Baldwin’s statement that our rights come from God, not Uncle Sam, is a staple view of Christian Reconstructionism. That movement’s chief instigator, the late R.J. Rushdoony, openly proclaimed that Christianity and democracy are incompatible. There’s a recent blog entry at the Chalcedon Foundation (chalcedon.edu), which Rushdoony founded, that summarizes nicely the threat that this kind of “thinking” represents:

“Modern history is a war over the establishment of religion, and unless the Christian recognizes this, he or she shall be overcome by the establishment of Humanism. The things we suffer as nations are the result of man doing what is right in his own eyes whether in economics, politics, education, or culture. … There can be no change until the Christian can cast aside neutrality and recognize that God’s sovereignty extends over the state, the economy, the courts, the schools, and all things else.”

Kind of hard, I would think, for a politician to hold this sort of opinion without breaking his or her oath to preserve and protect the Constitution.

Uh..the bailout wasn’t for the Federal Reserve- it came from the treasury to the private banks.

Well, Mr. Baldwin, wouldn’t they need to be charged with something first? What would be the charges?

Surely such a devoted advocate for the U.S. Constitution as yourself understands the importance of due process.

Yeah, yeah, I know! Some on the right will say that the report was biased.

The other co-sponsor of LPAC was the “Campaign for Liberty,” whose vice president Matt Hawes told convention goers that the organization – built around the popularity of the Tea Party – now has 600,000 supporters nationwide.

How do we know this claim can be substantiated?

Or is it typical “patriot/liberty”-movement braggadoccio requiring substantial exaggeration, usually by a factor of 100?

Prove it. The next time your rights are violated by another person, pray to god instead of calling the police. See who responds faster.