Category Archives: Constitution Party

Some Alaska Republicans Jump To Constitution Party

Below is an e-mail from the CP. There is some backstory here. I don’t remember the details, but a Ron Paul Republican was elected Chairman in Alaska and then was undermined by the party apparatus. I’ll look up the details. Please forgive the fund raising appeal that is an inevitable part of any e-mail of this sort.

Dear friend:

I wanted you to be among the first to know of a big upset we’ve scored in Alaska.

The former Republican Party state chairman has joined the Constitution Party and endorsed our team of J.R. Meyers for Governor and his Lt. Governor running mate Maria Rensel. 

Several Ron Paul supporters in Alaska, including the former state chairman, have switched parties recently — they understand the GOP can’t be “reformed.” They know America needs a new party, one based on timeless principles and courageous candidates. The Constitution Party is their new political home.

Your support is moving our party forward faster than ever. I’ll have more political news very soon.

In the meantime, I must ask you to help underwrite our party — there are only 36 days left before the election. It is urgent that I hear from you right away. Your investment of $250 or $25 or $500 or $50 is vital.

Thank you for all you are doing for the Constitution Party — with your help, 2014 will prove to be a great year for us.


Frank Fluckiger
National Chairman

Addendum: OK, here is a Reason article about Millette’s ouster. The charge was failure to adequately fund raise. This strikes me as obviously trumped up.

Raw Story Goes on PC Witch Hunt Against Michael Peroutka

For those who don’t know, Michael Peroutka won the Republican primary for a seat on the Anne Arundel County, Maryland City Counsel.

Now the PC Gestapo is up in arms. What amazes me about some of these stories is how out in the open they are. Anyone who is at all familiar with dissident right and third party politics should know very well where Michael Peroutka is coming from. Obviously these lefty PC thumb breakers don’t follow the other side except maybe what the SPLC says about them, so they act like they have stumbled upon some scandalous revelation. So Peroutka is a young earth creationist? Yeah. So Peroutka uses the Bible to evaluate laws. Yeah. So Peroutka was (is?) a board member of the League of the South and thinks secession is a legal and constitutional remedy. Yeah. The guy is not a phantom. He is a past Constitution Party nominee for President and his association with the League is well documented. Ever heard of the internet and YouTube Mr. Raw Story investigative reporter? Wow, you’ve really managed a scope here. I don’t follow all the ins and outs of far left politics in America, but if someone said lefty X once said nice things about Trotsky or Margaret Sanger or something, I wouldn’t be shocked. That’s what far lefties do. (As opposed to far rightists who scandalously say nice things about the Founders.)

Here is another breathless Raw Story article about Peroutka. This one is about a supposedly scandalous video of Peroutka addressing the League of the South, that was “uncovered” by a professor at Grove City College, a supposedly conservative Christian school. We have discussed this professor before. He seems to specialize in PC thought policing. If someone wants to write a real investigative report, maybe they can write one “exposing” Professor Throckmorton as the PC water carrier that he is despite teaching at a college known for it’s conservative and Christian beliefs, particularly its refusal, like Hillsdale College, to accept any federal funds. Does the Professor not realize that the PC forces he shills for hate all things Christian and conservative, and surely think Grove City is a bastion of racist, sexist, Christianist oppression?

Anyway, back to Peroutka. According to the second Raw Story article, it says Peroutka is a former board member of the League of the South. If this is true, it is news to me but I don’t necessarily doubt it. As for Peroutka saying he does not support Southern secession, this may be technically true, but I doubt it is the whole story. Unless Peroutka has had a complete change of heart, which I seriously doubt and would be very unfortunate if true, I know he believes in the right to secession and he believes Lincoln was wrong to invade the duly seceded South. What he may have said is that he doesn’t support Southern secession at this time and wants to give reforming the US a college try before resorting to it. This would be consistent with the belief of a lot of constitutionalists.

As for Perotka and race, the League has always been implicitly white as is conservatism in America as is constitutionalism as is the Tea Party, etc. but has recently become more explicitly white. That Peroutka specifically endorsed this new direction or was even aware of this change, I doubt. Peroutka has always used colorblind conservative language. In fact, I remember seeing a column he wrote fairly recently that used typical colorblind conservative language and thought to myself that there might be some League members who would object to the language. (With a lttle Google digging, here is a recent article he wrote dated July 15 that looks like an attempt to ward off his critics. It is essentially the same column as this one dated Jan 20 that I recalled. It seems to be inspired by the MLK holiday.)

So if the Raw Story PC storm trooper is really shocked that a former Constitution Party Presidential nominee and well known sympathizer of the League of the South has beliefs that are outside those of the tame “mainstream right,” then perhaps he needs to familiarize himself with the outside the mainstream right before he writes about it. Again, I’m not tuned into all the inner workings of the far left, but I would expect people of that persuasion to have beliefs and associations that are outside the mainstream left, so if I wrote an article about one of them I wouldn’t pretend to be shocked by such revelations or act as if such revelations only need to be trotted out in order to discredit someone. But of course, I’m intellectually honest, unlike PC hacks writing click bait hatchet jobs for liberal websites and PC peddling professors who “uncover” things in plain sight.

Constitution Party Response to the 2014 State of the Union Address

Dear Fellow Constitionists,

Over the past few months the Constitution Party, with your help, has made inroads on several fronts – a new website, a new newsletter format, social media and internet advertising, ballot access battles in several states, and many more behind-the-scenes efforts by tireless patriot volunteers across the nation. We are making tremendous strides towards helping states build and improve their websites, improving our media relations, growing our social media outreach, too many ways to be listed in this brief email.

We are actively engaged in building a strong political opposition to the current two-party duopoly that is rapidly descending into a chaotic tyranny, as is evident from President Obama’s recent State of the Union address to Congress, the nation, and the world.

President Obama laid down the gauntlet at his first cabinet meeting of the year when he said, “We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help they need. I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone.”

Click here to hear Darrell Castle (2008 Vice-presidential candidate) and Cynthia Davis (four-term Missouri State Legislator) present the Constitution Party Response to the State of the Union.

Our goal is simple: we want to re-establish the American Constitutional Republic, according to the actual intent of the Founding Fathers.

Forget everything you have known about or experienced under the tutelage of the current two major parties. The Constitution Party is not your granddaddy’s political party. It is not your father’s political party. It probably isn’t the political party you first supported. The Constitution Party is committed to putting Principles before Party. Which principles? The principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the 1787 Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. Find out about our basic Seven Principles on the national website.

The Constitution Party does not play Super Bowl politics. The Constitution and the impact it has on the American people, indeed the world, is not a simple football game between two opposing teams, whose strategy is to win the victory at all costs. Scoring a constitutionally-correct touchdown means standing up against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and saying “No, that is not within the authority granted to my office by the federal Constitution (or state Constitution, etc.). I will not do it.”

The Constitution Party is committed to putting forth constitutionally-committed candidates. Congressmen, the President, the Courts, elected and appointed officials at all levels of government have lost the vision of what constitutes a representative republic based on the Constitution. It is time for the Constitution, and the American people who believe it its principles, to have duly elected officials willing to make the tough decisions necessary to save the American economy and American Liberty.

We need you to make real change happen in America.

We need your time, your volunteerism. We are a grassroots, from the heart, organization. 99.9% of us take no pay for the work we do to build the Constitution Party. We do not rely on lobbyists or Daddy Warbucks. We are fighting against a corrupt system, which has no desire to support a political party that will not give those in charge the power, glory, and gain they seek. We need volunteers at all levels. Visit the State Parties page of our website to contact your state leaders or area chairman. Roll up your sleeves, it’s a hard job, but somebody has to do it and that somebody is you.

We need your financial support. It doesn’t matter how small or how often, just donate. Only you can provide the resources necessary to fight for ballot access in several states. Only you can give us the resources to expand our advertising outreach. Only you can choose to invest in a political party with the will to make the hard decisions necessary to restore Liberty. Only you can make a donation today!

We need your Vote. We need your commitment to vote for, or become, a constitutionally-committed candidate. No one else is going to do it for you. Stop wasting your vote on candidates who continue to support party over principle. If you don’t vote or run, then who? Contact your State Party or area chairman to find out more.

Explore our website and our commitment to the Constitution, then decide for yourselves if you are willing to take the next step and become an active participant the great struggle for Liberty, both for ourselves and our future generations.


Karen Murray
National Communications Director

Editor’s Note: All the links in this letter are not intact due to formatting issues, but the link to the actual response is working.

Originally posted, in slightly different form, at Independent Political Report.

Constitution Party Has a New Newsletter: The American Constitutionist

The Constitution Party has a new newsletter out and they have changed the name to The American Constitionist and changed the format a bit. Here is a letter from the CP Chairman. Please excuse the fund raising appeal.

Dear Patriot:

One of the best ways to grow our party is by circulating our monthly newsletter. It carries news of our progress, our take on the vital issues of the day, and provides a platform for our candidates — running for offices ranging from town council to the U.S. Congress.

Now I have the pleasure of introducing you to The American Constitutionist. I urge you to read over the issue, and then send it to friends and allies. It’s another effective way to demonstrate that the Constitution Party means business at every turn.

We have to mean business because the hour is late. In 1884, Congress wrote its oath of office: “I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same …”

I believe there are politicians who don’t believe in that oath. They seek to ignore or do away with any Constitutional restraints on the dominance of the federal government in our lives. They seek nothing less than raw political power. The calling of the Constitution Party is to educate and motivate our fellow citizens: we must instill faith and allegiance to the Constitution to protect our liberties.

Does the Constitution have enemies? You be the judge …
•In a television interview during a visit to Egypt, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the Supreme Court asserts, “I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” In its place, she recommended, the South African Constitution, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, or the European Convention on Human Rights.
•New York Times Supreme Court reporter Adam Liptak says, “The Constitution’s waning influence may be part of a general decline in American power and prestige.”
•Georgetown University law professor Louis Seidman claims, “Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues, and inflamed our public discourse.”

That is the challenge we face as Constitutionists: the Founding Fathers vision and values are either right and timeless for society, or we adopt situation ethics when it comes to the rule of law and the power of government.

I strongly believe in the advice handed down by Thomas Jefferson:

“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government,
so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution
so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.”

Let the fight for the Constitution be led by the Constitution Party. Read The American Constitutionist to see how you can help — state parties are on the move, a number of campaigns are already off the ground, and ballot access drives are underway.

To ensure success, patriots must invest our time, talent, and financial resources — your gift of $25 or $50 or even $15 helps so much in this election cycle. And I remind you that early contributions are far more effective in setting in place battle plans.

So share our newsletter by posting it on your Facebook page and sending it to friends: TEA party activists, pro-lifers, home schoolers … those who are just one step away from finding a home in the Constitution Party, but haven’t yet got an invitation.

I hope you appreciate the newsletter, and I hope you will invest $100 or even $10 right away. The election is fast upon us, and the fight for the Constitution is our cause.


Frank Fluckiger
National Chairman

Cross posted at Independent Political Report.

Potential 2016 GOP Candidates not Looking Good

Here is a Townhall 2016 straw poll. Vote if you like. It’s quick. You do have to enter your e-mail which will get you on some e-mail list, but I already get Townhall e-mails so no biggy. You can also always unsubscribe. I post this mainly to illustrate how abysmal the potential 2016 lineup is. I voted other/none of the above because write-in were not allowed.

Here is the list of candidates:

Jeb Bush, former Governor of Florida
Benjamin Carson, Doctor of Pediatric Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University
Chris Christie, Governor of New Jersey
Ted Cruz, Senator from Texas
Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana
John Kasich, Governor of Ohio
Sarah Palin, former Governor of Alaska
Rand Paul, Senator from Kentucky
Mike Pence, Governor of Indiana
Rick Perry, Governor of Texas
Marco Rubio, Senator from Florida
Paul Ryan, Congressman from Wisconsin
Rick Santorum, former Senator from Pennsylvania
Scott Walker, Governor of Wisconsin
Other/None of the Above

What a sorry lot. Rand Paul is the closest to acceptable. As I said before, we need to start talking up potential acceptable GOP primary candidates and potential Constitution Party and Libertarian Party candidates.

Here is the comment I left.

There is no one in this list that represents non-interventionist conservatives. Rand Paul comes the closest, but he has already drifted too far away from the principled non-intervention of his father. I will not vote for a GOP interventionist. If they don’t do better than this it will be third party for me in 2016.

Doug Phillips Resigns, Vision Forum Ministries Closes Its Doors

This is a sad story. I don’t agree with everything Doug Phillips supported, but he was a significant advocate for many things that were positive. As the son of Constitution Party founder, Howard Phillips, and a major figure in the Reformed community, Phillips and paleos shared an overlapping but not identical orbit. I won’t comment much on this very unfortunate turn of events, but I thought it was important information to pass along in case some here hadn’t heard about it. (The Atlantic article is surprisingly fair.)

Here is his original resignation statement.

Draft Darrell Castle for President and Other Constitution Party Intrique

The following was sent to me by Randy Stufflebeam of IL, the Vice-Chairman of the CP:

As of last night, I have created a new page to “Draft” Darrell. Please go there and [LIKE] the page, if you haven’t already and make sure to spread the word. We need to send a strong message to Darrell that he needs to run and he needs to announce VERY early, so that he can begin raising money and campaigning so that he actually has a chance to win the election.

If you haven’t already, I would STRONGLY suggest clicking on the following link and UNLIKE the page.

It is the page that was the original “Draft Darrell Castle for President in 2016,” and they are now using the page for nefarious reasons and with your name still there, it appears that you support it.

The original page was created by a very young man who is now disgruntled with the Constitution Party and says that he is now a proud Republican…

The end of the post contained a specific name. I didn’t post that part because I don’t want to get into naming names here on this site. I just wanted to pass on the information about Castle, because, given the current crop of potential GOP candidates, it seems likely I’ll be voting CP again.


A Couple More Write-in Suggestions

Below, I suggested that we need a coordinated campaign to write-in a candidate in 2016 Presidential polls given the dismal list of potential candidates that currently make the list.

Here are a couple more:

Mike Church – He’s hard core and he has a platform. Plus he describes himself as a paleoconservative.

Paul Craig Roberts – He actually has a plausible Presidential resume.

Who Should I Write-in in 2016 Presidential Polls?

OK, so the 2016 polls are starting to appear in my inbox and as pop-up ads, etc. The current list of potential candidates is abysmal and depressing. It includes RINOs like Chris Christie and so called conservatives like Rick Santorum and Jim DeMint who are just mainstream movement cons of one degree or another and are therefore wrong about all the things mainstream cons are wrong about (foreign policy, surveillance/police state, trade deals, etc.) Rand Paul is the best of the lot, but is off my list because of his PC pandering and waffling on immigration and foreign policy.

The problem is, as far as I know, there aren’t any rumored paleoish candidates to talk up. Worse, there aren’t really even that many paleoish figures who aren’t rumored that can be credibly talked up. I’m sure our constant critic Sav and others would say this points to a failure of paleoism and perhaps they would be right, but that doesn’t solve our immediate problem of who to tout as a potential candidate.

Here are a few thoughts. Let’s discuss it.

Potentially Serious Candidates:

Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions comes to mind. I haven’t heard him talked up as a candidate, but if he did run he would be serious because he is  a Senator. He has been by far and away the best person in the Senate on the immigration issue. The problem is that Sessions is generally wrong on foreign policy and police state issues. But because Sessions has  been so out front on immigration, a vote for him could be seen as an endorsement of immigration restrictionism. As an actual vote, it might be hard to justify, but as an exercise in immigration issue message sending a case could be made for writing him in. (For the record, I consider immigration the most important issues because all the other issues [abortion, taxes, spending, etc.] hinge upon its outcome. Unless current demographic trends are halted, the GOP and by implication any further right alternative party will become irrelevant at the national level.)

Semi-serious Candidates:

Tennessee Rep. John Duncan and North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones come to mind. Neither have the voting record of Ron Paul, but both are know as Republican (relatively) non-interventionists so a vote for either would likely be interpreted as an endorsement of non-interventionism. As far as I know, neither has been seriously discussed as a possible candidate.

Actually Rumored Message Candidates:

Judge Andrew Napolitano has been widely discussed as a possible candidate. He is a natural heir to the Ron Paul Revolution, especially for those unwilling to support Rand Paul. As a widely known Fox News commentator, he is a semi-plausible candidate. A vote for him would be the most direct way of endorsing the continuation of the Ron Paul Revolution. The major problem with Napolitano is that he is absolutely horrible on immigration. He has completely swallowed the libertarian Kool-Aid on the issue.

Ted Nugent has thrown his own name out there. Besides guns and not liking Obama, I’m not sure I know exactly where he stands on other issues, and I’m sure I’m not alone with that. But where The Nuge stands on every issues is hardly relevant. A vote for Nugent is simply a way to stick a great big thumb in the eye of the Powers that Be. As I said before, Nugent is a visceral Red and a vote for him would be an endorsement of visceral Redness.

Pure Message Candidates:

If you want to send a single issue immigration message then you could write in Tom Tancredo. He’s not good on war and peace issues, but since he is so identified with the immigration issues, the message of a vote for Tancredo would not be missed. An alternative might be to vote for Pennsylvania Rep. Lou Barletta, who is also closely associated with the immigration issue but likely not as well known as Tancredo.

Tom Woods has been suggested as a possible candidate and has even addressed the issue. I think Woods would be an excellent candidate. He is articulate and funny. He would put nullification and secession on the table, and since he is a Traditional Catholic he could appeal to cultural conservatives and couldn’t be accused of being an amoral libertine. Also, like Judge Nap, a vote for Woods would be an endorsement of the continuation of the Ron Paul Revolution.

If you wanted to send a pure ideological message of the whole no-compromise package – non-intervention, immigration, Constitutionalism, abortion, anti-Lincoln, etc. – you could write in Chuck Baldwin. Since he has actually run before, the idea isn’t quite as out there as it might otherwise be. Or, on that note, you could write in Michael Peroutka. Peroutka has been the center of some controversy recently since he is now on the Board of the League of the South, so a vote for him would be an even bigger rejection of the status quo.

Those are some of my preliminary thoughts. Discuss.

(FTR, I limited my choices to people that actually could conceivably run for President. So no Patrick Henry for example. If we have a problem of no rumored candidates we can get behind, we might as well start rumors about people who could really run.)

New Edition of Constitution Party Newsletter is Out

The latest edition of the Constitution Party newsletter is out. It contains an interview with Doug Enyart, the CP candidate for the recent special election in Missouri’s 8th District.

Doug, you ran for Congress in the special election in Missouri’s Eighth District in June. Why did you run?

My decision to enter the political fray as a candidate came in part from the
spirit of the saying if you want a job done right, do it yourself. The other part
comes from my deep concern for the nation my grandchildren will inherit from me, the erosion of the Constitution, and our loss of liberty. When Jo Ann
Emerson resigned from Missouri’s Eighth Congressional District I decided to
run but I knew I needed support from a political party. I found my home in the
Constitution Party.

See more…

The Constitution Party Disses The American Conservative

I don’t usually post blatant fund raising appeals, but this was too rich to pass up. Even the Constitution Party is dissing TAC now. Note the third bullet point.

Dear Friend of the Constitution Party:

The more things change the more they stay the same. That’s so very true in the political arena. Here are some recent news items that underscore my point:

• An Associated Press headline: “Britain’s governing Conservatives have hired Jim Messina, President Obama’s former campaign manager, to advise them ahead of the 2015 general election.” The Constitution Party has long said that the elites can cross party and ideological lines at will.

• The neo-con magazine, National Review, reports that, “Senate Republicans and Democrats Agree on Syria: Red Line Has Been Crossed.” The article backs the idea of US intervention in yet another Middle East hotspot—in this case it means siding with “rebels” who have the full, open support of Al-Qadea. The Constitution Party knows you can’t impose “democracy” at the point of a gun.

• Former GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman wrote an editorial in The American Conservative (of all places) stating that, “civil unions” and marriage “equality” were a “conservative cause” and should be supported in the name of “civil equality.” Even the GOP has joined the “gay rights” movement—the Constitution Party supports the traditional concept of marriage as understood by the Founding Founders.

George Wallace used to say, there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats. Today, the distinction between “Conservative” and “Liberal” will get you change for a nickel.

That’s why the Constitution Party is the only party to live up to its name. Our pledge is to support the right to life—from conception to natural death. We believe that US borders must be safe, that the security of American workers be the highest priority in foreign trade policies, and that Washington power brokers must not risk national sovereignty via entangling alliances.

I’m reminding you of what the Constitution Party stands for, what we fight for every day, because … it’s August.

You see, the hot summer months mean supporters are on family vacations. Perhaps home projects take their attention away from politics. In any case, funding for ongoing Constitution party activities is down. I have no other way to say that the Constitution party needs your help.

Please consider a generous donation of $50 or even $25—and please let me hear from you right away.

It’s urgent that we build a new website, print literature, and plan for ballot access drives. That work cannot wait until the slow summer months go by. Please invest what you can, $20 or $200, so we may stay in the fight.

If you believe that our fellow citizens need to hear the patriotic alternative to the establishment duopoly, then send a gift today. A $100 donation will go a long way this month. If we could count on active patriots to pitch in $25 it will help so much. Your support in August, in the next few days, will make a difference.

“Conservative” and “Liberal” labels are a fraud. Only “Constitutionalists” offer America real solutions … help us make that known.


Frank Fluckiger
National Chairman

Michael Peroutka Elected to the League of the South Board of Directors

Michael Peroutka, who was the Constitution Party’s 2004 nominee for President, spoke at the League of the South’s National Convention on Friday the 21st. Peroutka, who is a lawyer, spoke on “The Case Against Case Law.” It was announced at the Convention that Mr. Peroutka has been elected as the newest member of the League of the South Board of Directors.

Cross posted at IPR.

Chuck Baldwin to Preach Howard Phillips’ Funeral

This is from Chuck Baldwin’s Facebook page.

My dear friend Howard Phillips passed away this past Saturday. He was one of my heroes and one of the most brilliant men I have ever known. He forgot more about government and history than most of us will ever learn. He was a graduate of Harvard. He was the head of two federal agencies in the Nixon White House. Most people don’t realize that he was the principal founder of what became known as the “Religious Right.” He also inspired Jerry Falwell to start the Moral Majority. He was the founder of the Constitution Party and chairman of the Conservative Caucus. America lost an ardent defender of liberty, and I lost a good friend. The family has asked me to preach Howard’s funeral. I don’t know the exact day yet. When I know, I will post it here on my Facebook wall. The funeral will take place at the McLean Bible Church in Tysons Corner, Virginia. I’m sure going to miss my friend.

Cross posted at IPR.

Howard Phillips, R.I.P.

Howard Phillips (no relation) has passed away. This is sad news. He was a good Christian, a good man and a good conservative. He will be missed. Phillips was a Nixon Administration official, but left the GOP due to its ever leftward drift. He founded the Constitution Party and was three times its candidate for President. May he Rest in Peace. The (real) conservative movement has lost a giant.

Addendum: I’ll add remembrances as I come across them.


It turns out that he had dementia. I didn’t know this.

The Washington Times.


Gary North

Thomas DiLorenzo

Chuck Baldwin no Longer Pre-mil

Chuck Baldwin is moving away from Pre-millenialism, and has endorsed Pan-millenialism, a humorous term meaning that someone doesn’t embrace a particular end-times system, but simply believes it will all “pan out in the end.” This may seem like theological inside baseball to many, but I think this is a pretty significant development. Chuck Baldwin posted the following post on his Facebook fan page. I’ll explain why I think it is significant below:

Another note about prophecy: regardless of one’s personal interpretation of Bible prophecy, this much seems clear to me: prophecy is mostly used by preachers to build crowds and make money. Before Christians become prophecy “junkies,” they need to get grounded in the “weightier matters of the law.” When asked about the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel, Jesus said bluntly, “It is not for you to… know…” (Acts 1:6,7) Let’s quit pretending that we completely know everything about the Lord’s return. We don’t. Our interpretations of Bible prophecy are educated guesses at best. Next: prophecy seems to be a tool of many Christians to promote war and military aggression overseas. This is not only unscriptural, it is VERY DANGEROUS. Jesus plainly told us that we are supposed to “occupy” (literally: “take care of business”) until He comes–whenever that is. If pastors and Christians would get as excited about taking care of business in the here and now as they are about something that God Himself is going to take care of in the future (and over which we have absolutely no control) our country would not be teetering on the edge of tyranny and oppression. Let God take care of His business, and we start taking care of our business!
He followed it up with this post which is even more on the point:
People keep trying to pigeon-hole me into one prophetic camp or another. Just FYI: I was raised and schooled in the Pre-millennial, Pre-tribulational Rapture position. As I’ve grown older and studied more on the subject, I confess that I have become much more neutral. For one thing, I am totally disgusted with the way my Pre-millennial friends use the doctrine of the Rapture to excuse their laziness and cowardice. In the name of “Jesus is coming soon,” they sit on their blessed assurance and do absolutely nothing while our beloved country is being turned into a giant police state. They also use their understanding of prophecy to justify all kinds of undeclared, unconstitutional, and immoral foreign wars. If the tree is known by its fruit, the fruit of Pre-millennialism (at least nowadays) is pretty rotten. My bottom line is I truly don’t believe that we Christians are supposed to know the exact details of Christ’s return. My study of scripture convinces me that God purposely intended that we NOT know these things, that they are confined to the Province of God. I have further come to believe that it truly doesn’t matter much what one’s personal view of prophecy is. We have a duty to do; we need to do it! “Occupy” until He comes (whenever that is). I guess one could say I am a Pan-millennialist. I believe it’s all going to Pan Out according to God’s Sovereign plan. In the meantime, I want to be faithful to do my duty. And part of that duty is resisting these infernal attempts by big-government elitists to surrender America’s independence and liberties to a bunch of New World Order globalists. Regardless of your view of prophecy, will you join me?
Chuck Baldwin is an Iindependent Baptist pastor. It is generally safe to assume that such people are Dispensational Pre-millennialists. When I was touting Baldwin’s Constitution Party campaign for President in 2008, I ran into several people for whom this was a concern, since most of the people I thought might be interested in Baldwin were non-interventionists who had been Ron Paul supporters. They assumed that since he was a dispy pre-mil that he would be supportive of military intervention on behalf of Israel, even though Baldwin was on the record as a non-interventionist.
One of the things that struck me about his second post above is how similar it is to what I have written in the past. Don’t get me wrong, I’m certainly not accusing Chuck Baldwin of plagiarizing me. I was just amazed at how we had arrived at the same conclusion for the same reasons. In order to find somewhere I had written similar before, I entered “Red Phillips” and “Pan-millenialism” into Yahoo and this is what popped up. It is a discussion thread on the blog Sharper Iron. I have a few replies in the thread but note this one:
A pan-millennialist. I guess that is what I am. In my opinion the Bible is not clear on the exact end-times scenario. If it was, we wouldn’t still be arguing about it. I tend to believe this lack of clarity is intentional. (Other than the clear teaching that Jesus is coming again.) It is potentially dangerous to know the future, because it could affect how you behave in the present. It is particularly dangerous to think you know the future and be wrong about it. The post-mils and pre-mils are both correct when they condemn each other based on the consequences of their beliefs. Ideas (theology) do indeed have consequences. One should be hesitant about embracing a certain set of consequences when the theology it is based on does not warrant the level of certainty that many give it.
It is significant that someone so thoroughly schooled in the Pre-Milliennial perspective such as Chuck Baldwin has reconsidered, and it is noteworthy that the excesses of the pro-war on behalf of Israel crowd is one of the main things that prompted this introspection and re-examination. Is Baldwin representative of an emerging trend? My suspicion based mainly on the vibe I get from the political and Christian blogosphere is that he is.