And you are podcasting with Gary DeMar. Let's figure things out. Welcome to the Gary DeMar Podcast. I'm Eric, that's Gary, and Gary is holding a sheet of paper across from me. And by the way, this is the first time that we've been, we've ran a couple of interviews and some other things. But yeah, it seems like it's been a little bit of a wrong vacation. I was on vacation and you're going on vacation here next week, but we're back in the bunker.
For a limited engagement, hopefully we can get back into our office here soon. The reason we're in my basement, and the girl you were here with, the stuff with my granddaughters, is what would you call it? A business venture by some, I wanted to open up a dance studio right below us. And it always happened during the morning when we do our podcast. And so we couldn't do it because the music was wiring all over the place.
Well, it hasn't worked out for him. I could have told him that it wasn't going to work out for him. So he's moving out and some friends of ours are moving in. So it's good. Yeah, so we'll be able to move the equipment back over to the old new office or the new old office and get back to, hopefully just a little, just a little bit more of a podcast studio type recording environment.
Anyway, all that to say, you didn't need to know any of that, but that's what we're doing here. And like I said, Gary's holding up the topic that he wants to discuss across the table from me, which is much, there's a much shorter table than we have in the other office. So I can read this without my glasses. Rolling stone melts down over a lead O being a Christian who believes in limited government.
Yeah, this is this is the new tactic of the wash, what am I saying? Rolling stone hasn't melted down in the last stone magazine. Rolling stone magazine for the younger folks rolling stone magazine really started off during the heyday of the kind of the British invasion.
And they had some, there's some pretty good, pretty good articles dealing with the music scene and so forth. And at one point, yeah, and at one point it was actually about music, kind of like MTV used to play music videos. Now, now it's all about about cultural and it's all sociopolitical stuff.
Yeah, so Rolling stone magazine sent a reporter to interview and I'll talk a little bit about that in a moment of what that was all about, but what the tactic is among the left right now is to discredit the Supreme Court. As long as the power play of the Supreme Court leaned left on abortion rule or rulings and on homosexual marriage and so forth, the left, the Democrats were all excited about it.
Yeah, you're seeing all this stuff come out about clearance Thomas. I mean, they're going after him. They're going after a lead O in his wife and rights. And the biggest, the biggest mistake that the left made it really wasn't there, their mistake, but it was Ruth Bader Ginsburg's decision not to retire to give the Democrats the job and give them the freedom to put in a new Supreme Court.
Or she's I think she wanted to really believe that Hillary Clinton was going to be Trump. Okay. So she stayed on because she wanted to retire during Hillary Clinton's presidency and so that she could then rename someone on Supreme Court. Well, that didn't work out. So she handed up dying and then it was ended up Trump.
And then she changed the Supreme Court. There's no there's no doubt about that. And you remember what was going on at that time with the cabinet. I mean, the left went absolutely crazy trying to keep. The cabinet off of the court. And everybody talks about January 6, January 6 and talk about the politics of insurrection and so forth. I mean, there were there were demonstrations at the Supreme Court, but people banging on doors.
And then it was also the Schumer Chuck Schumer saying, you know, you'll you'll rue the day that you put you put clearance Brett Kavanaugh on the court, intimated, you know, some sort of violence that is going to take us. We forget we forget all of these things in the media forget them too. We also forget things like the congressional. I don't know. I mean, you remember this. Remember the congressional baseball game.
When was that was a during the Trump administration was it was it was it before that were a madman who was a Bernie Sanders supporter went in there and shot up people at the congressional baseball game. You do what you remember that. What's a congressional baseball game? They the Democrats and the Republicans get together put a team together and they play they play a baseball game softball.
Is it softball or baseball? I think it's baseball. Really. Yeah. Okay. Could be wrong. Anyway, this not where is that in the Constitution? And we forget about we for well, we don't forget about it. It's it was like, oh, yeah, this happened, but you know, yeah, maybe he was a Bernie Sanders supporter, but you know, he was a crazy nut job.
And yet January six comes along with with you know, nothing really happened in terms of overtaking the government. Like people I know I know people who were there and they weren't there to overthrow the government. But anyway.
So the goal the goal of the left has been to deed now to delegitimize the Supreme Court. And one of the tactics, of course, was to let's stack the Supreme Court because there's nothing the Constitution that only says there's not only to be nine nine Supreme Court just as this and I think if my history's correct. I think during Roosevelt's term, there was this. The goal was to stack stack the court. Okay.
And so the the the courts right now, the last. So what is that then? Is that is that look at gentlemen's agreement that we keep it at nine? Is it that that that's a has been writing somewhere right? No, it's not. It's just I don't know. I think it's been kind of an agreed upon. It's just nine Supreme Court just as but I don't think there's anything that says how many they're supposed to be really. Yeah.
Two senators and then of course the you know the number of Congress, Congress people and so forth. That's all that's settled, but not the number and Supreme Court. Interesting. So okay. So the goal right now is in the course we were seeing this with the law fair that's taking place. And then the Supreme Court because of a number of so-called conservative decisions coming out of the Supreme Court, although just a couple of days ago, depending on when you're listening to this.
Supreme Court ruled nine to zero, not to abandon the the pro abortion drug. So he's thinking, well, you know, they got rid of Roe v Wade. But then insane that they're not going to they're not going to rule against this particular drug.
But the ruling from the Supreme Court on this pro abortion drug was the people who were bringing the case didn't have standing. That's the that's kind of the the given way of getting out of these things. Oh, they really don't have standing rule on this because there is no basis that they can bring this to the Supreme Court.
Okay. And it really is a congressional issue if it's even that, but that's another another story. So so the goal is to get rid of a lead. Oh, and they've been trying to get rid of Clarence Thomas or at least to get these two justices to recuse themselves dealing with anything regarding Trump. Okay. So if a decision comes if somebody goes to the Supreme Court where the Supreme Court is going to rule on either what's happened in New York.
And Manhattan or what's going to happen in Mar-a-Lago or any of these other cases that the Supreme Court rules on those. They want to they want to flip the balance here a little bit and say, Oh, Alito needs to recuse himself and Clarence Thomas needs to recuse himself because Clarence Thomas's wife, the reason name is Jenny.
She has expressed her her own political conservative political views and supports Republicans. Oh, no, you can't have that. Oh, you can't have an activist judge like you did in the Trump trial. Right. Right. Who is it? Who's a democratic party donor. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And that's okay. Right. And his daughter had she was in there was some relationship financially and so forth.
But this is this is the tactic. The tactic always is that from the Democrats from the left, whatever they are doing, you accuse the Republicans and conservatives of doing that's that's the tactic. That's the way it always happens. So they're trying to get rid of Thomas Clarence Thomas to recuse himself. Now the latest one is to get rid of Alito to recuse himself because his wife flew a American flag upside down.
On their home. Yeah. Oh, no. And supposedly it was flown at the time of the whole January 6th things. Okay. So the so Alito's wife was actually flying the flag upside down to protest the actions taken by our government against the January 6th people. So she was allowed to be a private citizen and have a and have opinions and things.
She should have said, Hey, I flew the flag upside down because of of January 6th. Right. Nothing to do politically with what was going to but supposedly there was some very, very bad blood between Alito's wife and a woman who was living with, I think her mother or her parents and a couple of a couple of houses down the block.
Who was a just a flaming die hard leftist who signs up and so forth and so on. And flying the United States flag upside down is not contrary to regulations regarding the display of the flag. Okay. It is a sign of distress. So you put the flag upside down. It's a sign of distress. And so someone could January 6th. This was a sign of distress. No matter what your view.
Sure. Yeah. And there and if you go online and you look at articles regarding this incident, almost every single article. I shouldn't say almost every single article about this whole flag flap is written by some leftist media group New York Times NPR, associated press and all it. It's all pretty much one sided. But there is no doubt that there was bad bad blood between Alito's wife and this woman who eventually ended up getting married and there left this leftist causes. Okay.
And so they're trying to use this thing to say, hey, he needs to recuse himself. Well, you know, today it's you got judge. You got Ginsburg who supported homosexual marriages before before she ended up getting married. She ended up ruling on homosexual marriages. And so again, the left accuses the right of things that they're the ones actually doing. And what's always so fascinating about this, if you deface a homosexual LGBTQ plus plus plus plus plus flag.
You can be cited for hate crime. If yes, if you if you deface the rainbow crosswalks where they've put in some cities, you can be accused of a hate crime. But if you fly the United States flag upside down, oh, supposedly this is a violation of the sacredness of the United States flag. Well, it's actually written into all the provisions of the flag that it is legitimate and legal to fly a flag upside down.
Okay. So the all in all of this, the left is going absolutely crazy. So the latest thing here, we've now worked to the Rolling Stone Mel, Rolling Stone magazine melts down over Alito being a Christian who believes in liberty, limited government. And it says, wow, the Supreme Court Historical Society's annual dinner last week, Liberal filmmaker Lauren Windsor pretended to be as Rolling Stone put it a religious conservative to try and extrapolate gotcha answers from Alito on various questions.
And so many of his answers were egregious or wrong, but Rolling Stone's portrayal of them is an indictment of their antipathy toward America's founding ideals and principles. So she faked her position, totally though she doesn't know, and then this is this is this is what she said, she doesn't know that we can negotiate with the left and the way that needs to happen for the polarization to end.
And so it's a matter of like winning. And here's what Alito said, I think you're probably right. Now remember, she's she's presenting herself as a conservative, she's using all the buzzwords and so forth. And she's trying to trap him. Of course, she's got this on tape. And this is what Alito said, I think you're probably right on one side or the other, one side or the other is going to win.
And so I mean, there can be a way of working a way of living together peacefully, but it's difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can't be compromised. They really can't be compromised. So it's not like you are going to split the difference. I'm listen to that. And I'm thinking, that's a good judges answer to all.
Okay. Now, yeah, there are different factions. There's people on the left, there are people on the right. I don't know how this is going to be resolved. There may be some ways that we can, you know, accommodate one another's positions and so forth. And this the article goes on, of course, Alito said nothing inaccurate. And then this article goes on to say the left is waging a dystopian war on every fundamental principle from the second amendment to freedom of speech.
And so the conservatives surely should not compromise their inherent God-given rights, enumerated in part by the founders all because globalists backed leftists want total control. Anyway, she goes on to say people in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that to return our country to a place of godliness.
Now, see, she's trying to entrap him by saying, Hey, yeah, I said, we need to bring God back into all this. And Alito says, I agree with you. I agree with you. He said, and this to the horror of Rolling Stone, which claimed in its headline that Alito was caught saying such a well truthful thing.
And the article goes on, it's this type of fainting outreach outrage meant to invoke a sense of hysteria from left-wing detractors who will use this mischaracterized answer to smear Alito for being a justice with religious beliefs, which apparently is no longer allowed. And so here this woman comes in here, you know, presenting herself as a religious conservative and saying, Hey, we need to beat these liberals back in Alito.
Just saying, look, yeah, there's a disagreement on both sides here. But what's so fascinating about this is how absolutely ignorant this woman is and Rolling Stone magazine is when it comes to the religious foundation of the United States. Okay. And again, we've presented this in a couple of books, the case of America's Christian heritage, America's Christian history, the untold story. I mean, the facts are overwhelming.
The facts are so overwhelming, even to the point where Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, all of them, John Adams, none of whom were actual Christians in our perspective of that. Understood that underlying all of the basic philosophy when it came to the building of the United States, creation of the United States had foundationally this premise that God was the rule of everything.
Yeah, I've, I've mentioned this before, but when years ago when I worked at answers and Genesis, I took Dr. Werner get from the offices in in forest Kentucky, right outside Cincinnati. And I took him whatever that would be north or or or basically just just east for a couple different speaking engagements. We went to, we went to Penn State, which is where I went to school.
And then, and then I took him to the Philadelphia airport and he flew back to Germany. He's a, he's a German information scientist. And we had, I don't know, five or six hours, this is before you had to show up for a flight five or six hours early. So, so we, so I took him to a couple places, took him to the, to see the Liberty Bell independence hall, a couple different places in Philadelphia.
And he just, he just looked at me and he's like, then he's, I'm not going to try to do the German accent, but he said, Eric, how can, how can people say your country isn't founded on Christian principles? They're chiseled into your buildings. They're, they're, they're everywhere. And I say, well, yeah, I know. I know. If, but if you, if you just feed us, take well, that's, that's what, that's what people have long ago used to believe. We don't, but that's the point.
Yeah, exactly. That is the point. That is. And again, you know, Jefferson, Madison, of course, Madison, Madison was, was, he was a, he was a student on their witherspoon. I'm pretty sure he was. And so he, he got a Christian education. They all did do a certain degree. Thomas Jefferson was certainly no atheist. I mean, Thomas pain was no atheist.
In fact, Thomas pain, if you read his book, Common Sense, he makes, he makes his arguments using biblical, biblical arguments and, and, and that regard. And again, I cover those cover those things in my, and my book plus we have that book, the Christian life and character of the civil institutions of the United States. And so what's, you know, fascinating, which is much easier to dismiss than to read.
Oh, yeah, we, wow, yeah, we run ads on, on Facebook. This is a book that's 900 pages. And, and this, oh, this, this, this isn't true. And I still have you read the book. I don't need to read that. And something somebody made the, the comment about the, the capital dome that we have a picture of on the cover.
It's a beautiful cover by, I think we've done numerous covers. I think it was the best cover we had. And someone said, don't you know that that was, that slave labor was used to build, to build that, that dome. And again, that was our choice. It wasn't Benjamin Morris's choice. Benjamin Morris has a huge section, dealing with the unrighteous practice of slavery in the United States. I mean, it's, it's, it's, it's the meat of the, the end, the end of the book.
So, you know, you can, you can, you can fault the capital image and all that. But again, did you read the book? No, I don't need to read the book. And, and I said, it's probably 80% original sourced documents. That doesn't matter to these people either. And so what's fascinating about this is if you look at, let's say the Declaration of Independence, the Declaration of Independence is quite theological. It talks about, let me just read just a couple of the things in here.
Endowed by their creator, of course, Nature's God, Supreme Judge of the world, for the support of this Declaration with a firmer alliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred on all those elements are in the Declaration of Independence.
And what's, what's interesting about this, if I can, if I can find this again, it says the, the Westminster Confession of Faith, and we look at those standards about, down by the creator, Supreme Judge of the world, protection of divine Providence. And it says here in this paper that was delivered by Jeffrey H. Morrison, he argued persuasively that the Declarations references to divine Providence and the Supreme Judge of the world would have been quite acceptable to reformed Americans in 1776.
Now we're talking about when we reformed Americans, we don't reformed alcoholics, reformed Americans are those who hold to the reformed faith. And the reformed faith is scripted if you will laid out in the Westminster Confession of Faith, which was a 17th, mid 17th century document.
And so because it conjured up images of the distinctly biblical God when they heard or read the Declaration. And the reason he's making that point is because the Declar, because the Westminster standards at that 110, 512 and 619, 523, 1117s, because he goes on here with a list of them, which shows you that the, the Westminster standards also use some of the same language that you find in the Declaration of Independence. 100 years earlier.
100 years earlier. More than 100 years earlier, that same language was used. And it's because of the permeation of reform theology within the colonies at that time, that that language became a popular and accessible to everybody. Everybody used that type of language. It's very much like people use biblical language today that don't even know about.
I have a book in our library about all these little phrases that we use today that are found that are found in the Bible, and you talk about the good, good Samaritan, in fact there's an organization called Good Sam. Yeah, which is kind of a help people on the road. You've got all these apple of my apple of my eye, the pupil of my eye, all these all these ideas are just built into our, built into our language.
And it was no different back in the 18th century, but also it was very specific and give you an example of this Benjamin Franklin, who was certainly, he wasn't a Christian. But again, he was a believer, he was certainly a believer in God. And this is the constitutional convention. It says, and this is what Benjamin Franklin said in this situation of this assembly,
growing as it were in the dark, which is a reference to, to Job chapter 12 verse 25, to find political truth and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us. How has it happened, sir, referring, this is a reference to George Washington that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the father of lights, James chapter one verse 17,
to illuminate our understanding, which is another passage in the Bible as well. In the beginning of the contest with Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.
Prayer, sir, were heard and they were graciously answered, all of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of super intending providence in our favor to the kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity.
And have we now forgotten that powerful friend, or do we imagine that we no longer need his assistance, this is a reference to God. And then Franklin goes on, I have lived, sir, that long time in the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth that God governs in the affairs of men.
And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it is, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid, Matthew 10, 29, 31. We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings that accept the Lord build the house, they labor and vain it build it some 127,1.
I firmly believe this, I also believe that without his concurring a, we shall succeed in this political building, no better than the builders of Babel. We shall be divided by our little partial local interests, our projects will be confounded and we ourselves shall become a reproach and byward down to future ages again, more scripture passages.
And what is worse, mankind may hear after from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance war and conquest. And this is pressing it here. You've got Benjamin Franklin, this is looking, looking down the portals of history, not seen our day at all, but understanding the foundation of a nation is not based upon just the so-called wisdom of men.
There was something much more profound and basic to establish a nation and Benjamin Franklin understood that. And this, this reporter for World's, for Rolling Stone magazine doesn't get it. She thinks, oh, if we got rid of God out of all this and limited government, we'd have a utopia. No, that's not the way it works. You would be in a tyranny, you would have your own God, you would have your own priests, you would have your own sacred scriptures.
And there would be no limit as to what these people would do to you. And all you have to do is look at the history of the world and see that that's indeed the case. Yeah, I was going to say this is a, this is a empirical evidence. Like you got to look through is, is, is how it has worked out in the past, which has hasn't been well. But guess what? We'll do, we'll do. We're so much smarter. We're going to do. Yeah, right. Okay. So anyway.
So this, this is the tactic that we're seeing among the left right now. It's not a new tactic in the Republicans. I think, I think to a certain degree, some of them are getting wise to this. And it can be interesting to see what takes place in November. I'm still.
I'm still really nervous of all this going to happen because I know that the, the Democrats got away with a great, I still believe it was a great, the, the election wasn't, I don't know if it's called stolen, but it was manipulated in various places. And they got away with it and say, look, we got away with this once. Right. We get back in power again. They're not going to be able to stop.
Yeah. So that's today's episode of the Gary DeMar podcast. If you have a question for a future show, email podcast at AmericanVision.org podcast and AmericanVision.org. We thank you for listening and we'll catch you next time.