...and suggesting a Second American Civil War with blood in the streets, if Obama is not elected. Please note that their civil war would not be for freedom--but for an alternate from of statist tyranny. They prefer the Nanny State to Big Brother, and they're willing to shed blood for it.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D944H6EO0&show_article=1

Economy shrinks in third quarter as consumers retrench by most in 28 years, sign of recession.

A faithful Christian cannot neglect the replete evidence provided by my good friends, Bon Renaud, and Wesley Strackbein, at Vision Forum. Read it now.

Across the exhibit hall stood another booth that should have attracted attention but didn’t. Representatives of the Chalcedon Foundation, a California-based group that espouses "Christian Reconstructionism," smiled as they passed out literature and signed up potential new supporters.

So writes Rob Boston, long time communications director for the Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AU), in his oversuspicious review of the recent Value Voter's Summit (VVS) in Washington, D.C. Consistent with virtually all commentary from the AU, Mr. Boston is a fear-mongering voice not all that dissimilar from those he criticized in his article.

I use the term "fear-mongering" with intent. Mr. Boston is engaging in a worn-out tactic employed by most of the recent anti-theocratic conspiratorialists: making connections that are not there; misrepresenting our theological positions; and unnecessarily frightening his readers with unsubstantiated accusations. Yet, the specter of a lurking theocracy makes for good business for the AU. As much as they may oppose our theology, we do make for a useful bogeyman that helps to underwrite their existence. Our presence at the VVS provides Mr. Boston with the confirmatory evidence to corroborate his "voice in the wilderness" assertion that the Religious Right in not dead:

There was a time when Religious Right groups seeking to portray themselves as "mainstream" would have kept the Reconstructionists at arm’s length. Their appearance at the FRC event is a sign that not only is the Religious Right not dead, its leaders are feeling so emboldened they will openly consort with radical movements.

Mr. Boston is assuming too much here. There was no consorting per se, in the sense that headship of the Chalcedon Foundation sat down with the organizers of the VVS and made special arrangements for an appearance at the summit. In fact, the entire appearance was organized and personally underwritten by our vice-president, Martin Selbrede. This was no simple task for Selbrede, since he is not employed by the Chalcedon Foundation, but serves as our vice-president voluntarily. As in most instances of his service, he had to make special arrangements for securing time off for himself so that he and his wife could "man" the booth. The VVF made no special concessions for our group, nor does our appearance equate to an endorsement of our views. Mr. Boston is sculpting a ghost at this point.

(As an aside: critics are always welcome to contact us in order to better fact check before they engage in doing a write up. This is usually avoided because it always helps the cause of the critic to depersonalize reconstructionists and focus on the misconstrued citations routinely lifted from our vast corpus of written work. Mr. Boston does this, as you'll soon see.)

Despite our 43+ years of ministry--and the near 30 years of critique--Mr. Boston insists on parroting the typical disinformation that we've long since addressed. Usually, when I read the following description, I dismiss a critic outright, because it's obvious he or she has not done the needed homework--they are merely rehashing web-based disparagements. But because Mr. Boston represents the AU, he deserves special attention--the point being to show that little has changed in the dishonest practices of his employer.

Reconstructionists are the most overtly theocratic faction of the Religious Right, embracing a vision of a “reconstructed� society where fundamentalists of their ilk work to pave the way for Jesus’ second coming by dramatically reordering the law and government.

Boston is correct in stating that we are "the most overtly theocratic faction." However, what's in question is the definition of theocracy. Mr. Boston must first define the term before he can accuse us of holding it. Although I have tread this ground sufficiently since 2005, it is good to augment my previous efforts in order to better silence sensationalists like Mr. Boston. For accurate source material, I go to the grandfather of reconstructionists, Dr. R. J. Rushdoony:

Few things are more commonly misunderstood than the nature and meaning of theocracy. It is commonly assumed to be a dictatorial rule by self-appointed men who claim to rule for God. In reality, theocracy in Biblical law is the closest thing to a radical libertarianism that can be had. [1]

Rushdoony describes theocracy as a "radical libertarianism" because morality is lived out and scrutinized around a minimal state, or civil government. In this sense, Rushdoony is truly libertarian, as set over against those seeking only to get civil government out of the bedroom and their stash of pot:

The state in Scripture is a minimal institution, and so too is the church as an institution. The rule of God's law is essentially through the lives of men as they apply their faith, and as they create tithe agencies to govern various areas and needs. Where faith wanes, the theocracy wanes. [2]

One should not attempt to misconstrue Rushdoony's alternate means of social governance. The ignorant critic might try to seize on the fact that although Rushdoony condemns the civil government as the total means of civil authority, he is still seeking to replace it with a diffused system of decentralized tithe-funded agencies organized around Biblical law. In other words, it's six, and one-half dozen the other. Either way, it's Christian tyranny.

There is some merit to that accusation, because ultimately, whether at the individual level, or at the level of institutions--regardless of their size and scope--theocracy means "the rule of God." And if you just so happen to live in a society that was actually so predominatly Bible-believing Christian, you can rest assured that you'll need more than MapQuest to find a gay bar.

However, consider the requirements for such a society to exist. If you do, you'll better understand why a great deal of our Christian critics refer to our postmillennialism as utopian. The reason, as they say, is that a near Christian society could never exist because of the depravity of man. Therefore, if you are going to usher in the Kingdom of God in the short term, you are driven to the policies of the Religious Right: you will use the apparatus of the existing behemoth state in order to impose certain moral legislation. This is not the policy of the Chalcedon Foundation. That sort of thinking is closer to a mild form of revolutionary thinking. For Chalcedon, the issue is regeneration not revolution. We believe the Holy Spirit has the power to one day change the hearts of all men. Yet, a great deal of that has to do with our faithfulness now. So, the succeeding Christian generations work for each other.

The short answer, however, to Mr. Boston is that such a Christian society could be hundreds, if not thousands, of years away--that's determined by the work of the Holy Spirit. So, why do we speak so much of dominion now? Because the Bible does, and the Bible does so in order to encourage faithfulness in each succeeding generation so that such a godly social order may one day materialize.

This is why critics must consult our doctrine of time in order to contextualize what they perceive to be an overemphasis upon the historical "conquering" of the church. The critics often misconstrue our statements of victory to be an implication for the immediate. Therefore, they say, our statements must be conjoined with the present politics of the Religious Right. In other words, "The reconstructionists state that we must see the rule of God in every area of life, and Tony Perkins is doing just that in his opposition to gay marriage." Now, you have a conspiracy theory. Mr. Boston continues:

They would abolish democracy and impose a harsh theocracy based on a narrow reading of the Old Testament’s legal codes. Under Reconstructionist rule, government becomes the enforcer for fundamentalism, and homosexuality, unchastity, blasphemy and worshipping "false" gods (among other offenses) would merit the death penalty.

Boston doesn't provide any citations to support his assertion that reconstructionists would abolish democracy. This is common slander amongst the anti-theocratic conspiracy theorists, and it reveals the perpetual misconception they have of the entire American system. We are not a democracy in the pure sense of the term, and there is no lobbying by reconstructionists to obstruct or change the democratic process. However, we will oppose ungodly laws as God's prophetic church with whatever legal means available to us. Remember, Mr. Boston, that democracy goes both ways.

Boston then echoes the repeated refrain concerning our "narrow reading of the Old Testament's legal codes." By this he must mean that we a) believe the Old Testament laws are valid; and b) that we interpret them as literal when they are stated plainly. He's welcome to hold this criticism, but holding it doesn't make it true or enforcing. The American states have numerous laws on the books requiring capital punishment, therefore the discussion should be directed as to what crimes require such severe retribution. Anti-sodomy laws have predominated in all states for the majority of our nation's history (Based upon the AU's concept of theocracy, America was much more theocratic in her earlier years). And like American law, it is acts of immorality that the Bible condemns with historical reprimands, not feelings, or states of mind. Those aspects are judged eternally.

Mr. Boston is protesting too much, and nothing in his write up addresses what was the more significant aspect of the VVS: disillusionment. To a large degree, we are witnessing a significant transition in the Religious Right as she is awakening to the fact that she's been played by politicians like a cheap fiddle. I cannot predict where this will lead, or how long before a radical break transpires between the GOP and Conservative Christianity. But things have changed.

The VVS represents an adrenalin injection into the failing heart of political Christianity, but that "booth" which attracted little attention at the Summit still holds the ideological key to the future of orthodox Protestant Christianity. However, once dominionism goes off the political radar and organizes its resources around creating alternate institutions--as it did with Christian education--you'll be able to say that the Religious Right is officially dead. Those days are not here yet.

1. R. J. Rushdoony, Roots of Reconstruction (Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 1991), 63.
2. R. J. Rushdoony, Systematic Theology in Two Volumes (Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 1991), 1141.

"Because the fulness of man's meaning is discernible only in terms of his Creator and the creative purpose, it is impossible, if man is in harmony with God, for liberty and law to be in conflict. Even as a fish needs water to live in, because it is his environment or law-sphere, and 'liberation' into air would kill him, so man finds true liberty in God's law, his environment. The law becomes a curse to apostate man, since it makes clear that his course apart from God's law sphere is death, but to the redeemed man, it is the environment of life." ~ R. J. Rushdoony, The One and the Many, p.36

Contrasting McCain with his hero, Joe declared a few weeks back, "When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and ... said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"

Nice historical reference. Except when the market crashed in 1929, Hoover was president, and there was no television.

Can one imagine what the press would have done to Sarah Palin had she exhibited such ignorance of history. Or Dan Quayle?

Joe gets a pass because everybody likes Joe.

"The question of liberty is thus in a very real measure a question of faith. Man's current problem in the economic realm is not that capitalism has failed but that man has failed. As a result, capitalism, liberty, and individualism all have an unpleasant and distasteful ring to man; their very success adds to their offense when man himself is a failure." ~ R. J. Rushdoony, The One and the Many (ed. 2007), 25.

You've got to hand it to the Anglo-American Establishment for the way they play hardball. It's becoming more apparent that it will be very difficult to undermine U.S. /British hegemony by other nations like Venezuela, Russia, China, and Iran. Other economic powerhouses like India are by no means on our radar, since they are squarely fitted within the Anglo-American empire due to their dependency on U.S. corporations.

This is in essence what we've been doing with Iraq. That's why we have over a dozen permanent military bases, and the largest embassy in the world, established in Saddam's former nation. It's also why military conflict in Iraq is now giving way to commercial enterprise, rebuilding the infrastructure, and a growing stock market. We have an "India-like" nation knocking on Iran's door.

Now, as our primary foreign competitors salivate over the alleged U.S. financial crisis, another sudden crisis has seemingly appeared within the international oil industry. Countries like Iran, Venezuela, and Russia, which have built up their regions within the past few years by means of rapidly rising oil prices, have overspent their resources and now the bottom has fallen out of the price per barrel. As quickly as prices rose, they are now declining, and these challengers to the Anglo-American empire are now on precarious footing. Today's International Herald Tribune is highlighting this development. Here's a few snippets:

As the price of oil roared to ever higher levels in recent years, the leaders of Venezuela, Iran and Russia muscled their way onto the world stage, using checkbook diplomacy and, on occasion, intimidation.

Now, plummeting oil prices are raising questions about whether the countries can sustain their spending — and their bids to challenge United States hegemony...

Still, Russia, Iran and Venezuela have all based their spending on oil prices they thought were conservative but are now close to the market level. Significant further drops could tip the three countries into deficit spending or at least force them to choose among priorities. A worldwide recession, which many economists say is likely, would worsen matters, dampening energy demand and holding down prices.

Remember, the American-British oligarchs (I must also include Israel in this equation, since it is essentially our 51st state) have been at the business of empire much longer than these other upstarts. The intelligence apparatus, the economic control, and the media power all serve the interests and aims of Western power, and at the heart of the West is the Anglo-American Establishment. Like them or not, they are well-versed in modern imperialism.

Carroll Quigley, once professor at Georgetown University, and teacher of Bill Clinton, wrote a couple of volumes describing the history, development, and core of Western power: Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, and The Anglo-American Establishment: From Rhodes to Cliveden. In reaction to Quigley's publications grew the now pervasive conspiracy theory movement. This is due largely to the now infamous quotations by Quigley:

There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies (notably to its belief that England was an Atlantic rather than a European Power and must be allied, or even federated, with the United States and must remain isolated from Europe), but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known. [Tragedy and Hope, Pg. 950.]

The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. [Tragedy and Hope, Pg. 1247-1248.]

We're seeing this now as Americans are beginning to realize that there is very little difference between Republican and Democrat. I think that can be overstated. There clearly is some differences in policy and national direction, but what does not change is the fact that the state is central to all of life. Still, the Anglo-American power structure remains fortified, and the recent bail out granted a significant increase to its authority, as like the Federal Reserve Act, the American people have turned over more authority to the financial oligarchs. Someone might say, "But, didn't we actually give more authority to the Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson?" Yes, we empowered Mr. Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs banking house. He's no politician.

It would be beneficial to learn more about Anglo-American Establishment from Mr. Quigley himself:

Conservative news channels give a glowing report about how the surge is now leading to a safer Iraq; a ten-fold increase in the stock market; and Western commercialism underway in Baghdad.

The Dow rose 400 points,

The Index of Leading Indicators did better than expected in September,

And gas dropped to under $3 a gallon for the first time since February.

This film, and others like it, represent a growing animosity being directed at the massive credit card industry for luring the American public into a vicious debtor's prison. But what is not addressed is the fact that the American people have larceny in the heart, and that industries can only thrive if they cater to the baser values of our lower nature.

Even the most abusive credit situations are easily resolved by self-government. The majority of people (or consumers) that end up in bankruptcy got there because of a failure to exercise restraint. That's why people trapped in sizable debt are advised to "cut up" their credit cards--they can't control themselves.

It is not, therefore, the fault of any industry that you do not understand the way the game is played. Sure, the credit offers are deceiving, but so what. Do you expect something noble and true from the unredeemed? Shame on us for conforming to this world.

Now, I am no friend of the credit card companies. Just like I am no friend of the local drug dealer. It is ultimately my choice as to whether I will indulge in either supplier, and my choices are informed by my faith. Therefore, if we perish, we perish for a lack of knowledge. Our antinomianism creates a vacuum for sin, and the way of the transgressor is hard.

For the Christian community, we have come upon a crucial period in history. We can either continue with the American system, or forsake it in order to create an alternate society centered around the Lordship of Christ and the comprehensive application of His law-word. This is what we refer to as the Kingdom of God--it is a people modeling on earth the way things are done in heaven. And in heaven, you owe nothing but love for one another.

If the current polls hold, Barack Obama will win the White House on November 4 and Democrats will consolidate their Congressional majorities, probably with a filibuster-proof Senate or very close to it. Without the ability to filibuster, the Senate would become like the House, able to pass whatever the majority wants.

Though we doubt most Americans realize it, this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s. If the U.S. really is entering a period of unchecked left-wing ascendancy, Americans at least ought to understand what they will be getting, especially with the media cheering it all on.

Remember, historically, fascism is NOT a Right Wing movement. Mussolini was thoroughly Leftist--a socialist through and through. What Obama Mania is doing is unconstitutional. Why does he need the help of police and prosecutors to run a political campaign?



Also, Obama supporters terrorize political opponents.

Here's a snippet from his recent article in Profile magazine.

This leads us up to the broader question of how US foreign policy is decided. It is already being raised in America. But Russia also has the right to ask it. The US is our most important partner regardless of the present state of our relations. We must know how far the political leadership of America controls pursuit of the foreign policy of the country. If it is made at the level of middle-tier State Department officials that are provided with the powers of deputies, then we must consider this in our strategy. The impression is that there were mediocre decisions taken on vital issues. Who did the analysis? Who tried to foresee all the consequences? This kind of privatization of American foreign policy on key issues suggests a diplomacy that is absolutely nontransparent, which undermines the very foundation of our cooperation.

Once more on the factor of force: When I unsuccessfully tried to have my article published in Foreign Affairs last year, I happened to encounter rather insistent censorship, which was quite a revelation. Forty percent of my text was abridged, but what’s most important – all my references to Christianity as the common basis of all the branches of European civilization were cleaned up.

I believe that Christian values retain their significance, especially during times of change, when such qualities are required as humility and readiness for sacrifice. They have a special significance for America as the policy aiming at gaining total control and absolute security is doomed to failure. These things are impossible for people because they belong to God: either under God or instead of God. Fyodor Tyutchev, who was not only a poet and diplomat but also a profound thinker, wrote in the middle of the nineteenth century: "Is the appropriation of divinity not a negation of it?" The Puritan ancestors of Americans rejected the supremacy of Rome and the principle of papal infallibility.

But what’s to be done with human infallibility? Is this not what the claim to one’s righteousness attests to? Our entire history has taught us humility.

Read the full article.

From August 2006. Peter Schiff is continually correct. Art Laffer is not only incorrect, he actually ridicules Schiff as clueless. How does that shoe taste, Art, now that your foot is in your mouth?

...then what exactly are we facing? Let's pray that our Lord will remove those who are pushing this country into a financial dark age. The people of America--especially God's people--must wake from their national slumber and demand of their government some fiscal righteousness.

This discussion on Glenn Beck is a little frightening to the ears of the flesh. At this point, it is still difficult to predict what will ultimately develop because numerous factors can come into play in the months and years ahead. Gary North provided a sober summary of the most recent developments, but predicting the market is always a challenge. The "x factor" in my mind is the American people. Although nefarious elements may stir a troublesome pot, the majority of Americans will have an opportunity to be introduced to their "better selves."

This is when you should rejoice that you're a child of God; but be sure the blood is over your own doorpost. I recommend that you prepare your own household for whatever may come. And, remember what Rushdoony said:

"The crisis must be seen as good news, as evidence that God is at war, that the wages of sin in any sphere are always death, and that every tower of Babel man erects has a common destiny, disaster and confusion. The Lord is at work; let the people rejoice."

"The world is moving into the greatest economic crisis of history. It is a religious crisis, the product of man's efforts to play god and to control all things. For humanistic man, freedom is anathema, because it runs counter to scientific planning and control. The growing crisis is thus a religious one, and we must see it as God's judgment on a false and rival order. The crisis must be seen as good news, as evidence that God is at war, that the wages of sin in any sphere are always death, and that every tower of Babel man erects has a common destiny, disaster and confusion. The Lord is at work; let the people rejoice."

~ R. J. Rushdoony, Roots of Reconstruction, pp.1101f

"War is a sign of impotence. A system or philosophy of life which has no power to convert becomes imperialistic. For the zeal and faith of peaceful missionary work it substitutes brutal terror. A failing faith resorts to war, because it lacks the contagion of faith and conviction and can only force men into its own system. War is the resort of those who lack true power and are declining."
~ R. J. Rushdoony, Roots of Reconstruction, p.17

By R. J. Rushdoony

Decapitalization means the progressive destruction of capital, so that a society has progressively less productive ability. Decapitalization is the dissipation of accumulated wealth (Prov. 14:23).

Some of the potentially wealthiest agricultural countries are importers of agricultural produce, such as Venezuela and Chile. The fishing-grounds off the Pacific Coast of South America are some of the richest known to the world, rich enough to feed that area.

Chilean fishermen cannot market fish properly and dump marvelous catches of fish into the sea, because they have neither storage nor transport to take their fish to the markets. Thus, there is neither a lack of labor nor a lack of markets for the fish, but necessary capitalization to provide the facilities for bringing labor, produce and market together is lacking.

Much of the world is in the same predicament: it has the labor, the natural resources, and the hungry markets for its produce, but it lacks the necessary capital to make the flow of goods possible. Socialism tries to solve this problem but only aggravates it because it furthers the poverty of all concerned. Socialism and inflation both accomplish the same purpose: they decapitalize an economy.

Inflation succeeds when people have larceny in their hearts, and the same is true of socialism. Socialism is organized larceny; like inflation, it takes from haves to give to the have nots. By destroying capital, it destroys progress and pushes society into disaster.

As the products of capitalization begin to wear out, new capital is lacking to replace them, and the state has no capital of its own; it only impoverishes the people further and therefore itself by trying to create capital by taxation.

It's highly unlikely a third-party candidate will win this November. However, I'm more concerned about the "third-party" factor in the lesser magistrate elections, i.e., local politics. We'll certainly require a stronger buffer within our respective state legislatures to help resist the growing bureaucratic tyranny in Washington.

Ralph Nader (independent candidate) received 2% of voter choices, Bob Barr (Libertarian Party) and Cynthia McKinney (Green Party) 1%, and Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party) received less than 1%. The two major-party candidates, Obama and McCain, combined to receive 90% of registered voters' choices.

The Chancellor will move to take control of the Royal Bank of Scotland today by injecting £20 billion of taxpayers’ money.

The Government is also expected to take over HBOS in the most dramatic extension of state ownership in the British economy since the war. The bank’s rescue takeover by Lloyds TSB appeared to be on the brink of collapse last night.

Connecticut's Supreme Court is the third state to rule that forbidding gay marriage is unconstitutional. This is yet another encroachment passed the true meaning of separation of church and state. Since the state did not create man or woman, it cannot define them. And since the state did not create the institution of marriage--a covenantal domain--it cannot define it. In addition, since marriage is not a "right," but a covenant act before God for the extension of His Kingdom, the state has once again asserted its divinity. Adding insult to injury is the defamation of God's holiest order for man by the state's empowering of one of the Bible's most heinous crimes.

Since 1973, America has officially declared itself an anti-Christ nation. It was then that the state put into law the state-sponsored, tax-funded, limitless blood bath of surgical abortion. They no longer refer to it as abortion, but clean up the blood stains with such Nazi-like euphemisms such as reproductive rights. Now, gay rights--another distorted term--is being pushed on the American populace as a constitutional matter.

Murder and sodomy are now issues of the Constitution? Only in a satanic society do such high crimes become virtues and the participants made into victims. What else to you call a nation that codifies such evil into law? Legislatively, it is anti-Christ, for it has despised the order of God and spurned His Word. They deny Christ as coming in the flesh in that they reject His authority within history. Ultimate authority lies with the state, and the state is now remaking the image of God in man in order to create an upside down world that makes Alice's Wonderland look like a land of sensibility.

Connecticut is now officially an anti-Christ state: it has codified its hatred of God's order. Is your state next?

"[T]here is a campaign under way to give a new meaning to the First Amendment and the separation of church and state. Almost every day, the press carries attacks on the recent role of the church on the political scene. It is plainly stated that tax exemption requires silence on the part of the church, and that separation of church and state requires no comment on anything political by the church.

"The fact is that the purpose of the First Amendment was to keep the church free to exercise its prophetic role with respect to the state and other areas of life. The clergy demanded the First Amendment because they knew that an established church is a controlled church; a controlled church is a silent church, and usually a corrupt one as well. The election sermon was then a routine fact before civil elections. The church was the prophetic voice of God, spoke to every area of life, including the state, bringing God's word to bear on all things. For the church to be silent is a sin, and it is a denial of its calling, and a forsaking of the very purpose of the First Amendment. The freedom of the church to apply God's word, God's law and moral requirements, to the state is necessary for the health and welfare of the state and society. Today, as in ancient Israel and Judah, where evil rulers sought to silence the voice of the prophets, so now evil and anti-Christian rulers again seek to silence the prophetic word of God, and the church, the ministry of that word.

"To be silent in such a time is to deny the Lord, abandon the faith, and concede to the enemy."

~ R. J. Rushdoony, Roots of Reconstruction, p. 519

Berlusconi also seems to be downplaying the assertion for a market suspension.

Oct. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said political leaders are discussing the idea of closing the world's financial markets while they "rewrite the rules of international finance.''

"The idea of suspending the markets for the time it takes to rewrite the rules is being discussed,'' Berlusconi said today after a Cabinet meeting in Naples, Italy. A solution to the financial crisis "can't just be for one country, or even just for Europe, but global.''

According to this article, they're considering a new Bretton Woods type of agreement in which gold would once again play a role in backing currencies. The question becomes, "Will this mean a new currency for Western nations?"

The U.S. government is contemplating some nationalization of key, but problematic, banks. Iceland has already done this within the last 48 hours, and more European countries are considering this alternative also. For those of us that are ignorant of markets and banking, we can only hope that somebody knows what they're doing.

If you can clear your mind of all the economic jargon, the market, government intervention, and the purpose of central banking rely upon a simple premise: yours and my confidence. This was spelled out today in the Washington Post in an article entitled "The End of American Capitalism?":

The Bush administration is considering a partial nationalization of some banks, buying up a portion of their shares to shore them up and restore confidence as part of the $700 billion government bailout. The notion of government ownership in the financial sector, even as a minority stakeholder, goes against what market purists say they see as the foundation of the American system.

The purpose of the bailout was to restore confidence, but confidence, in a consumer-driven society, is based upon the availability of credit. If we switch to the language of a drug addict, credit is like crack--it's an addictive resource enabling citizens to equip their individual concept of the American dream. Where once that meant owning your own home, it now means owning at least two vehicles (one an SUV), a TV for every room, new clothes, eating out, and cell phones and iPods for every child. Cut off the abuser from this lifestyle, and he'll riot in the streets.

Therefore, when the government says "restore confidence," that means you continuing some semblance of the American consumer lifestyle. Market fear is the great enemy of this type of government intervention: "Oh ye consumer of little faith, why did you doubt?"

In order to pacify fear, government has to be sure banks can keep a steady stream of credit for businesses and consumers to keep the faith:

Yet the administration may feel it has no choice. Credit, the lifeblood of capitalism, ceased to flow.

This writer is deadly wrong. Credit is not the lifeblood of capitalism--only modern capitalism. Productivity, frugality, saving, and sound investing are the lifeblood of real capitalism. I'm not being "capitalistic" because I take out a 30-year mortgage, a five-year car loan, and pay with a major credit card. Capital is created for me by doing the opposite. I'm accumulating capital by being productive, avoiding wasteful spending, and saving. Then, I can invest in equally sound business ventures, and through my tithing, create Christian social institutions that deal with the immorality of my neighbor and the danger that represents to a stable social order.

The Washington Post did say this rightly: "An economy based on the free market cannot function that way." This is because the free market works by self-discipline and foresight, not credit-based spending. It is not based upon instant gratification, but the government is appealing to the materialist drive of the consumer-addict in order to maintain stability. The sad part is that they're only putting off the unwanted season of "withdrawal" (to again use the language of the addict).

There are alternatives, however. Bringing all our troops home, and cutting off the majority of foreign aid would eliminate huge amounts from the U.S. budget. Cutting back on the welfare state will also make a significant impact on government spending. Working to keep people in their homes by adjusting down mortgage rates would have a positive effect on the economy for the next few years, and then embracing the short-term recession--our national withdrawal--will serve as an effective rehab for our consumer culture.

Government intervention in the last few weeks has only led to further downturns on Wall Street. This equates to a lack of confidence in the market, i.e., fear. And because the state suffers from a god complex, it believes it can restore miracle-working faith to the people. It's too late. The damage is already done, and the people know the emperor is naked. In order to survive, the state must turn on itself and free up the free market by getting off its own crack addiction.

As you'll notice in the video, David Parker was arrested for his persistence. After refusing to leave the school after 2 hours, authorities arrested Parker.

Are we surprised at all this? Of course not. The Parkers are learning that their children belong at home, or at a Christian school.

With an almost synchronized effort, the news today is replete with an apparent shift in the economic discussion. Today, the news is focused on internationalism, i.e., a meeting of global leaders, the failing of foreign economies, and a push for a new world order.

The economic crisis may turn into the first world-wide public discussion of a new international financial order, which always results in a corresponding political transformation. Try to keep in mind that in every crisis, those who are to blame--or who failed in their responsibilities--are usually the ones that end up with the power to fix the problem:

• U.S. gov't failed on 9/11 but ended up with greater power.
• U.S. gov't failed with Hurricane Katrina but ended up with greater power.

After the failure of central banking, the central banks--on an international scale--will walk away with consolidated power to resolve the crisis.

It was on October 8, 451 that the fourth ecumenical council (Council of Chalcedon) met in Asia Minor (Bithynia) to establish the Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union, or dual natures of Christ:

We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.

Two lectures from our recent Evening with Chalcedon meetings in Virginia are now online for listening. You may listen at our home page, or download the mp3.

"The hope was to spur nervous consumers and businesses to spend more freely again."

A recession--like a drug rehab--is supposed to force the addict into cutting off the source of their addiction. The Fed just fixed the American people another syringe full of financial crack.

A Leftist (Socialist) power grab of the American system has been underway for some time now, and agents like Barney Frank--Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee--have served their superiors well in driving lenders like Fannie and Freddie to bursting the housing bubble.

Back on September 11, 2003, the Bush administration recommended "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." At that time, Bush was pushing for a regulatory agency within the Dept. of Treasury to "assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

Then Treasury Secretary, John Snow, wanted to place the power to appoint directors to Fannie and Freddie to Congress--the obvious implication is that the President would be clear of the blame for the fallout everyone knew was coming. They've know about this since 1992, because even by then Fannie and Freddie were packaging investment securities from mortgages.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families.

Well, we now know what financing those lower-income families would produce.

Fannie and Freddie--two silly pseudonyms--were once known as Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie), and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie). They would soon represent nearly half of the U.S. housing market ($12 trillion). They were both a part of the New Deal, and since the 1930s as government agencies but were privatized in the late 60s.

What's not discussed in this debate is the fact that the Clinton administration pushed Fannie Mae to increase lending to low-income families. And since Fannie is a purchaser of loans, pressure--if you want to call it that--was placed on banks and mortgage companies to lower the bar for easy money in the mortgage marketplace. This meant huge dividends for lenders, and the repackaged securities produced by Fannie and Freddie were too lucrative for hedge fund investors. From this came the housing bubble.

In 2003, Barney Frank said in reaction to the Bush plan for increased regulation under the Treasury Department, ''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.'' Why are so few pundits shoving these words down Barney's throat?

Barney Frank was opposing the proposed plan for congressional regulation of Fannie and Freddie simply because it would adversely affect lower-income families from obtaining a loan. If this was simply politics on Frank's part, then he's too inept to serve as Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. He knew the science behind the savings and loan fiasco of the 1980s, and he knew the science behind the bursting of the dot com bubble just two years prior (2001). He was encouraging bad lending practices by the two firms most responsible for the present crisis.

There is only one conclusion to reach: Frank wanted the bubble to burst. He helped to make it happen. Why? It is likely a subversion from the Left--much like the pushing through of the Patriot Act, and the Department of Homeland Security, were a power grab from the Right. This is probably why Secretary Paulson wanted the bail out bill to feature no congressional oversight. The Bush administration wanted to keep the socialists at bay, stop the effort, and provide hedge fund investors and CEOs as much money as possible as they pulled out to regroup.

The American people resisted the initial version of the bail out bill, but with little to no understanding of what was actually transpiring. Socialistic bureaucrats and capitalistic predators are dueling for control of the failing American system, and like always, the citizens are the turf on which the game is played.

For those "in the know," a massive unified campaign is underway to install Obama/Biden into office. Although I care for neither McCain nor Obama, the solidarity between big media, bureaucrats, public education, and Hollywood in support of Obama is unprecedented. It's almost humorous that such an ambiguous campaign can garner so much support. The slogan itself says it all: "We Are Change." Okay, so that's it? You're simply a change? I think you mean, "We're Not Bush."

Equally breathtaking is the McCain choice of Gov. Sarah Palin. This is often described as a "wise choice" on the part of McCain, but in actuality, it reveals the level of desperation. They knew the "War on Terror" politicizing was no longer working, and they knew the economy was tanking. The only viable political bloc to try and secure was the disgruntled Christian Right. Palin is designed to reach that demographic.

We are either facing a socialistic mammoth state, or more of the same fascistic looting from the warfare economy and the corresponding jackbooting that system requires to maintain power. Either way, tyranny is the only choice on the menu. That's why it's bordering on ridiculous to think Christians can change anything within the two-party system. Our most important work is to educate our fellow citizens. The growing totalitarianism and economic suffering will certainly make that easier. We're sure to see meet up groups every flavor sprout throughout the country, and it's vital that you and I participate in this new era of populist re-education.

I have to admit that O'Reilly is right on this one. Congressional leaders failed to address these issues early on and Frank did say that Fannie and Freddie were good investments going forward.

How then shall we vote? Well, before I attempt to answer that "not-so-complex" question, allow me a moment to state first what I believe should be our larger concern.

What's foremost is our acknowledgment that we're engaged in a long-term battle that can be summarized in two steps: 1) save the country, and 2) save the country. No, you did not read that wrong. I stated the two ideas in the same phraseology. In other words, we have a short-term goal--relatively speaking--of working somewhat within the political process to both restore and preserve the original character of our nation. Under this rubric are such items as restoring a Constitutional Republic, ending federalism, a return to sound money, routing out the nefarious elements, putting an end to the state-sponsored murder of children, etc. Secondly, and contemporaneously, we are to seek the salvation of men. In short, save the country, so that we can continue to save men.

What this demonstrates is that we should be looking far beyond the 2008 presidential election. In fact, as I've written previously, the most important work we can do is to continue to educate friends, family, and the general public to the rising tyranny in this once-free America. We must share with them the Biblical ideals for how a society should be governed and that only a civil order based squarely upon God's laws can truly prosper in security, well-being, and character.

For example, we've had a tremendous opportunity granted to us by the campaign, and corresponding "revolution," that burgeoned around Congressman Ron Paul. Now, more than ever, hundreds of thousands of Americans are waking up to the threat of statism. They're no longer on the control grid of mainstream media and the controlled political system it represents. However, these newly awakened "rebels to tyranny" are not being given a worldview to replace their broken system. This will only lead to more problems. It is now that Christian Reconstruction has an effectual door opened to it to instruct these neophytes in the Biblical foundation to freedom.

So, what does that mean for how we vote this November? It means we have a chance to send a clear message to BOTH parties: they're immoral, bankrupt, and rotten to the core, and they'll receive no acknowledgment from us.

"Wait a minute, Chris! Are you suggesting that I vote for a third party candidate?" Well, I can't tell you what to do, but I can tell you what not to do. Don't be suckered in by the luster of "using the political process" in order to hopefully get a Bible study in the basement of Babylon. The American system is now like Israel during the time of Christ. It is a fig tree with no figs. The problem goes all the way to the root.

Cast your vote for righteousness, because choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. Let the Lord be honored when He looks down upon your choice, for how can He honor pragmatism? How can He honor your interpretation of the future? Is God wringing His hands at the possibility that Obama will win because a Christian stayed home, or voted for a third-party candidate? Hardly. God wants faithfulness, and if one is to seek the Kingdom and His righteousness, he must support that which best reflects God's standards.

Ron Paul did try to work within the Republican party, but they laughed at him. While he was declaring that we were facing a financial crisis, the lot of idiot nominees harped on a senseless war while saying "the fundamentals of our economy are strong." The support for Ron Paul came from outside. For all intents and purposes, he was a third-party candidate, because no party would embrace him. All the benefit he derived from bearing the label "Republican" was what it gained him in media coverage. Well, that's over now. It's time to burn the boats. We have a new city to build.

Our nation is facing the consequences of its sin. America had larceny in its heart, so it never challenged this fiat money system. We the people forsook our personal responsibilities as self-governing citizens and now we moan under the weight of this bloated bureaucratic tyranny. We the "followers of Christ" turned His children over to the Molech public school system, and now that our young men and women are older, they have departed from the way. And we who offer a gospel of peace are celebrating the blood bath of innocent Muslim women and children all in the name of vengeance, imperialism, and economic exploitation.

Any vote for a mainstream candidate is an endorsement of a satanic agenda. And, if the Religious Right cannot comprehend this simple premise, she is neither religious, nor right.

Larceny in the Heart: The Economics of Satan and the Inflationary State

Get the book which is essential reading for an understanding of the moral crisis of modern economics and the only certain long-term cure.

Economists here and abroad say Zimbabwe’s economic collapse is gaining velocity, radiating instability into the heart of southern Africa. As the bankrupt government prints ever more money, inflation has gone wild, rising from 1,000 percent in 2006 to 12,000 percent in 2007 to a figure so high the government had to lop 10 zeros off the currency in August to keep the nation’s calculators from being overwhelmed. (Had it left the currency alone, $1 would now be worth about 10 trillion Zimbabwean dollars.)

In fact, Zimbabwe’s hyperinflation is probably among the five worst of all time, said Jeffrey D. Sachs, a Columbia University economics professor, along with Germany in the 1920s, Greece and Hungary in the 1940s and Yugoslavia in 1993.

Making matters worse, cash itself has become scarce. Business executives and diplomats say Zimbabwe’s central bank governor, Gideon Gono, desperate for foreign currency to stoke the governing party’s patronage machine, sends runners into the streets with suitcases of the nation’s currency to buy up American dollars and South African rand on the black market — drying up Zimbabwean dollars that would otherwise go to the banks.

Read the full story...

Senate Gives a Majority "Yes" to Bail Out

And while I was giving my most earnest attention to the matter, I happened to meet with certain barbaric writings, too old to be compared with the opinions of the Greeks, and too divine to be compared with their errors; and I was led to put faith in these by the unpretending cast of the language, the inartificial character of the writers, the foreknowledge displayed of future events, the excellent quality of the precepts, and the declaration of the government of the universe as centered in one Being. And, my soul being taught of God, I discerned that the former class of writings lead to condemnation, but that these put an end to the slavery that is in the world, and rescue us from a multiplicity of rulers and ten thousand tyrants, while they give us, not indeed what we had not before received, but what we had received but were prevented by error from retaining. ~ Tatian, "Address of Tatian to the Greeks"

Gary North: "What I find interesting is that the media keep blaming the securities regulatory agencies for having failed to call this process what it was, and to take steps to stop it. What we do not see is a detailed discussion of Federal Reserve policy under Alan Greenspan. Greenspan was hailed as a genius, the Maestro, the greatest Federal Reserve chairman of all time. Yet it was Greenspan, as no other Federal Reserve chairman before him, who was the architect of this gigantic failure of the financial markets. It was the Federal Reserve System, far more than the regulatory agencies that supervise stocks and bonds, that caused the boom, which has now turned into a bust. But the Federal Reserve System remains sacrosanct in the media. To call it into question now is to call into question the financial markets since 1914. To call it into question, and to identify it for what it is -- the enforcement arm of the commercial banking cartel -- would be to identify the heart of modern state capitalism. State capitalists own the media, and we are not about to get this story regarding the Federal Reserve System. Instead, we get stories of CEOs who made fortunes, received large severance pay, and walked away multi-multimillionaires. This makes for great news bites, and it also makes for exceedingly bad policies passed by Congress and enforced by the regulatory agencies from this time on."