Exposing David Barton

David Barton is not a name many non-believers are familiar with, although they should be. Based in Aledo, TX just a few miles southwest of Fort Worth, Barton is a Christian theocrat and historical revisionist most widely known amongst the "religious right", ultra-conservative Republicans and neocons. He is the founder of Wallbuilders, an organization which is, according to their website, "dedicated to presenting America's forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on the moral, religious, and constitutional foundation on which America was built." The problem with this, and with all of Barton's work, is that it is fiction.

Barton, who earned a degree in "religious education" from Oral Roberts University in 1976 (1), has written several books which he purports to be the actual history of the United States. His books have been picked apart time and again and exposed as fallacious. Barton is also the vice chair of the Texas Republican Party as well as serving on the board of advisers for the Providence Foundation which is described by The Nation as "a Christian Reconstructionist group that promotes the idea that biblical law should be instituted in America (2)."

In his 1989 book The Myth of Separation, Barton used twelve quotes which he claimed were from the founding fathers and the U.S. Supreme Court, which supported his claim that the separation of church and state as guaranteed by Thomas Jefferson in his Letter to the Danbury Baptists. He also said in the book that the "wall of separation" Jefferson wrote about was one-directional, meaning that the government has no right to infringe upon the church but not the other way around (3). Thing is, you see, after some tedious research by historians, Barton was called out on this lie. As cited in the article "Wallbuilders Shoddy Workmanship" by Rob Boston (in the magazine Church & State), Barton admitted he had made the quotes up. He was pressured into publishing a pamphlet entitled "Unconfirmed Quotations" in which he admitted such.  The word he used was "spurious" which, for anyone who doesn't know, means "of falsified or erroneously attributed origin" (4).  In other words, he made them up.

His popularity and perceived legitimacy continues to grow, however. Some of his supporters include George W. Bush, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee and Bobby Jindal. He continues to tour the country promoting his books and giving lectures with very little opposition. This is wherein the danger lies with Barton. One of his favorite things to say on his radio program is that his work can be verified because he has included thousands of footnotes in his books. Footnotes don't really prove anything and, when you cherry-pick and alter quotations to suit your needs, are completely useless.

In her 2006 book, Liars for Jesus, author Chris Rodda (Senior Research Director for the Military Religious Freedom Foundation) refutes and shoots down most of Barton's false claims. Her website has much of the book available to read on-line. In a series of videos (also on the website), Rodda discusses her brief meeting with Barton and his subsequent lies about her, their meeting and what she believes. In the videos she systematically tears down the wall built by Barton and exposes his lies for what they are. She makes a very astute observation: that the inclusion of footnotes really doesn't mean anything because the average reader isn't going to bother looking in to them. She encourages people to do so, however and has included a footnote archive on the website with direct links to each of the actual documents Barton claims to have used. The evidence is clearly in Rodda's favor.

The only question that really remains is: why are people giving any credence to a man who is an admitted liar? Any court in the land would automatically dismiss anything and everything a witness said once they admitted lying to the judge and jury. Why are Republicans and conservative talking heads like Glenn Beck attaching themselves to a huckster like this (5)? The answer is simple. He says what they and their supporters want to hear. They apparently don't care if it's true as long as it rings true to their wishful ears.

I will end with a paraphrasing of something Barton said on his radio broadcast (see Rodda's videos). He said people were getting upset by his books because what he had to say wasn't what they had been taught in school. He is correct in part. It's not what we were taught in school. Not because the Supreme Court had tried to do away with the "real" history of our great nation, but because his "real" history just isn't very real.