Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
8 Comments
NetRunner*news
*comedy
*lies
siftbotAdding video to channels (Comedy, Lies, News) - requested by NetRunner.
MorganthWhere are the lies? Did you even watch the other two parts of the interview?
RFlaggThe lies are Barton's mouth having words come out.
In part 2 he purposely misrepresents the National Day of Prayer case as if it was an attempt to stop Christians from praying, or having an organized day of prayer. That wasn't what the case was about, it was about the government sponsoring it, and John should have called him on that one.
In part 3 he noted, wrongly, that the establishment clause doesn't apply to the states, just the Federal Government. But the 10th Amendment doesn't mean that the states are excluded from the establishment clause, otherwise states could ignore all the other provisions of the Bill of Rights, although he seems to try to make that argument.
Add to this Barton's general lies outside this interview and revisionism.
>> ^Morganth:
Where are the lies? Did you even watch the other two parts of the interview?
enochbarton is an opportunist on steroids.
he makes the argument and then uses cherry picked (and rarely comprehensive and complete) historical data to make his argument.
which works wonders on those unfamiliar with this nations history.
if you watch his other interviews and lectures he relies heavily on anecdotal evidence in order to set up his revisionist premise and a main reason why true historians dismiss him.
HadouKen24says...There are far more mistruths in this interview.
He (I believe in part 3) that he has never had to submit a retraction of anything he has said. This is blatantly false. Though it's no longer on his website, for years he did have an article on Wallbuilders apologizing for his use of supposed quotes from the Founders for which no source could be found--quotes in some of his earliest books.
He claims that John Adams seriously meant to say that the Holy Spirit was a necessary foundation for just government in a letter to Benjamin Rush. He even invites people to go on his website and view the original in its entirety. If you go there and read it for yourself, you will clearly see that, as John Stewart averred, the statement is clearly ironic. Immediately after describing a view that says all legitimate government must be blessed by the Holy Spirit, Adams decries this view in the strongest terms as deceptive and inspiring awful fanaticism.
Barton claims that the Unitarians did not reject the trinity until 1839. This is also blatantly false. It was in 1839 that the Unitarians came together as a formal body. Before then, the Unitarians were largely a disorganized religious movement. But the rejection of the Trinity by the Unitarians occurred well before the Revolution. The preaching of the unity of God, as opposed to the Trinity of God, preceded its adoption by a formal body.
Barton notes that the Treaty of Tripoli as held in the State department archives indeed does not have an Article 11. But he falsely claims that the original did not have this article. But we know for a fact that the Treaty as signed by the President, and as published in numerous newspaper throughout the country, did indeed contain this article. It was not until later that it was somehow removed from the State department archives--perhaps by someone embarrassed by its statement that the US is NOT a Christian nation.
Barton's characterization of the text of the treaty is also incorrect. Read the text of the article itself. It very clearly states, with no caveats, that the United States government is "not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." The following clauses do add focus and weight to the statement, making it clear that the intent of including this passage was indeed to clarify that the government of the US has not enmity toward Islam. But these clarifying statements do not change the broad qualifier "in any sense."
In nearly every case in this interview, when Barton makes a declarative statement about history, the history he presents is either false or misleading.
siftbotTags for this video have been changed from 'Daily Show, John Stewart, David Barton, Liar, History, Jesus' to 'Daily Show, Jon Stewart, David Barton, Liar, History, Jesus' - edited by gwiz665
siftbotThe thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by critical_d.

Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.