Wallis is a political operative who wraps himself up in religion in order to gain some legitimacy so that he can then trash every conservative religious person for not being liberal.  Writing an article in the Huffington Post , Wallis demonstrates his mastery of dishonest sleight of hand.  Wallis first equates the Tea Party Movement with libertarianism and then immediately makes the jump to Rand Paul so that he can find some positions to use to make the Tea Party look bad.  He must have received the email from the Democrats on that one; it is a consistent talking point approach lately.

The basic gist of his article is an attempt to make the case that because he is an alleged reverend he is therefore qualified to pass judgment on “how Christian” the Tea Party movement is.  In fact, his incredibly weak arguments fall well short of convincing any intelligent person of the merits of his position and simply made me want to find out who this clown was.  It seemed clear that this guy was an Alinksy type, a wolf in sheep’s clothing.  Little did I know how true that was, but I will get to that later.

Wallis starts out by demonstrating his complete misunderstanding of compassion:

Loving your neighbor is a better Christian response than telling your neighbor to leave you alone. Both compassion and social justice are fundamental Christian commitments, and while the Christian community is responsible for living out both, government is also held accountable to the requirements of justice and mercy. Both Christians on the Right and the Left have raised questions about Libertarian abandonment of the most vulnerable — whether that means unborn lives or the poor.

Par for the course for those who revere government because they are utterly terrified of freedom, Wallis is not intellectually honest enough to understand the difference between individuals helping their fellow man when he truly needs it and the government seizing vast amounts of wealth to redistribute to those who have learned to game the system.  It is very important to note that it is never compassion when you are spending someone else’s money and that one can love one’s neighbor without feeling any requirement to pay his bills.

Because Wallis claims to be religious, I have to point out that millions of faithful Christians tithe ten percent of their money to their church.  But that sort of chump change is not enough for people like Wallis, whose agenda requires not only what he could raise under the ruse of religion but also necessitates confiscating the property of even non-Christians.  That is mighty Christian of you, Reverend Jim.

In fact, libertarians know that most poor people are poor not because they have encountered some misfortune in life but simply because they have made a series of stupid, short-sighted decisions.  Libertarians are not opposed to individuals helping individuals but are opposed to the government perennially transferring wealth from those who earned it to those who simply know how to harness poverty pimps like Jim Wallis.  Libertarians believe – with good reason – that people who do not suffer from the stupidity of their actions will continue to do stupid things.  Clearly Mr. Wallis thinks that one of the appropriate roles of government is to protect people from the consequences of their actions, but only if they are societal parasites.  That plants him firmly in the camp of the Nanny State Left.

Finally, to hear a member of the laughingly oxymoronic “religious left” criticize libertarians because many (though far from all) support abortion rights is a new level of hypocrisy.  As a member of the alleged religious left, Mr. Wallis is a card carrying stockholder in the abortion industry.  Sure, he may claim to be anti-abortion in front of certain groups, but the Democrat party has perversely elevated their vision of abortion rights to the level of a “canary in the gold mine” bellwether of individual rights.  As such, supporting the agenda of the Democrat party while claiming to be anti-abortion is like being a KKK member in the 1920s while claiming to be anti-lynching – you cannot be a part of the group without implicitly supporting one of its main agenda items.

For what it’s worth, this libertarian believes that the official Libertarian Party’s position on abortion is dead wrong.  That unborn human has just as many rights as the parent who wants to treat the child like an inconvenient mole, but uppercase-L libertarians are so caught up in wanting to be purists that they cannot see that they are just as wrong and selfish as the left is on this subject.  Furthermore, more libertarians should realize how unconstitutional Roe v. Wade is – under our system the judicial branch does not write laws, as Harry Blackmun did in his horrible decision.

Wallis also tries to make the contorted argument that simply because the bible happens to mention government, being anti-government therefore “just isn’t biblical”.  Statists like Wallis must pine for the days when government and religion were intertwined and even went so far as to prevent open inquiry in the sciences.

Then Wallis spews this tripe:

The Libertarians’ supreme confidence in the market is not consistent with a biblical view of human nature and sin. The exclusive focus on government as the central problem ignores the problems of other social sectors, and in particular, the market. When government regulation is the enemy, the market is set free to pursue its own self-interest without regard for public safety, the common good, and the protection of the environment — which Christians regard as God’s creation. Libertarians seem to believe in the myth of the sinless market and that the self-interest of business owners or corporations will serve the interests of society; and if they don’t, it’s not government’s role to correct it.

This is laughable.  The truth is that the left’s supreme confidence in big government is not consistent with the reality of human nature and corruption.  Their exclusive focus on wealth redistribution as the central goal ignores the real problem, which is that these people would not need to live off of the rest of us if the government had not created the lifestyle-subsidy welfare programs.  As an analogy, if you put out food for stray cats those cats will get used to it and will be there every morning.  Like our parasitic class in America, they will even get angry if the free food stops.  That entitlement mentality is at the core of those 47% of Americans who pay no taxes and are therefore living off of the rest of us.  Shockingly, liberals seem to believe in the myth of the blameless societal parasite and that giving someone else’s property to them will actually help rather than harm them.

Further, and I give credit to my brilliant wife for this angle, if Mr. Wallis actually took a clear look at the biblical view of human nature and sin he would realize that it in fact makes the best argument possible for limited government.  We simply cannot trust human beings with that level of control over their fellows.  They are too flawed to handle it without descending into power grabs and corruption and almost every shred of human history is a testament to that undeniable fact. This self-evident truth of government corruption was a main reason that the founding fathers realized that government should be limited to the role of umpire as opposed to the left’s desired role of mommy.  George Washington certainly understood this fundamental truth and put it as clearly as anyone ever has:

Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.  – George Washington

Showing the complete lack of logical thought that so uniformly characterizes the American left, Wallis continues:

But such theorizing ignores the practical issues that the public sector has to solve. Should big oil companies like BP simply be allowed to spew oil into the ocean? And is regulating them really un-American? Do we really want nobody to inspect our meat, make sure our kids’ toys are safe, or police the polluters to keep our air clean? Do we really want owners of restaurants and hotels to be able to decide whom they will or won’t serve, or should liquor store owners also be able to sell alcohol to our kids?

After seeing such flagrant use of the false dichotomy logical fallacy, it’s getting easy to understand how this clown is a democrat.  But to be fair, being a leftist Mr. Wallis is unaccustomed to dealing with people who possess a command of logical thought, so we cannot blame him for attempting to foist tripe on us that works consistently with his normal bevy of parasitic myrmidons.

Finally, I am just going to say it. There is something wrong with a political movement like the Tea Party which is almost all white. Does that mean every member of the Tea Party is racist? Likely not. But is an undercurrent of white resentment part of the Tea Party ethos, and would there even be a Tea Party if the president of the United States weren’t the first black man to occupy that office? It’s time we had some honest answers to that question. And as far as I can tell, Libertarianism has never been much of a multi-cultural movement. Need I say that racism — overt, implied, or even subtle — is not a Christian virtue.

Claims of racism are the last refuge of the scoundrel, the trump card played by someone who is losing the debate.  Apparently Mr. Wallis had no problem with every black American voting for Barack Obama simply because of the color of his skin.  They certainly were not voting for the [bankrupt] content of his character!  Mr. Wallis proves that he is a full-fledged race-hustling poverty pimp with this clumsy attempt to play the race card.

Yes, Mr. Obama is a huge part of the rise of the Tea Party Movement, but even Mr. Wallis knows that it has nothing to do with his brown skin and everything to do with his red politics.  Mr. Obama is a Marxist and patriotic Americans would oppose him no matter how much melanin was contained in his skin.

Finally, though there is plenty to criticize in Wallis’ “The Bible Loves Tyranny” screed, one need only read this gem to see the true nature of this leftist propagandist:

But a power-hungry government is clearly an aberration and violation of the proper role of government in protecting its citizens and upholding the demands of fairness and justice. To disparage government per se — to see government as the central problem in society — is simply not a biblical position.

Mr. Wallis has the typically weak leftist knowledge of history and his world view clearly demonstrates that.  Anyone who can make the statement that “power hungry government is clearly an aberration” simply cannot be taken seriously in any context.  When the rubber hits the road, Mr. Wallis is simply dishonestly attempting to use religion to sell tyranny.  As always, that tyranny is disguised as false compassion and false security.

After writing this I wondered if I had been too hard on Reverend Jim Wallis, so I did some more digging in order to ensure that I was not just going off on an unfair rant.  I quickly found what I was looking for in the very place that I should have looked first: David Horowitz’ incredible site, Discover The Networks.

Wallis expressed his hope that “more Christians will come to view the world through Marxist eyes.”

In short, Jim Wallis is a long term left wing radical.  His basic shtick is to attempt to use his status as an alleged religious leader to bash conservatives and push his own agenda.  The entry on Wallis at Discover The Networks contains the following interesting items:

• His magazine, now called Sojourners’, was originally an anti-capitalist publication called Post-American.
• He is a lifelong champion of communism and an apologist for atrocities committed by the Khmer Rouge and the Vietnamese.
• In a 1979 interview, Wallis expressed his hope that “more Christians will come to view the world through Marxist eyes.”
• In a January 13, 2006 radio interview with Interfaith Voices, Wallis was asked, “Are you then calling for the redistribution of wealth in society?” He replied, “Absolutely, without any hesitation. That’s what the gospel is all about.”
• In 1995 Wallis founded Call to Renewal, a coalition of religious groups united in the purpose of advocating, in religious terms, for leftist economic agendas such as tax hikes and wealth redistribution to promote “social justice.” 

The final quote from Discover The Networks lays bare the obvious truth of his screed in HuffPo, which is that Wallis simply wrote a hit piece on the Tea Party because he is a foot soldier in the progressive movement, a hard core Marxist who seeks more government control over the lives of Americans.

More than a mere religious leader, Wallis, a registered Democrat, is also an adroit political operative, publicly portraying himself as a politically neutral religious figure whose overriding allegiance is to God. Always with the disclaimer that neither major political party can claim to authoritatively represent the values of religious faith, Wallis passionately contends that Republican policies tend to be immoral and godless. — Discover The Networks

Jim Wallis is right to fear the Tea Party Movement.  We are taking our country back from freedom loathing charlatans like him and his intellectual soul mate in the White House.  We will once again attempt to toss Marxism back where it belongs, “on the ash heap of history” as a great President once said.

Whatever the reason, the trend is clear. Voted out of office in 2006 and 2008, Republicans are now the Party of Opposition. And their network of choice, Fox News, is now king.

After pointing out that both CNN and MSNBC have seen their ratings plunge, she contrasts that with Fox News:

Meanwhile Fox News, which broke records last year, continues to grow. Greta Van Susteren’s show was up 25%. Bill O’Reilly, whose show commands the biggest audience in prime time with 3.65 million viewers, was up 28%. And Glenn Beck, that conspiracy-fueling tinderbox for the Right? His audience was up 50% from last year.

The author quotes Bill O’Reilly repeating what I have heard him say on his program, which is that people get their regular daily news via the internet and typically look to cable news outlets more for analysis and commentary.  Therefore more and more Americans tune into O’Reilly (which I rarely miss), Hannity (which I sometimes watch depending on the guests), and Glenn Beck (which I have seen only a handful of times) to hear what other assorted pundits think about the news.  In a real sense those shows are analogous to the comments on an online article, where you will quite often find far more interesting data and perspectives than the original article (or news story) itself.

In her first lines Neuman hints at the larger lesson from these continuing ratings gains for Fox News Channel when she states “maybe this really is, at heart, a conservative nation”.  I still remember Newsweek’s cover declaring that We Are All Socialists Now less than a month after President Obama took office.  I didn’t believe it, but I also had refused to believe that America would hand the reins of power to the most radical and wholly unqualified candidate in American history, so I was not feeling too optimistic about what my country was thinking.  I openly admit to disappointment in my fellow citizens when the Obama personality cult succeeded, but suffice to say that many like-minded American patriots have renewed my faith in our exceptionalism since last summer.

The emergence of the Tea Party movement has reasserted that America is a center-right country.  Though we certainly have a noisy liberal minority, most Americans would fall into the independent-to-conservative band.  Obviously, the Democrat Party and most of the media are a few clicks to the left of center.  But has there ever been this wide a gap between the President’s philosophical agenda and the average American’s common sense and belief system?  I cannot think of a time.

This reminds me of one of the few episodes of the Glenn Beck show that I have seen.  He drew a horizontal line on his trusty blackboard with a small vertical line in the middle marking the political center in America.  He pointed out where he believed that most Americans were, slightly right of center, with liberals to the left of that line, and finally identified Progressives and the Democrat party’s leadership as well to the left of that line.  I spent a few minutes constructing something similar.  You can click on the image to embiggen it.

As you can see from the cool image of America, I placed the average American a little right of center.  Notice the huge separation between Joe Sixpack and the statist triad of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid who are almost rubbing shoulders with their ideological Uncle Karl.  On the right, standing with average Americans, are fine patriots like Mike Pence, Jim DeMint, Paul Ryan, Tom Coburn and that firebrand from Minnesota, Michele Bachmann.

I agree that people are looking for opinion shows.  But wouldn’t MSNBC’s lineup of hard-left opinion shows be doing well in the ratings if this was simply about people searching for opinion in addition to news?  This dominance by Fox News simply reflects the ideological center of gravity in America, and it is nowhere near Barack Obama or Rachel Maddow.  Put that in your pipe and smoke it, John Stewart.

It is understandable that the reader is asking what this has to do with a War on Socialism.

To better explain where I am going with this, let me use myself as an example.  Though I have to point out that the colors that we use to represent political ideology are backwards – “red” should clearly refer to the American left given their close resemblance to socialists, I live in a very red county in a very red congressional district in the very red state of Georgia.  Accordingly, when the August recess tea parties occurred across America, I had no one to yell at.   Though I argue that my two senators (Chambliss and Isakson) and congressman (Deal) quietly stay too low on the radar, unlike firebrands like Michele Bachmann or Jim DeMint, they did at least vote against the radical leftist agenda of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid statist triad.  So while I am a natural rabble rouser with a lot of justifiable anger at the self-destructive course of our nation under this radical leadership, I have no one to yell at, no one to shake my fist towards, and no one to vote out of office in the next congressional election cycle.  That can get quite frustrating for someone with a fire in his belly for liberty and self-determination.

I came to the realization that when the rubber hits the road, there are two types of conservative activists who simply cannot make a difference where they live.  In addition to those of us who live in safely conservative districts, there are a lot of people who live in districts that are so liberal that there is no chance of making any real change, at least not in this next critical election.  Rather than getting together at rallies with other like-minded people and shouting “hell yeah” at each other, we need to harness this passion and energy as effectively as possible.  The idea of Operation Carpetbagger came to me, and I even purchased the domain name with the intent of setting up a web site to implement this.  However, after scoping it out and expanding the project greatly it became rather obvious that by the time that I and my eager volunteer-engineer friends could implement the project, the ruling statist cabal in D.C. will have steamrolled over another good chunk of our Constitutional rights.

Trying to be practical, I came to the conclusion that I should communicate my ideas to the Tea Party leadership in hopes that they could simply add my ideas to their existing web infrastructure in a far shorter time and that I could instead use my passion, debating abilities, and communication skills to make a difference in other ways.  Several highly respected friends are actually urging me to run for political office.  I officially joined the Tea Party Patriots and intend to get the group going in my rural county which has no official Tea Party at this point.  More importantly, I am also sending this article to an acquaintance of mine who is in the top leadership of the national Tea Party Patriots in hopes that she can get the idea into the hands of their technical people.

Admittedly, the term carpetbagger has an understandably negative ring to it here in the South because of its use in the Reconstruction era, but the label is not important.  What is important is setting up a mechanism for people to sign up to be active in another district if that makes sense for them.  My vision for this would involve people signing up at TeaPartyPatriots.org, which would use their IP address or an entered ZIP code to determine the user’s location.  The web site would then use this information to intelligently decide whether this individual should work in their district or would instead be more effective in working in another nearby district where the margin in a congressional race is closer.  Based upon some metrics and user-entered information, it would determine this user’s effective area for particular action items.

Among the action items that the web site could suggest:

• Make phone calls for a candidate.  In this case, the effective area expands to the entire US.
• Monetary contributions
• Voter registration drives
• General campaign volunteering
• GOTV – get out the vote campaigns
• Calling into regional or national talk radio shows

We are smarter and more motivated than the other side.  We can and will defeat the statists whose power-hungry actions and policies are affecting the opportunities and standard of living of our children and grandchildren.  Never forget that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.  Your grandchildren are going to ask you what you did in this historic struggle for the soul of America.  What will you say to them?