RINOs, CRT, Secession, Federalism, And More! – On Foundations Of Freedom: How do we stop the GOP from endorsing RINO candidates? Will Critical Race Theory (CRT) end racism? Does the populous really understand what CRT is?Would the Founders support secession? Should a Convention of States repeal the 17th Amendment? Will Congress ever do away with the filibuster? Tune in to hear the answers to these questions and more on today’s Foundations of Freedom program!

Air Date: 07/15/2021

On-air Personalities: David Barton, Rick Green, and Tim Barton


Download: Click Here

Transcription note:  As a courtesy for our listeners’ enjoyment, we are providing a transcription of this podcast. Transcription will be released shortly. However, as this is transcribed from a live talk show, words and sentence structure were not altered to fit grammatical, written norms in order to preserve the integrity of the actual dialogue between the speakers. Additionally, names may be misspelled or we might use an asterisk to indicate a missing word because of the difficulty in understanding the speaker at times. We apologize in advance.

Faith and the Culture

Thomas Jefferson said, “In questions of power, then let no more be heard of confidence in man that bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”


You find your way to the intersection of faith and the culture. It’s WallBuilders Live. It’s Foundations of Freedom Thursday. And you can learn more about us at our website, wallbuilderslive.com. But today, we’re going to be taking your questions, so be sure to send them into [email protected], that’s [email protected]

And when we say Foundations of Freedom Thursday, that means we’re looking into the foundations and your questions can be about history, they can be about the Constitution, the Declaration, the Founding Fathers, could be about legislation going through your state right now or in Congress or how the system works. 

Whatever you’re curious about, send it in and we will do our best to answer it on a Thursday during Foundations of Freedom Thursday. And if we don’t get to enough questions for you today, by the way, at the website, you can jump in the archives, and listen to past Foundations of Freedom Thursday programs, all available for you at wallbuilderslive.com.

I’m Rick Green, a former Texas legislator and America’s Constitution coach. And it’s my honor to be here with David and Tim Barton. David is America’s premier historian. He’s the founder of WallBuilders. Tim Barton is a national speaker and pastor. He’s president of WallBuilders. 

These guys have the most amazing library you’ve ever seen and museum. They’ve got artifacts from the founding era, handwritten documents of presidents and Founding Fathers, journals, Bibles, all kinds of cool stuff. So when we dive into these questions that you’re giving us, we’re going to original resources. Check it all out at wallbuilders.com.

David and Tim, you guys ready to dive into some questions today?


Let’s do it.

The GOP and RINOs


Alright. First one is about New Hampshire and from New Hampshire as well. The question is, “How do we stop the GOP, Republican Party from endorsing a candidate, New Hampshire’s Rhino governor?” 

And for those that may be new to our program or new to what Rhino means, that means “Republican in name only” meaning they don’t really stand for the principles of the Republican platform. 

“New Hampshire’s Rhino governor who just made sure that New Hampshire teaches critical race theory. He knows that New Hampshire residents will still choose him on the ballot because he has an R next to his name. GOP needs to endorse a real Republican, not a Democrat in sheep’s clothing.”

So guys, we deal with this all over the country. I mean, this is pretty bad. I hadn’t even read this. So I didn’t realize that New Hampshire had adopted critical race theory with the endorsement of a Republican governor.


Yeah, but when you look at this, I look at the state more than I’ll look at the governor. Because when you look 25 years ago, a super red state in America was New Hampshire, then it became a blue state and now is kind of trying to be a purple state between the two. 

They’ve had so many people move into New Hampshire out of Boston area, because New Hampshire being Republican, had lower taxes had lower regulations, etc. But as often happens, when liberal people move to an area to get away from liberal policies, they carry their liberal beliefs with them.

And so what has happened is in New Hampshire, you no longer have a conservative state. So while Republicans may be very frustrated, what Republicans need to do is educate their neighbors, they need to get their neighbors to start voting Republican. 

The Seats Reflect the People

When you look at where are the congressional seats are in New Hampshire, it’s not where it had been. So what you have is very much a reflection of what the people are and where the people are right now.

And so you can throw Sununu under the bus and say he did this. Yeah, that’s less than it would have happened if you’d had a democratic governor. Well, it’s still not enough. Well, it’s as far as you’re going to get until you educate the voters and educate the people. You do not change a state from the top down. You change the state from the bottom up. And this is where grassroots activism has to become more important.


And that’s obviously not to excuse what the governor did by endorsing critical race theory. Obviously, we don’t support that. We’re not in favor of that. And this is where if you believe that people of your state do not support that decision, then what you do is you shine light on this bad decision. You say, look what this governor just did, and then you need to find a viable replacement option to be a candidate to run against the governor.

Because if the state agrees it’s a terrible decision, but there are no other options running for governor, well, then you’re stuck with what you have. And if you have other good options, then you all of a sudden, you can have a primary situation where you can replace this Rhino, as he has been called governor, with someone who maybe has more traditional conservative principles and values.

Educate the Populace

With that being said, I think a lot of it starts with going back. Dad, you mentioned educating the populace. One of the things that needs to be educated, again, if the thought is the people of the state do not support this, then you need to help more people in the state know what just happened to expose the behavior of this governor. 

That way when they go to the polling place, they’re not just going to simply pull the lever for R, or the lever for D. They’re going to say, wait a second, I don’t support and appreciate what this person did, we’re voting in a different direction.

And that’s certainly something that we are seeing happen around the nation, where a lot of people are waking up and getting involved and they will no longer just support whatever the standard party line is. There are issues they care about. And this is a healthy thing for the nation to get back to caring more about the issues and principles than just about what the party is, the party line is, whatever else. 

So again, I think it starts with going back and exposing what this governor has done, drawing it to the attention of the people. And if the people are not as outraged as you think they might be able, then you need to help educate those people why this is a bad decision. If they are outraged, then it’s a really good time to get a replacement candidate and to do things to help primary this governor who certainly is not supporting conservative or even factually historically honest principles.


Yeah, I would echo on what you just said, Tim. I would be real curious to know where the state was on critical race theory. And if the state is somewhat moderate on it, is somewhat purple on it, I would be very disappointed that a Republican governor would have done this. But at the same time, I’d say it’s not he that did it. It’s a state that supports it. So I need to work on my neighbors. I need to teach them what it is.

Critical Race Theory

I just got a text just moments ago from a state representative who last year, they were able to pass a critical race theory bill that is in the sense of stopping it. But now he’s meeting with a bunch of superintendents who don’t know what it is and they actually think it’s a good thing because they think it’s a way to end racism. It doesn’t end racism. But they don’t fully understand what it is.

And so I will just about bet you that in New Hampshire right now, you have a majority of the people who support critical race theory, because they don’t know what it is, they don’t know what it does. They think that it does end racism. Everybody wants to end racism. This goes back to education. And this is where you will not fix a state or a party or anything else from the top down, you have to fix with them bottom up.

And New Hampshire is the most grassroots of any state in the nation. I mean, their state legislature, I think is 450 members in the state legislature. That’s more than about four or five normal states put together. They have small districts they represent because they want to hear from the people. So this is the thing where I think that we as citizens need to get more involved. 

We’re using terms like critical race theory without people understanding fully what they are. We talked in previous programs how even in Texas when they tried to pass the bill, the Democrats did not understand what it was, and they were actually adding amendments they thought would kill it. 

They were actually supported by us, because that’s exactly what we’re trying to do. They did not understand. And I think it’s what so many people are today.


And sometimes it’s been willing to do the hard work, right? I mean, it’s to primary somebody or to study the candidates to know like Tim saying where people are now wanting to know more, it’s not enough to just have Republican behind your name. You know, David, you teach in our Biblical Citizenship class, you got to search for truth. 

It’s not easy anymore. You don’t just get to turn on the TV and you get truth. You got to be willing to put in the hard work to do the research to find these things. But hopefully, people are realizing that things are serious enough right now that you should be willing to do that hard work, both in finding truth and finding good candidates, and know whom to support.

Don’t Yell at the Leader


And let me echo too, that I’m not supporting Sununu in any way. I’m not excusing him saying that it was okay for him to do that. I’m not saying that at all. But I’m saying it’s very hard for a leader to take people where they don’t want to go. And even if it’s the right thing to do, they’re not going to follow you. And this Republican form of government we have, you will have a different leader that will go where the people want to go.

And so that’s why as Tim said, we need to see where people are. If people are upset over this, man, get them organized, make this happen, do primaries. Rick, as you said, let’s get something different in there. 

But if this is a reflection of where the people in the state are, and that’s the first question I would ask, is this where the people are? Then don’t yell at the leader. Start doing the stuff at the grassroots level to get that educated and change to get the activism up.


Well, speaking of activism, and people wanting to see things change, we also have to be strategic in how we do that. And this next question kind of goes to that point. Paul asked the question. “If states like Texas and Wisconsin, or others were successful in secession from the union and essentially creating their own country, they would no longer be able to vote or participate in presidential elections, correct? Wouldn’t this give even more power to the socialist Democrats which is what they really want anyway?

And, you know, guys, we get this question a lot because of the frustration and because of feeling like there’s nothing you can do about how bad Washington DC is. More and more people are saying, well, how do we start over? How do we do our own thing? Is Texas going to secede? 

Those types of questions come in quite often. This one’s specific to the idea. Okay, well, if that happens, if one or more of the good states secede, isn’t that going to make it even easier for the Left to win presidential elections and run the federal government?

Run to the Roar


Yeah, we have a video that’s out and called Run to the Roar, people can Google it online and see it in YouTube, whatever. And it really deals with this concept. Because what we’re seeing here is, hey, the more we get attacked, let’s retreat into our own area where we can have the Constitution. No, no, no, no, no. 

America is a nation built on the Constitution. It’s California that needs to secede. It’s Massachusetts. Why should they chase us out of the constitutional union? We’re the ones that ought to be standing and fighting so strongly for the Constitution that they can’t stand it. They still hate the Constitution. Great, then you guys get out of here. So this is not the thing that we want to pick up our ball and go home, that’s not the fight we want.


And let’s point out that secession wouldn’t be right, even if they are the ones…


That’s right, even if they did. That’s right.

The Founders and Secession


Let’s just clarify that real quick. I there have been many debates in American history over secession and every time even back in the Founding Fathers era, they came down on nope, secession is not something we do. Coming together being part of the union was a little like a marriage contract. And it’s something that unlike many marriage contracts today where people get tired or frustrated, and they want something different, and divorce is actually fairly common in America today, it was certainly not common backing up in the founding era.

And obviously, even back in biblical times, where Jesus told the disciples, the Pharisees, right, that God’s intent was not for divorce. For this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, the two become one flesh, etc. You can read all Matthew 19, you can get some context on it.

But the point was, it was a covenant that they were making, a contract they’re joining together in this union. And so this notion of secession was not something the Founding Fathers supported. Obviously, there was an entire war over this notion of secession. Obviously, slavery being a big part of why many southern states wanted to cede back in the time of the Civil War. Secession is not the answer.

But dad, to your point, a lot of people want to go the opposite direction and say, you know what, instead of fighting this fight, why don’t we just leave and do our own thing? And as you’re pointing out, is, look, if somebody is going to leave in this, if somebody is frustrated and wants to leave, they’re the ones that ought to be leaving, not us, because we’re the ones doing what the Constitution actually says.

Restore Constitutional Principles

With that being said, nobody needs to necessarily leave, but we definitely need to restore those constitutional principles. And instead of just sitting back and acquiescing to the will, the desire, or in this case, sometimes the very aggressive behavior, the philosophy and policies of a liberal agenda, and just being disappointed or frustrated, or whatever the case might be, we have to stand up and start getting involved.

And we’ve talked about it many times, where you’re seeing now, parents getting involved at the local level, getting involved at the school board of the city council level, because they’re tired of seeing these really kind of academic elites, and these woke leftists being in charge of these institutions, or even in local education. And so we’re saying we’re getting involved. 

We’re going to stand up and make a difference. That is the way you solve these problems. It’s not to secede. It’s to say, no, we’re going to roll up our sleeves, we’re going to get involved and make a difference. And that really is the best answer.

I know, it’s a little different than what the question was asking. As far as the question was asking, would it be worse if the conservative thinks less? Yes. It would be totally worse for the nation if the people with the conservative values were no longer part of the nation, would be totally worse.

 But that’s not really one of the options we’re looking at. That’s not a feasible option. It’s not a constitutional option. The best option is that we roll up our sleeves, get involved back in the process and spend the 10, 15, 20, 30, 40 years it takes to get this country turned back going the right direction.


That’s right. We need to redouble our efforts. This is a great opportunity actually to get involved. We should be thankful that we don’t live in pale and timid times as Reagan said. This is a time where you get to stand for something. So get involved in it, folks. Go to our website wallbuilderslive.com today, share the programs with other people find ways to host a class in your home or at your church, but become a part of the solution. Don’t run from the fight as David said, run to the roar. Quick break, we’ll be back in a moment on WallBuilders Live.


Samuel Adams said, “The liberties of our country and the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending against all hazards and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.”

The Courageous Leaders Collection

Hi, friends, this is Tim Barton of WallBuilders. This is a time when most Americans don’t know much about American history or even heroes of the faith. And I know oftentimes we, parents, we’re trying to find good content for our kids to read.

And if you remember back to the Bible, to the book of Hebrews, it has the faith Hall of Fame where they outline the leaders of faith that had gone before them. Well, this is something that as Americans, we really want to go back and outline some of these heroes, not just of American history, but heroes of Christianity in our faith as well.

I want to let you know about some biographical sketches we have available on our website. One is called The Courageous Leaders collection. And this collection includes people like Abigail Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Francis Scott Key, George Washington Carver, Susanna Wesley, even the Wright brothers. And there’s a second collection called Heroes of History. In this collection, you’ll read about people like Benjamin Franklin or Christopher Columbus, Daniel Boone, George Washington, Harriet Tubman; friends, the list goes on and on. This is a great collection for your young person to have and read and it’s a providential view of American and Christian history. This is available at www.wallbuilders.com. That’s www.wallbuilders.com

Calvin Coolidge said, “The more I study the Constitution, the more I realize that no other document devised by the hand of man has brought so much progress and happiness to humanity. To live under the American Constitution is the greatest political privilege that was ever accorded to the human race.”

Repealing the 17th Amendment


We’re back here at WallBuilders Live. Thanks for staying with us on this Foundations of Freedom Thursday. Next question from the audience. And if you’ve got one, send it in to [email protected], [email protected] Next question comes from Adam. “My question for the WallBuilders team is about the Convention of States and why they don’t pursue an amendment to the Constitution to return the election of senators to the state legislatures, as it used to be. 

“A repeal of the 17th Amendment should be something that all states would want and might receive an easy positive vote. Thanks for all you do. I love WallBuilders. Best regards, Adam.”

Adam, thank you for the question, appreciate you send it in. And before we dive into the answer, guys, just encourage people to take the Constitution class, go to wallbuilders.com, get that Constitution Alive, or the Biblical Citizenship in Modern America and go through that class. We spent a lot of time talking about 17th Amendment, why it was a bad amendment, why this is actually more difficult than it sounds to get a repeal of the 17th Amendment because most people are going to say:

Well, I don’t want the politicians in the legislature choosing my US Senator, even though we understand federalism, and if more people understood federalism, they think that was a good thing. But anyway, toss it out to you guys. Why this one may or may not be one that has a good chance of passing or is being championed by folks?


Well, I think first of all, it’s worth pointing out that there’s a lot of people in Convention of States that are championing this very thing. So I think the question read is why isn’t this something? Well, it is something that is going on a Convention of States. There are people that definitely are advocating and care for it.

Original Intent of the Senate

And certainly, if you look back at kind of original intent of the Constitution, it makes a lot of sense the way the Founding Fathers set up the structure that in the House of Representatives, it’s representing the people, but in the US Senate, it was there to protect and represent the states. 

And that’s why the state legislative body were choosing the people they thought would best represent and protect and defend their states. A lot of that still makes a lot of sense. And when we got into the national popular vote, it really shifted the motives of the senators, and it changed the entire idea of that legislative body and that bicameral system.

With all that being said, it certainly is something even though people are advocating for it, that has not caught on as well as we would have hoped. And, Rick, as you pointed out, it could very well be because a lot of people just don’t understand federalism in general. 

And if we’re going to be honest, a lot of people have never read the Constitution, they don’t know what it says, they haven’t read the Bill of Rights or even the 27 Amendments. But if you were more familiar with some of these things, it would help you land on the side of understanding why would the Founding Fathers intended and did with this specific election of senators made a lot of sense. But dad, why do you think that maybe this is not something that’s gotten as much traction since this passage of the 17th Amendment?


Well, part of it, you just hit on, people don’t know it, they don’t know federalism. But let me throw out the number. We know that 1/10 of 1% of Americans are able to identify the freedoms with First Amendment.

I think there’s a much higher chance they can identify that and they can the 17th Amendment. I think we did a man on the street interview and said, hey, the 17th Amendment, should we repeal it? I think 1,000 out of 1,000 would say don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

Teaching Civics Again

And so part of what it takes to get the constitutional amendment is you’re going to get two-thirds of the House, two-thirds and Senate, three-fourths of the legislature in the States. And I’m going to bet you that probably not half of the legislators in the states even know what the 17th Amendment is, even if they wanted to do something with it. So you’re fighting a knowledge battle here. I’ll also throw out another provision.

What if we actually taught civics again, and we taught that the purpose of the Senate was to protect the rights of the people, now that’s what it was designed for? If we had that, we wouldn’t need the 17th Amendment. We could say, hey, my US Senator, I got three candidates running, which one is going to best stand up for the state of Texas or Oklahoma or New York or whatever it is? 

We don’t have to have the legislature choosing them to do that. We just have to have good civics that the purpose of the Senate is not to be a super House of Representatives. The purpose of the Senate is to stand up for what’s good for the states, and the House will stand up for what’s good for the people. 

And if you had that viewpoint, you wouldn’t have to have the 17th Amendment, you start electing people to office for the US Senate on the basis of what they’re going to do to protect the state of Texas or Alabama or California or whatever it is.

So there’s other ways to get the same ends. But it all points to the fact that we really don’t know the Constitution very well. I think that is changing. I think people are now getting involved. And by the way, we’re in the process of bringing a reprint back with 1828 catechism on the Constitution, because people are so interested in what it stands for and what it does and what we should be doing. So I think there’s a chance we’ll get back to that knowledge, but I don’t think you have to change the 17th Amendment to do that.

Freedom of the Press


I was just thinking David about that catechism, so excited about coming out. And even in reading through it, just a small thing, but actually, it’s a big thing. But when you go through the part on the First Amendment, I mean, most everybody thinks of freedom of the press as the big boys. You know, that’s CNN, Fox News, New York Times, newspapers and television and all the big guys. 

The founders view was that was really just freedom of speech in print. But we tend to think of it as the media or the press, and this almost fourth branch or third entity or whatever you want to call it out there.

But that catechism is so simple and brought that to light for me. It was like, oh, wow, I need to be encouraging people to use their freedom of the press, meaning their own ability to post on social media or other ways of being the press themselves. Anyway, sorry to go off on a tangent, but I just thought that was really neat in that catechism that you’re reprinting.


Yeah. And it is one of the things that I think people will find cool about the Constitution when it comes back and they read it to say, this really is applicable for right now. This is not just a 220 year old document. I mean, this thing really handles where we are today.


Alright, guys, our final question of the day has to do with the filibuster rule. I think we’ve probably heard more about the filibuster this year than in a long time. But here’s the question. “Good day, WallBuilders family, I have a follow up question to a previous Foundation of Freedom question about the filibuster rule?” Here it is. “Do you think it’s possible that we’ll ever have a scenario in our country where there’s overwhelming bipartisan or overwhelming agreement in Congress to get rid of the filibuster rule and get back to preserving our Constitution that establishes a simple majority for everything, except constitutional amendments, or more likely that we would have to rely on a single party to have overwhelming majority in Congress eventually to agree to get rid of the filibuster?”

In other words, I think what he’s asking is, do you think you’ll ever have both parties come together to go back to majority rule and not to filibuster? Or is it going to take a supermajority by one party to be able to get rid of that rule?

Eliminating the Filibuster


Yeah, this goes back to Founding Fathers original intent. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, others we quoted, they said, the fundamental principle of the Constitution requires that the will of the majority shall prevail. A filibuster changes that. 

A filibuster says it’s the super majority, which actually empowers the minority more than the majority. So in the senate right now, 41 votes can trump 59 votes, and that shouldn’t be that way. So the question is, do we ever get to the point where we get rid of the filibuster rule? The answer is, do we ever get to the point where we read the Constitution and apply it again?

The introduction of the filibuster rule was long after the Founding Fathers in with progressives who said we need to do something to be able to thwart what the other guys are doing. And it puts the majority rule completely aside. And don’t think a majority rule in terms of the way that it’s being framed today with race issues, that means white versus black. 

As Sam Adams pointed out, everybody in America has often been on the minority side of some issue. Every time I vote for a candidate that doesn’t win, I’m in the minority, because the majority got the candidate that won. Every time I’m part of something that doesn’t win, I’m in the minority.

So don’t think of in terms of racial things like we try to frame it today. Everybody is in the minority at some point in their life, and you just have to learn to live with that, that the majority is the constitutional standard. So the question is, do you think we’ll get back to the point where the Constitution actually matters to the US Senate and US House? It’s not going to matter to them until it starts mattering to us and until we start electing people to office who actually read the Constitution.

Standing for Principles

I would bet you that most members of Congress, even the really good ones have so accepted the filibuster rule because that’s the way it’s been for 100 years, that they haven’t even asked the question, is that a constitutional rule? It’s just part of the institution today. 

So this goes back to what we’ve been talking about this entire Foundation of Freedom Thursday, and that is we need to get back to knowing the Constitution, to knowing what it says about so many areas and the 17th Amendment to the filibuster rule to everything else, it’s really important that we know and that we elect people on that basis.


So what do you do, like right now, what do you recommend from a strategic perspective? I mean, obviously the filibuster is right now serving us from the standpoint of keeping the leftist from completely running away with the country and considering how bad they are destroying the nation? If you’re a Republican in Congress right now, you got to want to hold on to the filibuster at this crazy time, but long term, you want to get rid of it. So what do you do strategically with that?


Well, I think what we’re doing right now is I don’t think anybody’s going to point to people as being much more conservative than you, me, and Tim, or being much more constitutional. But he even with that, we know that if we did not have a filibuster right now, the Democrats would run over so many things, the Equality Act, H.R.1, H.R.5, etc. And so here we are talking about the fact that the filibuster rule is not consistent with constitutional purpose and intent.

So we’re actually calling out something that’s helping our side not be crushed right now. Doesn’t matter, you got to stand for principle and you got to point the principle out. Andam I glad that we can stop H.R.1 and H.R.5? Yes, I’m very glad. But there should be other ways to do it other than having to violate the constitutional process. 

And that’s where I think you have to stand for principle even at times when not applying that principle actually helps you. You have to stand for it. And I think that’s what we’re doing at WallBuilders Live, and a lot of people are as well. But I think it’s always right to stand with the Constitution, even if doing so doesn’t help you achieve a win that you would like to see.

RINOs, CRT, Secession, Federalism And More! – On Foundations Of Freedom


Well, to stand for the Constitution, you got to know the Constitution. So folks, get those classes, start studying on your own or with a group. It’s actually really fun to study with a group. There’s something about that, iron sharpening iron and that fellowship that occurs. So we’ll give you all the tools. 

Make sure you go to wallbuilders.com today, get the DVD set, get you some workbooks, and invite some friends and family over or stay after church on Sunday afternoons, and eat lunch together, and watch the videos. It’s just a great way to learn about our history and our country, how it works, and how to be good biblical citizens under this Constitution, and that’s what’s going to help us restore our constitutional republic. Check it out today at wallbuilders.com. Thanks so much for listening to WallBuilders Live.

Thomas Jefferson said, “The Constitution of most of our States and of the United States assert that all power is inherent in the people that they may exercise it by themselves. That is their right and duty to be at all times armed, that they are entitled to freedom of person; freedom of religion; freedom of property and freedom of press.”