooses-politics/

October 12 Streams in the Desert

And Joseph’s master took him, and put him into a prison … But Jehovah was with Joseph … and that which he did, Jehovah made it to prosper. (Gen.39:20–23)

WHEN God lets us go to prison because we have been serving Him, and goes there with us, prison is about the most blessed place in the world that we could be in. Joseph seems to have known that. He did not sulk and grow discouraged and rebellious because “everything was against him”. If he had, the prison-keeper would never have trusted him so. Joseph does not even seem to have pitied himself.

Let us remember that if self-pity is allowed to set in, that is the end of us—until it is cast utterly from us. Joseph just turned over everything in joyous trust to God, and so the keeper of the prison turned over everything to Joseph. Lord Jesus, when the prison doors close in on me, keep me trusting, and keep my joy full and abounding. Prosper Thy work through me in prison: even there, make me free indeed.—Selected.

A little bird I am,

Shut from the fields of air,

And in my cage I sit and sing

To Him who placed me there;

Well pleased a prisoner to be,

Because, my God, it pleaseth Thee.

My cage confines me round,

Abroad I cannot fly,

But though my wing is closely bound,

My soul is at liberty;

For prison walls cannot control

The flight, the freedom of the soul.

I have learnt to love the darkness of sorrow; there you see the brightness of His face.—Madame Guyon.[1]


[1] Cowman, L. B. (1925). Streams in the Desert (pp. 295–296). Los Angeles, CA: The Oriental Missionary Society.

12 Oct 2020 – Rapture Ready News

Did The WHO Just (Accidentally) Confirm COVID Is No More Dangerous Than Flu?
The World Health Organization has finally confirmed what we (and many experts and studies) have been saying for months – the coronavirus is no more deadly or dangerous than seasonal flu.

‘Adjustment Day’ Looms As America’s Headed For Violent Civil War
It’s hard to believe, but the scenario envisioned by Chuck Palahniuk in Adjustment Day is becoming more plausible with each passing week…

Is Canada Handing Off the Western Provinces to the CHICOMS As a Prelude to Invasion of the United States?
The Western portion of Canada is not just allowing the CHICOM’s Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) to be present in British Colombia,  the PLA is taking over.

DATA MANIPULATION: CoVid Health Department Fraud
HERE WE GO – the fourth wave is now asserting itself just in time for the election…   The second and third waves apparently flopped, so attention is being drawn to a fourth, much more severe, much less age discriminate wave to incite fear and panic!   In Democrat controlled states… of course.

Democrat Keith Olbermann Says All Trump Supporters Are ‘Maggots’ And Calls For The President And Everyone Who Voted For Him ‘To Be Destroyed’
want to give you a very common sense and practical reason to vote for Donald Trump, something that could greatly affect your security and safety in the coming days after the election on November 3rd. Democrat Keith Olbermann, failed ESPN host and basement-dwelling Starbucks drinker, has called all of President Trump’s supporters ‘maggots’, and said that we must all be ‘prosecuted and destroyed’ in order to ‘re-create America’. Keith Olbermann is far from the only Democrat who thinks that way, and you should really think what I’m telling you.

Invoking the seven tell-tale signs to separate political parties
Politics was always meant to be evaluated by moral standards, though it’s been discouraged in the current climate besetting this election cycle. Except for the left, that is, which paints conservatives in its own likeness, expecting republicans to behave civilly during the process of excoriation according to a skewed concept of morality.

EXCLUSIVE: Federal judge drops massive bomb on Clinton Foundation, reveals IRS cover up — judge blows roof off protection racket in Moynihan & Doyle $2.5 BILLION case against Clinton’s
On the Thomas Paine Podcast, a federal judge today slapped the Internal Revenue Service for what amounts to a massive cover up to protect the Clinton Foundation from having to pay as much as $2.5 Billion in unpaid federal back taxes. In a rare overture, the judge sided with pro-se litigants and Clinton whistleblowers John Moynihan and Larry Doyle and allowed their case to proceed, smacking down the IRS’s attempts to derail the case and cover its own illicit activities.

WHO Flip-Flops: Urges World Leaders To Stop Using Lockdowns To Fight COVID Contagion
“We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,”

Ben Carson says HUD is investigating religious discrimination, Bible removal claims at housing complex
Dr. Ben Carson, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, said the department is investigating a complaint against the owner and manager of senior apartments in Oklahoma for violating the Fair Housing Act by removing Bibles and other religious literature from their common areas.

Hoping to outdo Trump’s ‘miracle cure,’ Israelis develop new antibody cocktail
US president took lab-made cocktail reportedly based on antibodies of mice and humans; Tel Aviv team says its version uses only human antibodies, potentially boosting reliability

— Read on www.raptureready.com/2020/10/12/12-oct-2020/

Monday Briefing October 12, 2020 – AlbertMohler.com

DOCUMENTATION AND ADDITIONAL READING
PART 1 (0:0 – 9:41): 
──────────────────
All Eyes on Washington, DC as Confirmation Hearings Begin for Supreme Court Nominee Amy Coney Barrett — What to Watch For as the Hearings Unfold 

Amy Coney Barrett’s Opening Statement For Senate Judiciary Committee 

THINKING IN PUBLIC
The Battle for the Supreme Court: A Conversation with Constitutional Scholar Ilya Shapiro 

PART 2 (9:42 – 17:56): 
──────────────────
The Politics Will Be Front and Center in Today’s Confirmation Hearings: America’s Senior Political Class in the Spotlight 

NEW YORK TIMES (BEN SMITH)
How to Cover a Politician In Decline: Blunt Truths 

NEW YORK TIMES (NICHOLAS FANDOS)
Democrats, Facing Critical Supreme Court Battle, Worry Feinstein Is Not Up to the Task 

PART 3 (17:57 – 26:56): 
──────────────────
Challenges to Religious Freedom in the Midst of the Pandemic: Churches and Other Religious Groups Face Discrimination From Overreaching Governments 

WALL STREET JOURNAL (THE EDITORIAL BOARD)
A Jewish Revolt Against Lockdowns 

NEW YORK TIMES (DOUGLAS LAYCOCK)
Do Cuomo’s New Covid Rules Discriminate Against Religion? 

THINKING IN PUBLIC
The Future of Religious Liberty in America: A Conversation with Law Professor Douglas Laycock 

Kicking at God’s Restraints — Grace to You Blog

In the aftermath of a tragedy, the unbelieving world is always quick to voice their spiritual skepticism with the question, “Where was God?” The underlying accusation is that God must not be so good or powerful if He can’t hold back wickedness and restrain evil. Even believers in moments of deep suffering and pain can give into the temptation of such thinking.READ MORE

Kicking at God’s Restraints — Grace to You Blog