oundations Thursday And First Question

SPEAKER_02 0:07

It's Thursday, Foundations of Freedom Thursday here at the Wall Builder Show. Thanks for joining us where we take on the hot topics of the day from a biblical, historical, and constitutional perspective. On Fridays, we love getting your questions. So be sure and send them in radio at wallbuilders.com. That's radio at wallbuilders.com. I'm Rick Green here with David Barton and Tim Barton. Guys, we got uh first questions coming from Ryan. And he asks, why exactly are presidential term limits in place? Should it be the people's right to vote someone in as many times as they want? Thank y'all for all you do. God bless. Okay, so presidential term limits, guys.

SPEAKER_01 0:42

Now, Dad, it sounds like he's been listening to your conversation about Congress and the Senate. That's right. That's right. And so now, Rick, I he he might be in trouble for a little bit right now.

edia Advantage And Wartime Presidents

SPEAKER_00 0:54

Uh I I no, because he didn't ask what I thought. He asked why they're in place. So I I could I could tell you why they're in place, but that's a different question from what I think about them. So, and by the way, that's exactly right. I have not been a fan of term limits. I think the people are the the the term limit if they want it. Uh now, there's here's here's a caveat that's different from back when they uh originally did it. So what's interesting is, and this goes back to really World War II, we've only had one president who served more than two terms, that was Franklin Roosevelt, World War II. Uh he was there long before World War II, died in World War II. He was elected four times as president, died in his fourth term. And it's interesting that the guy who championed this amendment was his vice president from that fourth term, that was Harry Truman. So Harry Truman finished out FDR's fourth term and then he had his own term, so he had a didn't f serve a full eight years, but he's the guy who did this, and it was interesting the the logic that they gave back at that point in time. Um they they they argued for limited power and that if you had someone who stayed in too long that it could end up being like Hit Hitler or Mussolini or others that are just in. Now, here's where I think that the the difference is with kind of a presidential term limit is back at that point in time you had so much earned media for FDR in his fourth term, the wartime president, everything else he did, I don't think there's anybody in the United States that could get anywhere close to being able to advertise their name at anywhere the level that FDR did without having to pay for it. He got all this earned media and so there was no way of having an even playing field coming in for anybody else to be able to compete with him whatsoever at any point in time. Now, there's some of that that goes today with re-election, but not four terms, four four times in. So yeah, I mean, anybody that's president has an advantage except with Biden, you saw that that didn't work. With George Bush 41, that didn't work. There's been a number of one-term presidents, and that's even in the modern era, Jimmy Carter. So it's not that being president gives you a massive advantage if your policies aren't aren't good. And wartime, we all came together, we're not talking about politics so much, we're talking about saving lives and ending the war. And so that just gave a huge advantage with four terms, and that's where I think the difference is. So that's why uh the concern, wh why they did it back when they did that, the 22nd Amendment, is we don't want a person in so long that they become like a dictator or like someone else, because at that point you cannot compete on an even playing field with somebody who's been in four terms and had all the earned media that the FDR had. So that's that's kind of by I'm still philosophically, I think the people have to be equipped to make the choice. And as long as there's a somewhat level playing field, which occurs because we do have two terms limits, it means you're only gonna run for re-election once. I think that really helps even the playing field a lot more.

SPEAKER_01 4:10

Well, and dad, to to maybe even add some thoughts, I don't want to say disagree with you. Uh, because I I don't fundamentally disagree with you on some of this, but uh obviously George Washington being the father of the nation, being the model of the kind of leader we want, the guy who really is just there to serve. He's not there to he George Washington benefited in no way from being the president because he he's an introvert, he's a homebody. Nothing about this is what he wanted, but he was the guy who was so loved and respected. He he's the only president ever elected unanimously through the Electoral College. Uh, he was the one that could bring everybody together, and he's the one that set the example after two terms. You you need to be done uh because we don't need some kind of king who's running and it's his will and his whims, and that's not the way it should work. And so, if nothing else, his example set the precedent that should be followed, and and it was so clear that no president confused that until FDR did. And and and so I would say, even though fundamentally I agree with you, the people should be in charge. As you mentioned, there's a lot of dynamics that have changed now with funding and campaigns and name recognition, and you can kind of go down the list where there certainly is a unique advantage to people that have been in politics for very long because they can grow their war chests, meaning all of their campaign contributions they can use to continue to do a lot of what they've done. We know the name recognition makes a difference when voters go to the polls. They often will vote on names they recognize, even if they have no idea who that person was. So that there definitely are some advantages. Uh, and so even though for a president there wasn't term limits until Harry Truman is the one suggesting and promoting that, the precedent was so clear that no president confused it. And so it was kind of like an internal integrity term limit, if you will, as opposed to having some kind of legal requirement.

SPEAKER_00 6:11

Yeah, and I I think the thing that really makes a difference is all the earned media, because I think any president in the 1800s could have run several times and not been re-elected uh time after time after time. But but I do think a wartime president gets more earned media. I think Lincoln got a lot of earned media because he is the president in a civil war. I think f uh that that when you look at Woodrow Wilson, he got a lot of earned media in World War I. He probably could have run for a third term and might have been able, but I I think you you take anybody else uh that was not a major wartime president, and I think that I I think even if a president had run three times and been elected three times in the eighteen forties, that didn't give them an advantage at all o over somebody else that might have run, governor from a state that might have run or something else. And and I yeah, I'm with you, Tim. I I think the real thing that changed it was media, not the principle of of running. And you're right. Well, I mean Washington said the the it was if it's good enough for George, should have been good enough for FDR, but it it wasn't obviously. Um but I think I think now the difference is that earned media, and I don't think that existed until after World War I when it really because even McKinley, you know, McKinley's the first guy to really have media coverage per se, and he got assassinated, and then you have Teddy uh Roosevelt who comes in and he gets media coverage, but it just didn't make that much of a difference until you got in World War I, had a war president with Woodrow Wilson, and he appeared to handle that pretty well, so gets re-elected. So it's it's it's just one of those interesting things.

SPEAKER_01 7:48

Well, and it's something too, Dad, that I it's is where Trump had a unique idea in his 2016 election win going to social media, because that's almost what FDR did during World War II with his fireside chat. That's right. He was in everybody's home uh every week, and and so he's getting to speak directly to the American people. It's what President Trump did. It's why the social media, the tech giants, changed the algorithms to try to stop him and slow him down. Because once an individual is able to speak in in mass to that many people, they can have a huge voice and influence. And then to your point, if there's a crisis going on and they're saying, I'm the guy you need, and and he's FDR is the guy in everybody's home every week on their radio with these fireside chats. His opponents weren't having that same opportunity. Uh this is where again it's it's so different. Once you've been elected, it's very hard. Generally speaking, the pin there are unique situations and circumstances. It's not that you can't remove an incumbent, it's not that you can't have a challenger win, but they have generally speaking a a more uphill battle the longer someone is entrenched in the system, the more advantage they have in seeking re-election.

hould Congress And Judges Have Limits

SPEAKER_02 9:08

Yes, the reason you can get a you know walking carcass uh able to win at 90 years old that has to be wheeled around and the staff is the ones actually voting.

SPEAKER_01 9:17

You know, Rick, how how dare you talk about half of Congress like that?

SPEAKER_02 9:22

It's the truth, though. And it's in fact a guy I had lunch with earlier today was saying to say he's like, what an embarrassment we're projecting weakness to the world when we do that. And uh yeah, I think Ryan, who sent this question in, great question, by the way. I think you're actually trolling us because you probably know this is the only thing I disagree with the Bartons on. Like a million different issues we've talked about over the last 20 years of doing radio. Here's the one thing I would love to reset the table so that just like we require Yes.

SPEAKER_00 9:52

Tell me that you like basketball better than basketball.

SPEAKER_02 9:56

I should have said political. The only political issue. Yes. Oh, gotcha. All right, gotcha. No, but I I to me it's like reset, it's it's it's what are the rules of the game? So it's it's it's not that you're taking choices away from from the American people willy-nilly, because we already say you gotta be 25 to run for Congress, you gotta be, you know, 35 to be president, you gotta we got age limits, we got geography limits, we got all these different things. So why not have a limit on how long you can serve when we know this 90% advantage goes to incumbents and we know that it gets abused and people stay there for 30, 40, 50 years, so Mitch McConnell and Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi are the poster children for why we should spread the power out to more individuals by not allowing that person to stay there for so long. Their district will still send a liberal or a conservative more than likely, but at least it's a new person that hasn't accumulated all that power. That's my argument for it. Which is kind of the same argument Truman was making with with why the president should be limited to two terms, just so you don't accumulate too much power. I think the same thing applies. And I I would even apply it not just to members of Congress, but to judges, Supreme Court justices especially, but but any federal judge, you know, ten years maybe, ten year term, and then maybe maybe a reappointment or two, but man, thirty, forty, fifty years, it's just too long to be in the bubble and have everything handed to you.

SPEAKER_00 11:15

You know, Rick, and and with the judges, I mean, the founders didn't give term limits because they used good behavior, but I would argue that the thing that has messed the Constitution up regarding judges has been progressive law schools in the twentieth century that taught a whole new purpose for judges and what they do. Earlier this week the story came out about uh a judge who ordered the release of a criminal who has been released several times, violent, and the police in Las Vegas just said no, we're not putting the guy back on the street. We've arrested him too many times every time we let him loose. And the judge says, I told you to let I'm sorry, you're not the executive branch, Mr. Judge. You're the judicial branch. You you can say what sentences are, but you don't execute the sentences. That that goes to the other branch. And we're just in this thing because uh of the way law schools have been in the 20th century progressives, they gave all this to the judges. I mean, judge is supposed to be the weakest branch, and it's not, and so that's where you kind of say, man, uh again, because we were not consistently good in putting good leaders in, including at universities, we now have all this garbage that's been handed to us in the 20th century that causes us to have to challenge original intent. Their plan was great. We just didn't stick to it. And now that we're off the road, how do you get back on the road? And so, you know, whether that's term limits or limiting judges or whatever, those are great discussions to have.

SPEAKER_01 12:38

Well, and and to just continue down this rabbit hole for just a moment, something that we all also have talked about and agree with, but as long as we're going down this rabbit hole, I think it's worth throwing out there. Uh, Rick, as you've advocated for term limits, one of the things that we have all agreed is that the people that need term limits maybe the most are not just the congressmen and senators. Obviously, we we mentioned judges, that's a given, but also it's the staff members that are up in Washington, D.C. And we know right now uh under President Trump uh that that there are so many young people serving, which is so encouraging. But I I would say, like on a positive side, we have a very good friend who uh served a really solid Christian congressman. Uh she then served a really solid Christian senator. She's now working in the White House. I love the fact she's there. Well, she's been there for quite a while. And the reason I bring this up is if you put term limits on congressmen and said you can only be there 12 years, right? For senators, you get three terms, it's 18 years, and and then you have to be done. I I think that's plenty of time for them to serve in general. Uh so Rick, I would kind of side with you on that. But if you remove them and you allow the swamp creatures, everybody from who the lobbyists are, who the the people involved in these different agencies are, and then even who the staff members are, if you're not changing out that ideology and worldview, then the people that are actually influencing the congressmen and senators the most, those that are around the most every day in DC, if that doesn't change, it's not going to have the desired outcome that putting a term limit on a congressman and senator would, to the extent that we would hope it would, if you don't change out some of the other people in DC.

SPEAKER_02 14:23

Yeah, and it's like we've said staff is policy, right? Because there's so many issues and there's so much to cover that staff person actually ends up really influencing how the congressman actually votes. So hu what's the how does Trump say it? Not hugely. Huge I guess just huge huge, huge it's just huge. That's a major, major factor.

SPEAKER_00 14:42

To that point, I mean, this last week when we were in DC, I was talking to uh one of my friends who had just seen one of the U.S. senators um coming down the hall, and he could not act he was not cognizant of where he was, of where he was headed. Um he had someone guiding him and leading him, and so he votes. No, no, no. The the staff says go out there and punch the yes button or the no button. I mean, he was not even cognizant of where he was.

SPEAKER_02 15:09

I thought Cornyn was back in Texas campaigning. I didn't know. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

SPEAKER_00 15:16

Take note of that one. So so it it's exactly what Tim is saying is is you really do get the staff because the guy, you know, they they know exactly how to do the right clips to but to look cognizant, to look all together. But when you see it between the clips and the clean the times that they choose to put them out there, um it's it's it's clear that hit his cognitive abilities are not there. And he is a retiring senator this time, but that should have happened before now.

reak And Patriot Academy Message

istorically Accurate American History Films

SPEAKER_02 15:42

And it makes you it makes you kind of pine for uh we want to see Daniel Webster going up against, you know, whoever, and just you know, the good debates and the and the and the sharpest, the best being there to to debate these issues, not not what you just described for sure. All right, guys, quick break. We've got more questions coming from the audience when we return. Folks, you're listening to the Wallpolo Show. Have you noticed the vacuum of leadership in America? We're looking around for leaders of principle to step up, and too often, no one is there. God is raising up a generation of young leaders with a passion for impacting the world around them. They're crying out for the mentorship and leadership training they need. Patriot Academy was created to meet that need. Patriot Academy graduates now serve in state capitals around America, in the halls of Congress, in business, in the film industry, in the pulpit, and every area of the culture. They're leading effectively and impacting the world around them. Patriot Academy is now expanding across the nation, and now's your chance to experience this life-changing week that trains champions to change the world. Visit PatriotAcademy.com for dates and locations. Our core program is still for young leaders, 16 to 25 years old, but we also now have a Citizen Track for Adults. So visit the website today to learn more. Help us fill the void of leadership in America. Join us in training champions to change the world at Patriotacademy.com. Welcome back to the Wall Builder Show. It's Thursday. Foundations of Freedom Thursday. Send your questions into radio at wallbuilders.com, radio at wallbuilders.com. Spencer's up next, guys. Spencer said, Dear Mr. Barton, our family so appreciates everything that you do. Have a specific question. Could you please direct me to any films or documentaries about American history that you know to be historic historically accurate? It's been so disappointing to enjoy an American history film only to realize that some information was either false or mischaracterized. I would appreciate any guidance you could give. Thank you. Oh man, we we we could give uh not a whole lot of them, but there but there's there's some. What do you guys think? What would you what would you suggest?

SPEAKER_00 17:47

Anything the first thing I think is uh uh what's his name? Fran uh Frederick Chandler Harris, uh who did uh the the the Brur Rabbit stuff and Burr Rabbit and Tar Baby and his thing was don't throw me don't throw me in the Briar Patch, which is where he wanted to be. I mean this this is a question I I hate that you asked me this question. Yeah, like no. I love this question. And it kind of kind of a fun side of this. There are some really, really good movies out there. There's not a whole lot in the in the last 20 years, I'm gonna say. There are some. There's a whole lot in the golden era of Hollywood in the 40s and 50s and 60s. There's a lot. And uh the the connection we have with wall builders and the museum we've got, and then our friend Glenn Beck, and we help run the American Journey Experience, which is another museum. So there's the wall builder staff and the American Journey staff, and we collaborate a lot together and talk a lot. We want we don't want to buy the same thing or compete against each other, and if they get something and we like it, or if we see something, we'll send it to them, or whatever. And so it's it's fun. We try every three, four weeks to get together and say, hey, what are the new items we've had in the last month? And so we go through and look at them together. Maybe we got at wall builders and they haven't seen it over American Journey or vice versa. And then we would all, as both staffs, would get together and sit down and watch a Hollywood movie that was accurate to the things that we had, and particularly for me with a lot more white hair, I knew a lot more of those movies, and a whole lot of the younger guys had not seen a single one of those older movies.

SPEAKER_01 19:24

Yeah, and Dad, this is where it's worth pointing out that most of the staff that that is at American Journey Experience are younger than 30. Uh, that we have several uh people, wall builders that are younger than 30. Uh now we do have some that have worked for us for a couple decades, uh, right out of high school or college. And so we they've already had mandatory movie time where we've already walked them through some of these movies, and so not to give away what might be on your list, but uh it's wait wait, Tim, mandatory movie time. I love it. It's like it's like mandatory Yeah, it's like mandatory fun time. Like, hey, you have to come and have fun with us, you don't have an option, we're gonna have fun. Uh yeah, you just you know, every now and then you need a mandatory movie night to watch something good. And you know, dad, so often when we will watch a film that these young people never would have chosen halfway through, or by the end, they're like, wow, that was a really good film. And we go, yeah, because back before they had AI and whatever animation and whatever you know, studio current graphic work they do, you used to have to be good storytellers. You used to have to be really good actors if the film was gonna be good. And so, several, as you mentioned, of those older films are so stinking good. So, Dad, I know the question that people are wanting the answer to is what are some of those films that people should watch? And of course, we could give caveats because I know one that's gonna be on your list. I'm gonna throw it out there, Sergeant York. Such a good one. Sergeant York, the actual man who is was Sergeant York, he was actually they're on set helping direct. Of course, because of the film, there's abbreviations, there's a little nuance different from the story, not dissimilar, maybe from like a Hacksaw Ridge, the more modern film, a little more graphic than Sergeant York was. But these are stories that are are honest to form, but there's some Hollywood details that have changed or nuance. But for example, Sergeant York, really, really great film. If people haven't seen that, go back and watch it. It is so good. So that as an example is one of the things on the list. So, Dad, what else is on the list?

SPEAKER_00 21:43

Uh, other things I would point to would be the film called The Longest Day. Uh, that was uh the really the D-Day invasion. It was done in the 60s, I think. Zanook maybe, yeah, I think it was sixties. But the guys who were on the set that helped ran that were the guys who landed on D Day, and they made sure everything was. Is Acker right to it? It is it is Stellar. The A-listers of Hollywood, a whole bunch of them were in there. Several dozen A-listers were in that movie. It's great. The movie Tor, Tora, Torah is really accurate. That's Pearl Harbor, the attack on Pearl Harbor. The movie Amistad is very accurate. John Quincy Adams, the the court case that he did in 18 uh 40s. That's a very accurate movie.

SPEAKER_01 22:25

And let's point out real quick that's rated R. There is some uh tribal nudity in that. Uh and and there is some violence in that. So uh just for families that you know might want to look at these, uh some of the ones you mentioned, the old black and white World War II movies, uh those have fighting in it, but it's it's from the 60s, and so it just looked a little like it's it's like almost like an old A-Team or Lone Ranger TV show, right? That the gun goes bang and the guy falls down. So not graphic, but if if there's one that is graphic, we will try to identify it, or obviously as parents, you can do a quick internet search and and and see what the content is in those films before you choose to watch it on a family movie night.

SPEAKER_00 23:10

Others that I would point to would be PT-109, the story of John F. Kennedy, um, that was done post-World War II, as his World War II experience. They were expendable, which is a story of how PT boats came into existence in World War II. Uh Disney had the miracle of the Y stallions, which is an operation under patent. It's a true story of what happened in World War II. Awesome movie. I love that one. Uh The Man Who Never Was uh was a World War II intelligence operation with Great Britain that helped deceive the Germans on D-Day, helped us land without them knowing it was happening. Uh The Scarlet in the Black is a Catholic priest uh during World War II and and some secret stuff that he did. The Great Escape, uh, another classic movie, big Hollywood A-listers. Uh The Helen Back is the autobiography of Audi Murphy, the most decorated soldier in World War II. Um he played himself in that. Uh G.I. Joe is the story of Ernie Pyle, who was the most famous journalist in World War II.

SPEAKER_01 24:12

Well, let's clarify. If people are looking up G.I. Joe, they might find one of the newer movies, G.I. Joe. It's definitely not that one. Good point. Not that don't don't go to that one. That's not historically correct at all.

SPEAKER_00 24:26

Yeah, if G.I. Joe that you look at is not black and white, it ain't the right one. And so G.I. Joe Apollo 13 uh was another one that was that was uh considered to be very accurate. End of the seventh, uh, end of the sixth happiness is World War II, a Chinese missionary lady who who led a bunch of kids out. It's a real good m movie, Ingrid Bergman. I mean, there's there's a lot of movies like that, just a lot of movies.

SPEAKER_01 24:52

Well, so so Dad, I I think a good follow-up question would be which of those maybe is your favorite? And your top recommendation, if you're gonna watch one, watch this one. But let me, while you're thinking, uh, let me ask another question about an old movie that like how historically accurate was it? Uh so there's a movie called The Devil and Daniel Webster. Um, Daniel Webster was a real guy. Was that an accurate movie?

SPEAKER_00 25:18

Or yeah, that that was uh an accurate legend. Daniel Webster was such a good speaker, he debated Satan and beat Satan in a debate, and so he got it, he saved that soul from going to hell.

SPEAKER_01 25:30

Yeah, guy sold his soul to the devil uh for momentarily financial gain, uh, and then he regrets it later, but he's stuck, and so Daniel Webster comes and argues with the devil and ends up winning the debate because uh the guy's soul was never his in the first place. It belonged to God, and so you couldn't anyway. It was really great. That's not a real movie. Daniel Webster's a real guy, it's a fun movie because he's a great debater. But dad, of the movies you mentioned, which one's your favorite movie?

SPEAKER_02 25:55

I could have sworn that was a Charlie Daniels song and there was a fiddle involved, but anyway. Yeah, that's right.

op Picks And Listener Wrap Up

SPEAKER_00 25:59

That's right. Uh I I would probably go for Sergeant York Longest Day, is is my top two. Entertaining movie is Disney, Miracle of the White Stallions. It's not the best acting in the world, it's got A-listers in it for sure. Um, and and one more is Operation Dumbo Drop, another Disney movie based on true events. Uh, and it's a really fun Vietnam War story. So those would be the ones I'd point to.

SPEAKER_02 26:25

So lots of good options. And by the way, don't forget our friends over at VidAngel. So some of the you know more recent stuff that uh you wouldn't be able to watch normally, you can watch by cutting out a lot of the bad stuff as well. So check that out as well. Thanks for listening today, folks. Send your questions into radio at wallboarders.com. You've been listening to the Wall Builder Show.