1

How The Federal Government Used Evangelical Leaders To Spread COVID Propaganda To Churches

Written by Megan Basham

In September, Wheaton College dean Ed Stetzer interviewed National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins on his podcast, “Church Leadership” about why Christians who want to obey Christ’s command to love their neighbors should get the Covid vaccine and avoid indulging in misinformation.

For those not familiar with Stetzer, he’s not just a religious liberal arts professor and this wasn’t just another dime-a-dozen pastorly podcast. To name just a few of his past and present titles in the evangelical world, Stetzer is also the executive director of the Billy Graham Center and the editor-in-chief of Outreach media group. He was previously an editor at Christianity Today and an executive director at LifeWay, one of the largest religious publishers in the world. That’s to say nothing of the dozen-plus books on missions and church planting he’s authored.

In short, when it comes to leveraging high evangelical offices to influence everyday Christians, arguably no one is better positioned than Ed Stetzer. You may not know his name, but if you’re a church-going Protestant, it’s almost guaranteed your pastor does.

Which is why, when Stetzer joined a line of renowned pastors and ministry leaders lending their platforms to Obama-appointee Collins, the collaboration was noteworthy.

During their discussion, Collins and Stetzer were hardly shy about the fact that they were asking ministers to act as the administration’s go-between with their congregants. “I want to exhort pastors once again to try to use your credibility with your flock to put forward the public health measures that we know can work,” Collins said. Stetzer replied that he sometimes hears from ministers who don’t feel comfortable preaching about Covid vaccines, and he advises them, in those cases, to simply promote the jab through social media.

“I just tell them, when you get vaccinated, post a picture and say, ‘So thankful I was able to get vaccinated,’” Stetzer said. “People need to see that it is the reasonable view.”

Their conversation also turned to the subject of masking children at school, with Collins noting that Christians, in particular, have been resistant to it. His view was firm—kids should be masked if they want to be in the classroom. To do anything else is to turn schools into super spreaders. Stetzer offered no pushback or follow-up questions based on views from other medical experts. He simply agreed.

The most crucial question Stetzer never asked Collins however, was why convincing church members to get vaccinated or disseminating certain administration talking points should be the business of pastors at all.

Christians and Conspiracy Theories

Stetzer’s efforts to help further the NIH’s preferred coronavirus narratives went beyond simply giving Collins a softball venue to rally pastors to his cause. He ended the podcast by announcing that the Billy Graham Center would be formally partnering with the Biden administration. Together with the NIH and the CDC it would launch a website, coronavirusandthechurch.com, to provide clergy Covid resources they could then convey to their congregations.

Much earlier in the pandemic, as an editor at evangelicalism’s flagship publication, Christianity Today (CT), Stetzer had also penned essays parroting Collins’ arguments on conspiracy theories. Among those he lambasted other believers for entertaining, the hypothesis that the coronavirus had leaked from a Wuhan lab. In a now deleted essay, preserved by Web Archive, Stetzer chided, “If you want to believe that some secret lab created this as a biological weapon, and now everyone is covering that up, I can’t stop you.”

It may seem strange, given the evidence now emerging of NIH-funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan, to hear a church leader instruct Christians to “repent” for the sin of discussing the plausible supposition that the virus had escaped from a Chinese laboratory. This is especially true as it doesn’t take any great level of spiritual discernment — just plain common sense — to look at the fact that Covid first emerged in a city with a virology institute that specializes in novel coronaviruses and realize it wasn’t an explanation that should be set aside too easily. But it appears Stetzer was simply following Collins’ lead.

Only two days before Stetzer published his essay, Collins participated in a livestream event, co-hosted by CT. The outlet introduced him as a “follower of Jesus, who affirms the sanctity of human life” despite the fact that Collins is on record stating he does not definitively believe, as most pro-lifers do, that life begins at conception, and his tenure at NIH has been marked by extreme anti-life, pro-LGBT policies. (More on this later).

But the pro-life Christian framing was sure to win Collins a hearing among an audience with deep religious convictions about the evil of abortion. Many likely felt reassured to hear that a likeminded medical expert was representing them in the administration.

During the panel interview, Collins continued to insist that the lab leak theory wasn’t just unlikely but qualified for the dreaded misinformation label. “If you were trying to design a more dangerous coronavirus,” he said, “you would never have designed this one … So I think one can say with great confidence that in this case the bioterrorist was nature … Humans did not make this one. Nature did.”

It was the same message his subordinate, Dr. Anthony Fauci, had been giving to secular news outlets, but Collins was specifically tapped to carry the message to the faithful. As Time Magazine reported in Feb. 2021, “While Fauci has been medicine’s public face, Collins has been hitting the faith-based circuit…and preaching science to believers.”

The editors, writers, and reporters at Christian organizations didn’t question Collins any more than their mainstream counterparts questioned Fauci.

Certainly The Gospel Coalition, a publication largely written for and by pastors, didn’t probe beyond the “facts” Collins’ offered or consider any conflicts of interest the NIH director might have had before publishing several essays that cited him as almost their lone source of information. As with CT, one article by Gospel Coalition editor Joe Carter linked the reasonable hypothesis that the virus might have been human-made with wilder QAnon fantasies. It then lectured readers that spreading such ideas would damage the church’s witness in the world.

Of course, Stetzer and The Gospel Coalition had no way of knowing at that point that Collins and Fauci had already heard from leading U.S. and British scientists who believed the virus had indeed escaped from a Chinese lab. Or that they believed it might be the product of gain-of-function engineering, possibly with funding from the NIH itself. Nor could they have predicted that emails between Collins and Fauci would later show the pair had a habit of turning to friendly media contacts (including, it seems, Christian media contacts) to discredit and suppress opinions they didn’t like, such as questioning Covid’s origins and the wisdom of masks and lockdowns.

What Stetzer and others did know was that one of the most powerful bureaucrats in the world was calling on evangelical leaders to be “ambassadors for truth.” And they were happy to answer that call.

The question was, just how truthful was Collins’ truth?

Evangelicals of a Feather

Stetzer, CT, and The Gospel Coalition were hardly alone in uncritically lending their sway over rank-and-file evangelicals to Collins. The list of Christian leaders who passed the NIH director their mics to preach messages about getting jabs, wearing masks, and accepting the official line on Covid is as long as it is esteemed.

One of the most noteworthy was the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), an organization funded by churches in the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S.

While a webinar featuring Collins and then-ERLC-head Russell Moore largely centered, again, on the importance of pastors convincing church members to get vaccinated, the discussion also moved on to the topic of masks. With Moore nodding along, Collins held up a basic, over-the-counter cloth square, “This is not a political statement,” he asserted. “This is not an invasion of your personal freedom…This is a life-saving medical device.”

Even in late 2020, the claim was highly debatable among medical experts. As hematologist-oncologist Vinay Prasad wrote in City Journal this month, public health officials like Collins have had a truth problem over the entire course of Covid, but especially when it comes to masks. “The only published cluster randomized trial of community cloth masking during Covid-19,” Prasad reported, “found that…cloth masks were no better than no masks at all.” [emphasis mine].

At this point, even the CDC is backing away from claims that cloth masks are worth much of anything.

Yet none of the Christian leaders platforming Collins evidently felt it was worth exploring a second opinion. And the list of pastors who were willing to take a bureaucrat’s word that matters that could have been left to Christian liberty were instead tests of one’s love for Jesus goes on.

Former megachurch pastor Tim Keller’s joint interview with Collins included a digression where the pair agreed that churches like John MacArthur’s, which continued to meet in-person despite Covid lockdowns, represented the “bad and ugly” of good, bad, and ugly Christian responses to the virus.

During Saddleback Pastor Rick Warren’s special broadcast with Collins on behalf of Health and Human Services, he mentioned that he and Collins first met when both were speakers for the billionaires and heads of state who gather annually in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. They reconnected recently, Warren revealed, at an “off-the-record” meeting between Collins and “key faith leaders.” Warren did not say, but one can make an educated guess as to who convened that meeting and for what purpose, given the striking similarity of Collins’ appearances alongside all these leading Christian lights.

Once again, Warren and Collins spent their interview jointly lamenting the unlovingness of Christians who question the efficacy of masks, specifically framing it as a matter of obedience to Jesus. “Wearing a mask is the great commandment: love your neighbor as yourself,” the best-selling author of “The Purpose-Driven Life” declared, before going on to specifically argue that religious leaders have an obligation to convince religious people to accept the government’s narratives about Covid.

“Let me just say a word to the priests and pastors and rabbis and other faith leaders,” he said. “This is our job, to deal with these conspiracy issues and things like that…One of the responsibilities of faith leaders is to tell people to…trust the science. They’re not going to put out a vaccine that’s going to hurt people.”

Leaving aside for a moment the fact that government does have a record of putting out vaccines that “hurt people,” is it truly the pastor’s job to tell church members to “trust the science?” Is it a pastor’s job to slyly insult other pastors who chose to handle shutdowns differently, as Warren did when he quipped that his “ego doesn’t require” him to “have a live audience to speak to.”

And still the list goes on.

The same week MacArthur’s church was in the news for resisting California Governor Gavin Newsom orders to keep houses of worship closed, Collins participated in an interview with celebrated theologian N.T. Wright.

During a discussion where the NIH director once again trumpeted the efficacy of cloth masks, the pair warned against conspiracies, mocking “disturbing examples” of churches that continued meeting because they thought “the devil can’t get into my church” or “Jesus is my vaccine.” Lest anyone wonder whether Wright experienced some pause over lending his reputation as a deep Christian thinker to Caesar’s agent, the friends finished with a guitar duet.

Even hipster Christian publications like Relevant, whose readers have likely never heard of Collins, still looked to him as the foundation of their Covid reporting.

Throughout all of it, Collins brought the message to the faithful through their preachers and leaders: “God is calling [Christians] to do the right thing.”

And none of those leaders thought to question whether Collins’ “right thing” and God’s “right thing” must necessarily be the same thing.

Why not? As Warren said of Collins during their interview: “He’s a man you can trust.”

A Man You Can Trust

Perhaps the evangelical elites’ willingness to unhesitatingly credit Collins with unimpeachable honesty has something to do with his rather Mr. Rogers-like appearance and gentle demeanor. The establishment media has compared him to “The Simpson’s” character Ned Flanders, noting that he has a tendency to punctuate his soft speech with exclamations of “oh boy!” and “by golly!”

Going by his concrete record, however, he seems like a strange ambassador to spread the government’s Covid messaging to theologically conservative congregations. Other than his proclamations that he is, himself, a believer, the NIH director espouses nearly no public positions that would mark him out as any different from any extreme Left-wing bureaucrat.

He has not only defended experimentation on fetuses obtained by abortion, he has also directed record-level spending toward it. Among the priorities the NIH has funded under Collins — a University of Pittsburgh experiment that involved grafting infant scalps onto lab rats, as well as projects that relied on the harvested organs of aborted, full-term babies. Some doctors have even charged Collins with giving money to research that required extracting kidneys, ureters, and bladders from living infants.

He further has endorsed unrestricted funding of embryonic stem cell research, personally attending President Obama’s signing of an Executive Order to reverse a previous ban on such expenditures. When Nature magazine asked him about the Trump administration’s decision to shut down fetal cell research, Collins made it clear he disagreed, saying, “I think it’s widely known that the NIH tried to protect the continued use of human fetal tissue. But ultimately, the White House decided otherwise. And we had no choice but to stand down.”

Even when directly asked about how genetic testing has led to the increased killing of Down Syndrome babies in the womb, Collins deflected, telling Beliefnet, “I’m troubled [by] the applications of genetics that are currently possible are oftentimes in the prenatal arena…But, of course, in our current society, people are in a circumstance of being able to take advantage of those technologies.”

When it comes to pushing an agenda of racial quotas and partiality based on skin color, Collins is a member of the Left in good standing, speaking fluently of “structural racism” and “equity” rather than equality. He’s put his money (or, rather, taxpayer money) where his mouth is, implementing new policies that require scientists seeking NIH grants to pass diversity, equity, and inclusion tests in order to qualify.

To the most holy of progressive sacred cows — LGBTQ orthodoxy — Collins has been happy to genuflect. Having declared himself an “ally” of the gay and trans movements, he went on to say he “[applauds] the courage and resilience it takes for [LGBTQ] individuals to live openly and authentically” and is “committed to listening, respecting, and supporting [them]” as an “advocate.”

These are not just the empty words of a hapless Christian official saying what he must to survive in a hostile political atmosphere. Collins’ declaration of allyship is deeply reflected in his leadership.

Under his watch, the NIH launched a new initiative to specifically direct funding to “sexual and gender minorities.” On the ground, this has translated to awarding millions in grants to experimental transgender research on minors, like giving opposite-sex hormones to children as young as eight and mastectomies to girls as young as 13. Another project, awarded $8 million in grants, included recruiting teen boys to track their homosexual activities like “condomless anal sex” on an app without their parents’ consent.

Other than his assertions of his personal Christian faith, there is almost no public stance Collins has taken that would mark him out as someone of like mind with the everyday believers to whom he was appealing.

How did Collins overcome all this baggage to become the go-to expert for millions of Christians? With a little help from his friends, who were happy to stand as his character witnesses.

Keller, Warren, Wright, and Stetzer all publicly lauded him as a godly brother.  When presenting Collins to Southern Baptists, Moore gushed over him as the smartest man in a book club he attends that also includes, according to Time Magazine, such luminaries of the “Christiantelligentsia” as The Atlantic’s Pete Wehner and The New York TimesDavid Brooks.

In October, even after Collins’ funding of the University of Pittsburgh research had become widely known, Moore continued to burnish his friend’s reputation, saying, “I admire greatly the wisdom, expertise, and, most of all, the Christian humility and grace of Francis Collins.” That same month, influential evangelical pundit David French deemed Collins a “national treasure” and his service in the NIH “faithful.” Former George W. Bush speechwriter and Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson struck the most poetic tone in his effusive praise, claiming that Collins possesses a “restless genius [that] is other-centered” and is a “truth-seeker in the best sense.”

Except, apparently, when those others are aborted infants or gender-confused children and when that truth pertains to lab leaks or gain-of-function funding.

Since news began breaking months ago that Collins and Fauci intentionally used their media connections to conspire to suppress the lab-leak theory, none of the individuals or organizations in this story has corrected their records or asked Collins publicly about his previous statements. Nor have they circled back with him to inquire on record about revelations the NIH funded gain-of-function coronavirus research in Wuhan. They also haven’t questioned him on the increasing scientific consensus that cloth masks were never very useful.

The Daily Wire reached out to Stetzer, Keller, Wright, Warren, Moore, and French to ask if they have changed their views on Collins given recent revelations. None responded.

Francis Collins has been an especially successful envoy for the Biden administration, delivering messages to a mostly-Republican Christian populace who would otherwise be reluctant to hear them. In their presentation of Collins’ expertise, these pastors and leaders suggested that questioning his explanations as to the origins of the virus or the efficacy of masks was not simply a point of disagreement but sinful. This was a charge likely to have a great deal of impact on churchgoers who strive to live lives in accordance with godly standards. Perhaps no other argument could’ve been more persuasive to this demographic.

This does not mean these leaders necessarily knew that the information they were conveying to the broader Christian public could be false, but it does highlight the danger religious leaders face when they’re willing to become mouth organs of the government.

What we do know about Collins and his work with Fauci is that they have shown themselves willing to compromise transparency and truth for PR considerations. Thus, everything they have told the public about the vaccines may be accurate and their message a worthy one for Christians. But their credibility no longer carries much weight. It would’ve been better had the evangelical establishment never platformed Collins at all and shipwrecked their own reputations to showcase their lofty connections to him.

While these evangelical leaders were warning about conspiracy theories, Collins was waging a misinformation campaign himself — one these Christian megaphones helped further.

Why they did it is a question only they can answer. Perhaps in their eagerness to promote vaccines, they weren’t willing to offer any pushback to Collins’ other claims. Certainly, the lure of respect in the halls of power has proved too great a siren call for many a man. Or perhaps it was simply that their friend, the NIH director, called on them for a favor. If so, a friend like Collins deserved much, much more scrutiny.

There’s an instructive moment at the end of Warren‘s interview with Collins. The pastor misquotes Proverbs 4, saying, “Get the facts at any price.”

That, of course, is not what the verse says. It says get wisdom at any price. And it was wisdom that was severely lacking when so many pastors and ministry heads recklessly turned over their platforms, influence, and credibility to a government official who had done little to demonstrate he deserved them.


This article was originally published by The Daily Wire, which is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. 




Why There’s an Increased Interest in Homeschooling

Written by Tony Perkins

There’s a lot to dislike about many public schools — and right now, student safety is at the top of the list. “After a gunman opened fire on students in Parkland, Florida,” a new Washington Times feature explains, “the phones started ringing at the Texas Home School Coalition, and they haven’t stopped yet.”

Like so many state organizations, the Texas organization was used to a certain number of inquiries about homeschooling. President Tim Lambert says they usually averaged about 600 calls a month — a number he watched double over the past several weeks. “When the Parkland shooting happened, our phone calls and emails exploded. And they’re not alone.

“I think what happens with these school shootings is they’re the straws that broke the camel’s back,” Christopher Chin, the president of Homeschool Louisiana, told the Times. “I don’t think it’s the major decision-maker, but it’s in the back of parents’ minds.” In general, he thinks, the violence, bullying, and dangerous environment is tipping the decision for families, who were already sick of the lack of quality instruction and the liberal indoctrination.

More families are angry about what their kids are learning — and they’re pulling their kids out of public school to prove it.

Over the last four years, reporters have seemed surprised by the mass exodus of children from traditional education settings. The homeschooling movement has ballooned from 1.5 million to estimates of more than 2 million now. Since most states aren’t required to count the number of homeschooling families, it’s still a guessing game. But there’s one thing everyone agrees on: more parents are making the leap — and fast.

Based on the crackdown on faith, the out-of-control sex ed, and genderless chaos, who can blame them? “Most parents homeschool for more than one reason,” Brian Ray points out at the National Home Education Research Institute. When he asks families, he hears these issues over and over again: “a desire to provide religious instruction or different values than those offered in public schools; dissatisfaction with the academic curriculum, and worries about the school environment.”

In some states, like North Carolina, the number of kids in home schools is actually growing faster than private school enrollment. At least at home, parents can take back the control that schools are stealing from them.

Of course, not everyone is happy about the shift — least of all big government bureaucrats, who are worried they’re losing their grip on students. Or local school districts, who lose a significant chunk of funding with each departing student. But what are moms and dads to do when the place they send their kids to learn is punishing their religiondenying them privacy, and forcing them to sit through sex-ed curriculums so pornographic you couldn’t read it on the evening news?

When President Barack Obama forced schools to open their bathrooms and locker rooms to kids of both genders, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick warned that it would “be the end of public education, if this prevails. People will pull their kids out, homeschooling will explode, and private schools will increase.” Looking back, Patrick was prophetic.

But, as usual, as the number of homeschoolers grow, so do the legislative threats. States like California would like nothing better than to clamp down on the families who want to take full responsibility for their children’s education.

Parents, state legislators and groups like the Homeschool Legal Defense Association need to be on their toes, as liberals try to fight back with tighter restrictions and more regulations on homeschoolers. In the meantime, maybe more school districts will get the message: If they’d stop being hostile to most Americans’ values, fewer parents would be running for the exits.


This article originally posted at Stream.org.




Forget Climate Change, Defend America!

Written by Dr. E. Calvin Beisner

George Orwell, call your office.

In what Huffington Post‘s Alexander Kaufman called “an Orwellian rhetorical shift away from a scientific reality,” the Department of Defense “scrubbed its latest National Defense Strategy of all references to climate change.”

In all likelihood, Orwell would call the 30-year campaign for climate alarmism—with all its oxymoronic appeals to “scientific consensus,” its sleight-of-hand temperature data homogenizations, its revisions of past data to exaggerate apparent warming, its exaggeration and fabrication and suppression and loss of data, its intimidation of dissent and corruption of peer review—Orwellian.

And he’d lead a standing ovation for the Pentagon’s courageous and sensible leaders.

Sure enough, the 2018 Summary of the National Defense Strategy (NDS) never uses the word “climate” (as this screen shot of search results shows), let alone the phrase “climate change” or “global warming.”

That’s the first time since 2008 that climate change hasn’t played an important role in national defense strategy.

As Michael Bastasch reported in The Daily Caller in December,

The Obama administration listed global warming as a top national security threat, and administration officials even [wronglyblamed climate changes for sparking the Syrian civil war and the rise of ISIS.

“Climate change will impact every country on the planet,” former President Barack Obama told U.S. Coast Guard Academy graduates in 2015.

“No nation is immune,” Obama said. “So I am here today to say that climate change constitutes a serious threat to global security, an immediate risk to our national security, and, make no mistake, it will impact how our military defends our country.”

Secretary of Defense James Mattis, like his boss President Donald Trump, clearly rejects prioritizing climate as a defense issue. Not only does the new NDS never mention climate change or global warming, but also it discusses energy not in terms of climate impacts but of the need to ensure stability in major energy-producing regions of the world, such as the Middle East. Why? Because the Trump Administration believes access to abundant, affordable, reliable energy, especially in the form the Middle East produces most—fossil fuels—is far more important to national and global security than whatever’s going on with climate.

It follows that the Department of Defense no longer thinks fossil fuel use is driving global warming that threatens global security.

Welcome to the new era—when adults are in charge at the Pentagon.


This article originally posted CornwallAlliance.org.




President Obama’s Middle East, North Africa, US Policy, Part 1

What does his eloquent prose really mean to us?

To the man who captured the hearts of over 53%i of Americans, a man of both precedence and outward candor, and a man who overwhelmingly won the most esteemed office in our land, Barrack Hussein Obama. Along with the opening of a new chapter in President Obama’s and our nation’s history, was the anticipated turning of the page in the lives of so many hopeful Americans who had hoped the mantra of “Change” would bring an economically strong and viable country, sustainable jobs, and an end to massive foreclosures and corporate corruption.

The majority of Americans had high hopes and expectations; in part, guaranteed by the man himself who said “I am a blank slate to be written upon”. Many of us probably assumed that WE would be the ones writing on his canvas what WE wanted America to be like – a strong and vibrant America. However, over the past three years we have seen something far different than we had been told, and something far more alarming than most in this generation had ever seen. Here is our leader, who swore to represent the people of this country. Here is our leader, who swore to uphold the rule of law and Constitution of this great land. Yet, time and time again, we clearly see a man driven by another agenda. An agenda of his own choosing, that has no regard for the clear majority in this country.

Over the past three years, many of the 63 million who voted for Obama have slowly but surely seen the components of his “Change” theory. Focusing on Mr. Obama’s speech on the Middle East and North Africa, given just days ago, let us analyze some of the components of “Change” as President Obama sees them.

THE PRESIDENT:

-For six months, we have witnessed an extraordinary change taking place in the Middle East and North Africa…

-But the events of the past six months show us that strategies of repression and strategies of diversion will not work anymore…And so a new generation has emerged. And their voices tell us that change cannot be denied.

ANALYSIS:

A new generation has never been born within 6 months. A basic rule of thumb in analyzing numbers is that “a month does not make a trend”. Not even six months should be an acceptable timeframe to measure the sustainability of the changes we have all witnessed in this region–a region that is riddled with corruption, soaked in deep-seated sectarian and religious hatred, and a land without the vital infrastructure of unity, legitimate and transparent distribution of finances, political structure, and a people skilled in voicing their demands without the fear of retaliation.

One hundred sixty-seven years. It took 167 years from the time the pilgrims set sail on the Mayflower in 1620 to the signing of the U.S. Constitution on September 17, 1787. This is 17 years after a riot broke out in Boston over Britain’s excessive tax on tea, known as the Boston Tea Party. Like in Egypt, here was a revolt against an oppressive and corrupt government. Yet, the U.S. Constitution was not signed 6 months later. With many battles in between to steady our resolve, 17 years passed before WE officially declared our independence from Britain.

Let us not forget the Black American struggle. It was another 76 years after the Constitution was signed before the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect on January 1, 1863, freeing slaves. Yet still, another 101 years passed before the end of the legal sanctions of Jim Crow laws with the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.ii iii There were many battles won and lost that tested the spirit of the American people – blacks and whites alike. But, through the struggles we found ourselves, we defined ourselves.

What am I trying to say here? Simply, that we did not declare our independence 6 months after leaving Britain. We did not declare our independence the day after the Boston Tea Party. By the time of the signing of the Constitution, WE had fought enough smaller battles that our resolve and steadfastness was assured. Before France and others came to our aid, WE were resolved and our pursuit for a better life had been time tested.

The proof is in the pudding. Before $2 billion plus are given to Egypt, we should demand to see the evidence of a change in nature. Before we assist in building up the infrastructure of those not typically considered our friend, but historically are our foes, we should expect to see a people proving to themselves that they want different for themselves. This evidence should not be based on emotional stories given to us by our President. So much is at stake that we should not base our decisions on random hearsay of people chanting “Muslim, Christians, we are one”ivwhen we see and hear differently.

-March 5, 2011 – A mob of nearly 4000 Muslims attacked a Christian church near Cairo, Egypt.v

-May 9, 2011 – Christians attacked in Egypt, 12 Christian Muslims killed, 232 injured.vi

-May 17, 2011 – Christian Protesters attacked in Egypt, angry mob of over 100 rushed the Christians hurling rocks and fire bombs.vii

-…and the list goes on.

THE PRESIDENT:

-In Cairo, we heard the voice of the young mother who said, “It’s like I can finally breathe fresh air for the first time.

-In Sanaa, we heard the students who chanted, “Our words are free now. It’s a feeling you can’t explain.

-In Damascus, we heard the young man who said, “After the first yelling, the first shout, you feel dignity.”

-After local officials refused to hear his complaints (a Tunisia street vendor who’s cart was confiscated), this young man…went to the headquarters of the provincial government, doused himself in fuel, and lit himself on fire.

-We have the chance to show that America values the dignity of the street vendor in Tunisia more than the raw power of the dictator. There must be no doubt that the United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity.

-We have a stake not just in the stability of nations, but in the self-determination of individuals.

-The United States supports a set of universal rights.

-…we support political and economic reform…that can meet the legitimate aspirations of ordinary people throughout the region.

-Today I want to make it clear that it is a TOP PRIORITY that must be…supported by ALL of the diplomatic, economic and strategic tools at our disposal.

-What we will oppose is an attempt by any group to restrict the rights of others, and to hold power through coercion and not consent. (Question: would this include China next?)

ANALYSIS:

Based on emotion-driven stories, our leader has pledged America’s full support and resources to help the “self-determination of individuals”. America is not a global cowboy (and girl) or a global watchdog. It is not our job to swoop in and make sure every Sovereign country is treating everyone nicely – humanly even. Based on 6 months of revolt, many tear-jerking stories, and President Obama’s personal affinity towards the region, America’s overly strained resources have been pledged to help others feel better about themselves and their opportunities in life. Admirable, indeed; but, a vibrant America should be his TOP PRIORITY. Instead, little is being done to ease American’s woes:

-Nationally, on average, we are paying $4 a gallon for gas. Chicago gas prices are nearing $5 a gallon. This noose around our wallets could be lessened if it became a TOP PRIORITY for our representatives.

-Since 2008, inflation rates have steadily increased year-over-year and in every single month this year.viii Over the past 6 months, the costs to purchase the following necessities have risen.ix Note: these are real expenses felt every day.

Expenditure Category CPIx
Total Food Prices Up 5.1%
Cereals & bakery products Up 4.5%
Fruits & vegetables Up 12.2%
Meats, poultry, fish, & eggs Up 9.2%
Dairy & related products Up 8.5%
Household Energy prices Up 5.8%

-The American jobless rate as of April 2011 is 9% versus 4.6% in 2006.xi

-National debt is $14,305,336,580,992.11, as of April 18, 2011. That’s over $14 trillion dollars. This equates to roughly $46 thousand dollars per American.

What am I trying to say? Simply, we cannot afford to save anyone until we first save ourselves. Notice the litmus test Mr. Obama uses to swoop in and pledge our boundless allegiance – UNIVERSAL RIGHTS of people and assisting the WORLD in securing their freedom (i.e., self-determination). Will this litmus test apply to China next, where sterilization is still a thing of the present for the citizens of China? This is an apparent shifting away from imposing ourselves upon another nation when our own interests are not in danger. This new paradigm begs the question “is there such a thing as national sovereignty anymore?” Are borders a thing of the past? Can anyone say with me “One World Government”? Is the inevitable future upon us, now?

The buzz word “universal rights” is something we should expect to hear more and more of, so listen out. But, for now, let the Middle East build their own change, by their own sweat equity. According to the CIA World Fact Book, the sum of the Arab nation’s account balance is roughly $63 billion, while America’s net account balance is a negative -$561 billion.xii xiii That buys a lot of assistance and power within their own community, to help their own people. And, if they are not willing to help themselves then why should we rush to pledge our best to them. It is doubtful that the average American wants to spend needed resources being “global bullies” and forcing sovereign countries to bend to our beliefs.

Throughout the first half of Mr. Obama’s speech, it became evident that he does not only want to help those who are helping themselves by taking to the streets in revolt. But, he is willing to be the Agent of Change in other Arab countries as he sees fit. As history tells us, this would be most unwise and very expensive in both American lives and dollars.

Perhaps it is true, that global change today comes at a much faster pace than the one we read about in our history books. Perhaps, the train has left the station, and there’s nothing we can do about it. Perhaps, this course in history is inevitable. But, is this what America wants? Does the voting public have a say in the country we want and in the role we believe we should play in the world? Or, are those matters now decided for us by the elites?


ihttp://articles.cnn.com/2008-11-05/politics/election.president_1_electoral-votes-african-american-voters-electoral-college-tally?_s=PM:POLITICS

ii Side note: The Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968 finally ended the legal sanctions to Jim Crow.

iii http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0826301.html

iv http://obamafoodorama.blogspot.com/2011/05/transcript-president-obamas-remarks-on.html

v http://www.persecution.org/2011/03/06/nearly-4000-muslims-attack-christian-homes-in-egypt-torch-church/

vi http://islamizationwatch.blogspot.com/2011/05/islamic-rules-christians-attacked-in.html

vii http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2721203/posts

viiihttp://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_rate/currentinflation.asp

ix http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid1104.pdf

x CPI – Seasonally adjusted annual rate percent change for 6 months ending April 2011

xi http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea03.pdf

xii Account Balance is a country’s net trade in goods and services, plus net earnings from rents, interest, profits, and dividends, and net transfer payments (such as pension funds and worker remittances) to and from the rest of the world during the period specified. These figures are calculated on an exchange rate basis, i.e., not in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms.

xiii https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2187rank.html


Kathy Barnette is a conservative black young mother. She spent over 14 years in financial advising and over 10 years in the Armed Forces Reserves. She is currently an adjunct Professor of Finance and Organizational Behavior, a Christian conference speaker, and writes forExaminer.com. Her blog can be found at TrueChristianLiving.com.