by Dr. Ed Berry
Long before I moved to Montana in 2008, I wondered why a seemingly conservative state would elect so many Democrats. Now I know why. Montana’s fanatical Libertarian voters would rather shoot themselves in the foot than elect a Republican.
Most Montana Republicans do not know why they lost elections to Democrats in 2012 and why they may lose elections to Democrats again in 2014.
The reasons are two men who work as a team: Pastor Chuck Baldwin, founder of Liberty Fellowship and Stewart Rhodes, former Ron Paul staffer and founder of Oath Keepers. Both moved to Flathead Valley, Montana, in 2010. Their goal seems to be to increase Libertarian voters to help Montana elect Democrats. Pastor Baldwin is the Oath Keepers National Chaplain.
Pastor Baldwin attacks Republican candidate for US Congress
On July 17, 2014, Pastor Chuck Baldwin wrote (Ref A):
Ladies and gentlemen, I don’t know how to say it any plainer: if you are forced to choose between a pro-war, pro-police state, neocon Republican candidate for federal office and a Democrat, and if you believe in voting for the “lesser-of-two-evils,” the Democrat is the one for whom you must vote.
Unfortunately, that is exactly the choice that the citizens of Montana have this year in its lone U.S. House race. We have a Democrat, John Lewis, running against a pro-war, pro-police state, neocon Republican Ryan Zinke. Without a doubt, the Democrat John Lewis is by far the lesser evil than Ryan Zinke.
Pastor Baldwin finally acknowledges the concept of voting for the “lesser of two evils” after much preaching against it. The next step is for him to realize truth must precede the comparison of the evils.
Pastor Baldwin’s argument is illogical and deceitful. He does not make an objective comparison of Lewis versus Zinke. He attacks only Zinke and claims this proves the Democrat is a better choice for conservatives. You can read an honest comparison of the two candidates here. Pastor Baldwin withholds this information about Lewis (which is the same as lying):
Voter’s Edge writes:
- John Lewis has no political experience or political accomplishments.
- John Lewis has never had a real job. His only employment was as an assistant to Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus from 2003 to 2013.
- John Lewis’ education is limited to a BA degree in political science, Western Washington University
JohnLewis4Congress.com says John Lewis is bad for Montana:
- After more than a decade working under Baucus, John Lewis has pocketed over $568,000 of taxpayers’ money.
- Lewis has been laying the groundwork for his campaign by visiting every county in Montana on the taxpayers’ dime.
- Lewis has spent nearly 12 years working under Baucus and was a top aide to the “chief architect” of Obamcare.
John Lewis is a global-warming eco-fanatic who wants to pump underground all human carbon dioxide emissions. He won’t listen to reason. Lewis proposes the same worn-out liberal mantras the Democrats use to destroy America. He will support Obama, Obamacare, EPA, and liberal judges. Lewis would be a disaster for conservatives and Pastor Baldwin’s arguments for Lewis are pure and simple lies.
In any fair comparison, Ryan Zinke far exceeds John Lewis in education, experience, and intelligence, and he shows it in his superior understanding of our economy.
The primary logical failure of most of Pastor Baldwin’s claims is he assumes the properties of some individuals accurately reflect the properties of a group. Every software programmer knows this to be false because logic is fundamental to programming. Everyone who has studied logic knows this to be false.
This logical failure has been known since Aristotle but few in the human species have taken the time to learn it. This logical failure is the basis of those who claim “the world’s problems are caused by the Jews” because some Jews are bad, or “all gun owners are dangerous” because some gun users are bad, and, yes, “all Republicans are bad” because some Republicans are bad.
Do you want to learn more about logic? If so, Bookfall.com has some excellent resources here.
The real Ryan Zinke
I have personal knowledge of Ryan Zinke’s political views, having spent many hours with him when he was running as Lt. Governor for Neil Livingstone whom I supported in the 2012 primary election. Maybe Neil Livingstone’s very conservative political views rubbed off on Ryan Zinke during their campaign. Maybe my conversations with Zinke made him a little more conservative than he was when he was a Montana senator. In any case, I learned that Ryan Zinke is much more conservative than Pastor Baldwin claims.
I learned that Zinke has an excellent understanding of the role of private business in the American economy. Zinke supports use of our mineral resources to enhance American energy production and he will not let the liberal concern for carbon dioxide emissions get in the way of American power generation by gas, oil, and coal. On economic issues, Ryan Zinke is very conservative which is what we need in Congress.
When Zinke is hesitant about transferring federal public lands to the State of Montana he is concerned only about making sure the transfer is negotiated in a way that will not hurt Montana’s economy. But in principle, he supports the transfer. Ryan Zinke has thought through every issue in more detail than have most conservatives and he has good reasons for his decisions and concerns. Yet he is always open to discussion of issues and is willing to learn.
Whether we agree with Ryan Zinke on every detail of every issue is not the point. None of us agree on every detail of every issue. The point is Ryan Zinke is looking out for the best interests of the State of Montana and will continue to do so after we elect him to Congress. He has both education smarts and street smarts and he is not about to let the Democrats take him for a ride.
Pastor Baldwin’s claim that Ryan Zinke is a “pro-war, pro-police state, neocon” is not true and it shows Pastor Baldwin’s bias against Republicans, perhaps cemented when he ran for President for the Constitution Party in 2008.
Ryan Zinke has signed a pledge to support a national right to work law. This alone justifies supporting Ryan Zinke over John Lewis.
The truth is Ryan Zinke is a better American, a better Montanan, and a better conservative than Pastor Chuck Baldwin. Most fundamentally, Ryan Zinke is concerned about the Truth and Pastor Baldwin is not.
This is not the first time I have criticized the political actions of Pastor Baldwin and Stewart Rhodes but it is critical now because they are in a position to swing the 2014 election from Republicans to Democrats. You can read my previous posts on this subject here:
- Rebuttal to Chuck Baldwin’s “A look at how Democrats and Republicans differ”
- Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them
- Suicide Politics does Not Work
- Don’t Play Assassination Politics
The Republican campaign challenge
It’s impossible to reason with those who think voting Libertarian will solve their perceived political problems because reason is not what got them into their mindset in the first place.
Brainwashing got them there and it will take deprogramming to bring them back to reality. Montana Libertarian voters are as irrational about politics as the eco-freak activists are about global warming. Truth does not matter. Logic does not matter. Scientific method does not matter….
This is the challenge the Republican campaigns of Zinke and Daines must address if they hope to win in November. Plain old advertising will not deprogram these voters. It will take something else. Numbers show the Republicans must convert at least half of the 2012 Libertarian voters to Republican voters.
Pastor Baldwin has a powerful sales method. He begins his articles with statements we all agree upon. He preaches Liberty and attacks Republican failures. These statements hook unwary tea-party conservatives.
He continues with a good story to build the reader’s emotional support. He adds a straw man to set up the false platform for his conclusion and call to action. His call to action is a voting recommendation that will cause exactly the opposite result of the stated goal. But his mesmerized readers and listeners blindly follow his commands as if they are hypnotized.
Here is the rest of Pastor Baldwin’s lies about Ryan Zinke:
Ryan Zinke never met a war he doesn’t like. He is already on public record saying “civilians” should not be allowed to possess .50 caliber rifles. (Of course, now that he is a candidate for Congress, he has had a sudden election year conversion on the subject.) He has owning-interest in a drone manufacturing company. He is trying to use his credentials as a former Navy SEAL to propel him to the U.S. Congress; but Ryan Zinke is a warmongering, police state facilitator of the lowest order.
Being the U.S. House seat in Montana is typically a Republican seat, it is very likely that if the Democrat Lewis wins, he would be a one-termer. A GOP candidate (someone besides Ryan Zinke, who was the absolute worst of all the candidates that the GOP had to offer this year) would have a very good chance of defeating the Democrat Lewis in 2016. On the other hand, if Zinke wins this November, we are probably going to be stuck with this neocon indefinitely. This would be a monstrous mistake for Montana and the U.S. House of Representatives.
The real “monstrous mistake” is to believe Pastor Chuck Baldwin. He is trying to tear America down by giving full power to the Democrat communists.
Pastor Baldwin’s attacks on Ryan Zinke are sound bites with no evidence of truth. His followers should demand proof of his statements before believing them. But sound bites resonate with many tea party voters. In 2012, brainwashed tea party voters said “Romney is a neocon” over and over as if these four words encapsulated all the information one needs to know about Mitt Romney.
Pastor Baldwin attacks drones. Is there something wrong with owning a drone company? It is a legitimate business. John Lewis has never run or worked for a business. Owning a private business is a plus for Ryan Zinke and not being familiar with private business is a negative for John Lewis.
Drones are used in many ways by private businesses to save money. Farmers and ranchers use drones to quickly survey their land, crops and cattle. Drones can quickly find and count the number of wolves in Montana. Our Border Patrol should use drones to spot illegal border crossings.
But Pastor Baldwin thinks drones are bad because Obama has used drones to kill people. Pastor Baldwin cannot separate a technology from the act of using a technology. Pastor Baldwin uses the same reasoning that liberals use to support gun confiscation, e.g., “some people use guns improperly therefore guns are bad and we must confiscate everyone’s guns”. Then he decides Ryan Zinke is bad because Ryan Zinke is associated with a drone business.
Negative, negative, negative is all I read from Pastor Baldwin. To me, Pastor Baldwin’s rants sound like Reverend Wright’s “God damn America!”
Pastor Baldwin wrote against Romney in 2012.
On June 21, 2012, Pastor Baldwin wrote (Ref B):
Given the choices for President that the two major parties have given us over the last couple of decades (including this year), it is a truism that it really doesn’t matter much whether the Democrat or the Republican nominee is elected. No, it really doesn’t. In fact, in many respects, the cause of liberty suffers more under Republican administrations than under Democrat ones.
At the highest levels, anti-freedomists control the establishment political system, the establishment media, and establishment religion. This is why, since Ronald Reagan was President, it hasn’t mattered to a tinker’s dam whether a Republican or Democrat has been in the White House. And this is why it won’t matter to a tinker’s dam whether Mitt Romney beats Barack Obama or not.
Pastor Baldwin believes it would have made no difference to America if we elected Romney rather than Obama. Is Pastor Baldwin insane?
Your assignment: Take 15 now and watch Bill Whittle tell about the truth about Mitt Romney. Then tell me if you think there is no difference between Romney and Obama.
If Romney were president, he would not have notable Muslims in his cabinet, Harry Reid would not have been able to sic the BLM on rancher Bundy, and “ambulance chasers” Pastor Baldwin and Stewart Rhodes would not have had this marketing opportunity. We would not have our current illegal immigration problem. We would not be doing stupid things internationally. We would not have our EPA problem. Our Montana public lands would be open to mining and energy production. Our economy would be booming beyond what we have now.
Pastor Baldwin, Oath Keepers National Chaplain, said there is no difference between Obama and Romney.
Pastor Baldwin’s reason for claiming Obama is the same as Romney is because, he claims, the Bush’s failed America. The premise “the Bush’s failed America” does not prove “Obama is as good as Romney”. This is a repeat of the same logical fallacy we discussed above: properties of some individuals in a group do not define the properties of the group.
The proper way to judge candidates is to compare their qualifications, goals, and visions. Obama has no qualifications and he stated his goals were to destroy America’s energy production and to develop a civilian security army stronger than our defense army.
Here is a Summary of Mitt Romney’s Plan for America. I am one of the few who saved it and over 5000 people have read it. This summary establishes without question that Mitt Romney would have been much better for America than Obama.
Stewart Rhodes trashed Republican US Senate candidate Denny Rehberg.
Today, on election day, Denny Rehberg deserves to go down in flames just like Conrad Burns did in 2006. Conrad Burns lost to Tester precisely because he lost the liberty vote in Montana. And Burns lost the liberty vote because he had abandoned the Constitution and violated his oath by voting for unconstitutional laws, such as the Patriot Act.
Even GOP propagandists like Ed Berry acknowledge that the liberty movement killed Conrad Burns’ political career, with 10,000 Montanan’s choosing to instead vote for the Libertarian candidate, which is a larger number of votes than the number by which Tester beat Burns. The Montana liberty movement simply refused to vote for an oath breaker – they withdrew their consent. And without them, Burns was burnt.
Today, the very same thing is likely to happen to Denny Rehberg – and he deserves it. He deserves to be “Conrad Burned.” Like Conrad Burns, Rehberg is an oath breaker who has abandoned the Constitution by repeatedly and willfully voting for some of the most dangerous and spectacularly unconstitutional laws to ever be passed in Congress during the short life of this Republic. Rehberg voted for both the Patriot Act, and for the NDAA, among many others.
The man is an unrepentant oath breaker who has, so far, gotten away with it. And the reason he has gotten away with it has been the “lesser of two evils” con game. Being told that you have “no choice” but to vote for oath breaker A or oath breaker B is like being given a false choice between voting for Joseph Stalin or Adolph Hitler, with so-called conservatives urging you to vote for the fascist to keep the communist out of office. “Vote for Hitler or Stalin will win!” I won’t do it. No sir. I will fight them both, or either one.
The commonly accepted New American Freedom Index scores Republicans Conrad Burns (59%) and Rehberg (52%), well above Democrats Jon Tester (21%) and Max Baucus (19%). Yet Rhodes takes pride in saying the Montana liberty movement did the right thing to elect Tester for 2 consecutive terms to the US Senate. Is Stewart Rhodes insane?
Look at it this way. Suppose I offered to give you 20 percent of $10,000 or 55 percent of $10,000. Which would you take? If you are rational, you would take the $5,500 and smile all the way to the bank. But if you are irrational like Montana’s Libertarian voters, you would reject the $5,500 because you wanted at least $9,000, and go home with zero.
2012 Republican Governor nominee Rick Hill scored 64% and the tea party Libertarians rejected him in favor of Democrat Steve Bullock (a clear 0%-er if he were scored). Are Montana’s Libertarians insane?
In the Montana race for US Senate, Republican Steve Daines (60%) is running against Democrat Plagerizer John Walsh (0%). Only dedicated liberal Democrats support Walsh. Do I hear Baldwin and Rhodes supporting Daines? Either I missed the memo or their megaphone is not turned on. The message is clear. Baldwin and Rhodes hate Republicans. Baldwin and Rhodes are delusional anti-conservative exၴremists.
Rand Paul, Ron Paul, Sheriff Richard Mack, Ken Miller, and Gun Owners of America endorsed Denny Rehberg for US Senate but even they made no difference to Rhodes, a former Ron Paul staffer. Rhodes is a law unto himself.
“Shaft them all” as far as Rhodes is concerned. “Off with their heads!”, like the Queen in Alice and Wonderland. And you pay Rhodes your Oath Keepers membership fee to support this insanity?
Here’s Stewart Rhodes at the Paul Fest in Tampa, Florida, on August 25, 2012, calling Mitt Romney “an oath breaker”:
Stewart Rhodes, a lawyer, operates by emotions rather than by logic. Of course, everyone in marketing knows emotions sell better than logic. So from the business perspective of collecting Oath Keeper dues, Rhodes is doing the right thing. But here we are talking about doing the right thing for Montana and America, not for Stewart Rhodes.
The Oath Keepers stated goal of oath keeping is good. But using the Oath Keepers as a conservative front to promote the Democrat socialist-communist agenda is very bad. Oath Keepers members are paying Stewart Rhodes to promote gun control and other liberal goals.
An Oath Keepers political rally
James Conner reports on the Oath Keepers rally in Kalispell on April 19, 2014, in his Flathead Memo with his comments and photos:
Proving that Oath Keepers and Pastor Baldwin are all about politics, several Republican candidates spoke at this Oath Keeper rally, apparently thinking this would get them more votes. This was a political mistake. The reality is their political association with Oath Keepers and Pastor Baldwin may have destroyed their political careers.
Congressional candidate Matt Rosendale, who lost his US Congress race to Ryan Zinke, speaks to the group:
Other Republican candidates who spoke at this Oath Keeper’s rally were Derek Skees, Jerry O’Neil, Ronalee Skees, and Michael Hebert, all losers except for Jerry O’Neil. See all James Conner’s photos and read his article here.
Jerry O’Neil can survive this association because of his long, successful history in Montana politics and his local support group. The rest, however, made a serious political mistake by associating with the same people who led the campaign against Rehberg and Romney in 2012 and are now against Ryan Zinke for 2014.
Their association with Republican haters and Democrat helpers will stick with them. I predict the political careers of Derek Skees and Michael Hebert are toast if they cannot successfully reject and overcome their documented association with this group.
The only way Matt Rosendale can save his Montana political future is to reject his association with Oath Keepers and Pastor Baldwin and to campaign vigorously for Ryan Zinke, which so far he has not done. Also, if there is a next time, maybe Rosendale should shoot donkeys rather than drones.
Who sent Oath Keeper Rhodes and Pastor Baldwin to Montana?
Stewart Rhodes has an admirable front for his Oath Keepers: keep your oath to our Constitution. Therefore, you can’t criticize political advice by Stewart Rhodes because you would be criticizing our Constitution.
Pastor Baldwin has an admirable front for his Liberty Fellowship: Christianity. Therefore, you can’t criticize political advice by Pastor Baldwin because you would be criticizing Jesus Christ.
Rhodes and Baldwin wrap themselves in the Constitution, American flag, God, mother, and apple pie. But the Bible tells us “by their works we shall know them.” And the works of Baldwin and Rhodes sabotage Republicans and put Democrats into power. Their actions empower the whole socialist-communist movement in America. In Obama’s case, their actions empowered the strength of the Muslim anti-Christian movement in America.
Did George Soros send Pastor Baldwin and Stewart Rhodes to Montana? Montana may be the easiest state where a few tea-party infiltrators can actually swing a state from electing Republicans to electing Democrats, and with the razor-thin balance in the US Senate, a swung Montana election can swing America from right to left. Montana is a good place to apply left-wing political leverage.
If the 2014 US Senate election adds Republicans but they fall one vote short of controlling the US Senate, we shall have Oath Keeper Stewart Rhodes, Pastor Chuck Baldwin, and Montana Libertarian voters to blame for this disaster for America. This should be evidence to all freedom-loving voters that the political rantings of Stewart Rhodes and Pastor Baldwin is the path that will destroy America. What Rhodes and Baldwin promote about politics is the exact opposite of how to save and restore America.
How much did the selection of delegates to the Republican National Convention affect the Libertarian vote?
Some Libertarians say the reason for the large Libertarian vote in Montana is because the Montana Republican Party was not fair in selecting Ron Paul supporters to attend the Republican National Convention. Based upon this review by Gary Marbut, I agree the Montana Republican Party representatives might have been more diplomatic in their interactions with the Ron Paul people.
However, I have had many discussions with Libertarian voters and only one of them claimed this convention affair changed his mind to vote Libertarian. In all other cases, the Libertarian voters quote some phrase from Pastor Chuck Baldwin or from the Bible as the reason they did not vote for the Republican.
Pastor Chuck Baldwin changes his opinions to suit his goals.
Pastor Baldwin’s attack on Ryan Zinke began with this paragraph (Ref A):
Just as they did with his father, Ron Paul, globalist elitists within the GOP are pouncing on Kentucky Senator Dr. Rand Paul. Obviously, the only reason for Republican leaders to be ganging up on Rand like this is because they are scared silly that he might just win the Republican nomination for President in 2016. And if there is anything that frightens the GOP establishment, it is an independent-minded, non-interventionist, reader of the Constitution–you know, someone like George Washington or Thomas Jefferson–or Rand Paul.
It turns out that I agree with Pastor Baldwin that Rand Paul would make an excellent president. I also agree with much of what Pastor Baldwin writes until he makes his irrational claims about Ryan Zinke as quoted in the first part of this post. So you can see the hook in action.
It goes like this: (a) First make statements that the reader will agree with. (b) Set up a straw man: “a pro-war, pro-police state, neocon Republican.” (c) Attack the straw man without proving Ryan Zinke resembles the straw man. The mesmerized reader will follow right along and agree with Pastor Baldwin that Ryan Zinke is the enemy.
But I am not a mesmerized reader and I don’t fall for this stuff. If I were that dumb I would not have a PhD in theoretical Physics which requires proficiency in logical thinking.
Now here’s the flip side of Pastor Baldwin. Here’s how he began is attack on Mitt Romney (Ref B):
Given the choices for President that the two major parties have given us over the last couple of decades (including this year), it is a truism that it really doesn’t matter much whether the Democrat or the Republican nominee is elected. No, it really doesn’t. In fact, in many respects, the cause of liberty suffers more under Republican administrations than under Democrat ones. For example, we lost far more liberties under G.W. Bush than we did under Bill Clinton. And as bad as Barack Obama is, John McCain would have been even worse! The same people that control one control the other. The difference is, at least when a Democrat is in the White House, conservatives and Christians actively mount rigorous resistance. However, when a neocon Republican is in the White House, conservatives and Christians say nary a word of protest.
With this in mind, it was extremely disconcerting to me when I heard Senator Rand Paul endorse Mitt Romney last week. Mitt Romney is nothing more than Barack Obama lite! And every true conservative and constitutionalist knows it. Put Romney in the White House and it will be George H.W. Bush and G.W. Bush all over again. Goodbye freedom; goodbye Constitution; goodbye balanced budget; hello more foreign wars; hello more burgeoning police state; hello more surveillance society; hello more deficit spending, etc.
And on a personal note, I cannot express my disappointment in Rand Paul enough! With his father, Ron Paul, stepping down from Congress, we had all hoped that Rand would become the leading voice for constitutional government on Capitol Hill that his father has been for all of these years. In my opinion, Rand forfeited that leadership position when he endorsed Mitt Romney. Of course, we all know why Rand did it. It was the “politically correct” thing to do. Rand is, no doubt, posturing himself for a higher office. But the GOP establishment will never embrace Rand Paul, unless he were to totally recant his constitutionalist ideals. Romney will pick a controlled Vice President. I thought that fellow Bilderberg invitee, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, would be Romney’s choice; except it seems now that he is about to become the president of Purdue University.
Ron Paul’s star quality is his unwillingness to compromise with the globalist establishment. In fact, in 2008, Ron Paul refused to endorse the neocon, John McCain, and endorsed a constitutionalist third party candidate for President instead. Obviously, Rand is no Ron. That’s a shame!
So, in Pastor Baldwin’s view, is Rand Paul a good guy or a bad guy? Well it depends. Rand Paul is a bad guy when it helps Pastor Baldwin claim Obama is as good as Mitt Romney, but Rand Paul is a good guy when it helps Pastor Baldwin claim John Lewis is better than Ryan Zinke.
This shows how Pastor Chuck Baldwin will use you or anyone else in any manner that will help him promote the Democrat in an election. His goal is to elect Democrats.
Actually, if Pastor Baldwin really wishes to support Rand Paul then the best thing he can do for Rand Paul is to stop talking about him. Pastor Baldwin’s support of Rand Paul will cause the majority of Republicans to associate Rand Paul with Pastor Chuck Baldwin, which would kill his chances of being nominated. Rand Paul was right in supporting Mitt Romney and this shows Rand Paul is smarter than his father.
The truth is voting for Ryan Zinke in November is a much lesser evil than following the political advice of Pastor Chuck Baldwin or Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes.
Ryan Zinke, Steve Daines, and all 2014 Republican candidates are much better for Montana and America than their Democratic opponents. We must support them.