Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
June 28, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Senate Leaders Scramble for a Deal on Health Care Bill

What’s Next for the Bill Cosby Sex-Assault Case?

Truthdig Bazaar more items

A/V Booth
Email this item Print this item

The Christian Conspiracy to Take Over the Military

Posted on Jul 13, 2011
Photo illustration from an image by Colin Grey

(Page 3)

Peter Scheer: This is Truthdig Radio. I’m Peter Scheer in studio with Robert Scheer, and we’re joined from New York by Moshe Adler. When he’s not blogging for Truthdig, Moshe teaches economics at Columbia University, and he is the director of Public Interest Economics, which provides consulting services to unions and other progressive organizations. Welcome, Moshe.

Moshe Adler: Hello.

Peter Scheer: Hi. So Bob wrote a column today called “The GOP’s Sick Priorities,” and it talks about this debt-ceiling limit debate and the attack on entitlements—what they call entitlements—and you read it, I understand. What was your reaction? What’s the argument, first of all Bob—why don’t we start with you?

Robert Scheer: Well, my argument is that it’s a phony. Whatever problems exist with Medicare, they have to do with health care costs and have nothing to do with the current debt problem. And Social Security, I argue, is in pretty good shape; it can be fixed very easily by increasing the contribution of people making more than $250,000 a year, but Social Security is perfectly solvent for the next 25 years. How many corporations can make that claim? And even at that point, it can account for 75 percent, and there’s 2.4 trillion in a Social Security trust fund, so I think these, what they call entitlements … first of all, the whole word bothers me. It makes it sound like you inherited it from birth, you’re entitled, you’re privileged, you’re spoiled. In fact, these are programs that people paid for, and paid for over the years, and have a right to have those programs honored. I’m also very worried that the president seems to indicate he might even accept cuts in Medicaid, which protects 68 million very vulnerable people, and that would be an absolute outrage. My basic argument is that the banking meltdown caused this; there was a 50 percent increase in the debt because of the banking meltdown. We also had this 50 percent increase before, thanks to George W. Bush’s fighting two wars that he wouldn’t pay for, and his eagerness and willingness to give a tax break for the rich. So to my mind, the debt ceiling argument has nothing to do with these programs.


Square, Site wide, Desktop


Square, Site wide, Mobile
Peter Scheer: OK. Well, now let’s check with the economics professor. Moshe, do you agree with his numbers there?

Moshe Adler: Yeah. I mean, I think that everything that Bob said is obviously true. And the only thing that … I just want to continue along the same line and say that the Republicans want us to think that what the government does is take care of old people with Social Security, and take care of old people by adding Medicare, and so on. But really what the government does is set rules that enrich the rich; this is really what the government does. And I think that if we come to have a stalemate with budget negotiations, with raising the deficit ceiling negotiations, and the government becomes underfunded, then the question becomes, OK, what functions should the government co-pay? And it bothers me a great deal that the president is kind of holding hostage all the poor, the most vulnerable people, and saying well, if you don’t give me what I want then I’m going to go hurt Social Security, the CPN, Medicare beneficiaries—instead of saying, if you don’t want to finance the government, if you don’t want to pay taxes, then OK, I’m going to stop the services that the government gives you, which actually let you exploit the rest of us. So I would say the first thing to do, if the government becomes underfunded, is let’s furlough the lawyers, say, that enforce the patent law. Let competition flourish, and let everybody who wants to produce something, let them produce something. And prices for drugs will fall, prices for software will fall; we will all be better off for it. Innovation will flourish, and these exorbitant monopolies that are all created by the patent law will vanish. So let’s start where the government makes you rich, and you pretend as if all the government does is kind of take from the rich and give to the poor, whereas what the government really does is give you the tools to become monopolies and exploit the rest of us. I mean, I would say let’s furlough all the lawyers that enforce the … that prevent local communities from having access to radio stations in their communities, and give these radio stations to big corporations. I mean, we have one corporation, for instance—Clearwater Communications—that owns 1,200 radio stations. And it’s notorious for not letting community voices be heard on its channels, and propagating right-wing ideology that says that patent law is a good idea, or letting the rich be rich is a good idea, and taxes are bad. So let’s start—if the government has to stop some functions—let’s start with the functions that make the rich rich and let’s … stop hurting people who are unemployed, or something.

Peter Scheer: Right. And you see this also with taxes, because the Republicans in Congress just walked away from an offer by the White House to cut, what, $4 trillion in spending because they would have had to raise taxes on wealthy people, and they refused to do that.

Moshe Adler: Right. So if they are not willing to pay for the government, then the government should stop protecting them. And I would say that this is the first function that the government should stop doing before it cuts unemployment benefits to a family that has no income, or cutting Social Security benefits to old people who most rely …

Peter Scheer: Dad, do you want to comment?

Robert Scheer: Yeah, I do. I think the point is really well taken. What the tea party has done—and by the way, these people are funded with a lot of money from big corporations and so forth, as is the Republican Party, and unfortunately also as is the Democratic Party—they’ve shifted the whole debate. And it’s big government versus little government. And what Moshe is saying is basically big government serves big business, and that’s the truth right across the board. The programs that have been singled out—Social Security and Medicare—working people are paying for; these are funded by, basically, regressive taxes. I mean, the math on that is really quite simple, particularly Social Security, which is paid for by working people and earned income. And, you know, people have hedge funds and so forth; they don’t pay into Social Security, they’ve been exempted from it. But if you really look at the budget, and what is big government, you have to first of all—and “entitled”—you have to look at the military. Certainly a big area, pushing a trillion dollars a year, Cold War levels, in real dollars, bigger than the rest of the whole word combined; all of the nation’s defense budget. And they don’t put that on the table. You’ll cut funding for kids who need medical care, pregnant women, but you won’t look at a weapons system designed to defeat a sophisticated military enemy, the old Soviet Union, that no longer exists? There’s no justification for it. But Lockheed and Boeing and these contractors, they feel entitled, and they keep that defense budget up—the military-industrial complex that … President Eisenhower warned us against. If you look at the whole bailout of Wall Street, which caused this big mess, caused the 50 percent rise in the debt, here we have the Fed and the Treasury keeping money costs for the banks low, protecting their interests. And finally, I would point out that it’s not just the preservation of law in terms of radio signals and patents and so forth, but the basic multinational corporation needs a powerful U.S. government to protect its interests around the world, whether diplomatically, in military terms, or economic clout—trade negotiations and so forth. So big government, big federal government, is at the service of the multinational corporations. And I agree, why doesn’t Obama call their bluff—which is, after all, what happened in the Clinton-Gingrich dust-up—and say, look, do you guys really want to curtail government? And we in fact had that statement this week from the business round-table, and all the big corporations saying hey, you better not do that.

Peter Scheer: I just want to, first of all, say we are speaking with Robert Scheer and Moshe Adler on Truthdig Radio. Moshe is an economics professor and expert, and Bob is the editor of Truthdig. I’m Peter Scheer.

Moshe, we were talking a lot about taxes, and you wrote a blog item, I believe, for Truthdig about why higher taxes would be good for us, would be good for the bottom line. Could you explain that?

Moshe Adler: Yes, but I just want to add about the debt ceiling … like Robert, I’m bothered by the fact that the president puts on the block Social Security and Medicare, et cetera, and not the programs that help the rich, like patent protection and so on. But I also want to say that the first thing that should go, if we don’t get the increase in the debt ceiling, is actually the payment of our, quote unquote, “debt obligations.” And I’m really upset that the Democrats have reached an agreement with the Republicans, that if they don’t reach an agreement, they will still pay… the interest on the debt obligations that are extending. Because I think that if we don’t reach an agreement, then definitely … You know that China is a big, big lender to the United States, and the government of China, as a matter of fact, is. And the reason that China does that is because it wants to weaken the yen against the dollar, or it wants to make the dollar strong, because what it is trying to do is it’s trying to make its labor cheap compared to American labor, and its products cheap compared to American products, and therefore shift employment from United States workers to workers in China. Now, I actually think that American workers and Chinese workers should work together rather than against each other, but surely American workers should not acquiesce with their own government paying interest—meaning making the Chinese government profit from their misery—and risk-free, because we promised that we would not renege on our obligations here. I think that this is the first thing that needs to go. I mean, American workers do not have any interest in protecting the credit ratings of the United States; they actually suffer from it. So all of these negotiations about the debt ceiling from the Democratic Party are all mishandled, because the interests of working people are just not well represented.

Peter Scheer: Well, let me ask Robert. Dad, do you agree that the first thing that should go is payments on the debt?

Robert Scheer: Actually, I don’t. I think that there is a national interest, when you borrow money, in paying it back. I don’t think that Moshe is saying this, but I don’t want to demonize the Chinese. I don’t think … I mean I think we’re very fortunate that they’re willing to underwrite our debt, and I think those debts have to be met. I think this is why the pressure should be on the business community, which even more handsomely supports the Republican Party than it does the Democratic Party. And we saw their statement this week to say, hey, cut it out! This is not kidding around; you are damaging our interests internationally. And I want to repeat a point that I made at the very beginning: the idea of scapegoating Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, which have nothing to do with this debt, is just the big lie. And for the business community to sit by and think Obama is going to save them, and yet they don’t put pressure on their Republican allies, this is a time when they have to speak up or they should be exposed. And that’s what Obama should do; he should say, look: We got into this mess because of what the bankers did, we got into this mess because of radical deregulation, we bailed you guys out, and you still support these Republicans who now want to put all the responsibility on working people and seniors, and that’s obscene.

Peter Scheer: We’re going to have to leave it there. Moshe and Bob, thank you so much for joining us.

Moshe Adler: Thank you for having me.

* * *

Kasia Anderson: This is Kasia Anderson, and I’m here with Johnny Temple, publisher and editor-in-chief of Akashic Books. We’re speaking to Johnny in Brooklyn. How’re you doing today?

Johnny Temple: I’m doing great. Thanks for having me on.

Kasia Anderson: And as many of our listeners might have heard about, your imprint was responsible for bringing the recent publishing phenomenon “Go the [F***] to Sleep” into the world. Can you tell us a little bit about the back story of how that fell into your clutches?

Johnny Temple: Yeah. The author, Adam Mansbach, is a friend of mine who I have published a little bit before. … He’s a literary novelist, and I’ve published a few of his short stories, and he co-edited an anthology that we published. And he came to me with the book proposal for “Go the [F***] to Sleep,” which he had put together in collaboration with Ricardo Cortés, a really excellent illustrator. When I first got the proposal, I laughed very hard, because it’s a book targeted for parents with young children, and I am in fact a parent with two young children. So I loved it, but I didn’t really think very seriously about publishing it when I first got it because it’s so unlike anything else that we publish. Most of what we publish is literary fiction, and a little bit of political nonfiction; we’ve never done a parody of a children’s book before. But I showed the proposal to my wife and to a few other friends who are parents of small children, and I got such a vehement, strong reaction from every parent I showed it to that it compelled me to show it to some more parents. And I kept getting the exact same reaction—people basically urging me to publish it. And so I quickly got my wits about me and decided, yeah, we’d be a great home for this book. And it was one of the best decisions I’ve ever made.

Kasia Anderson: So you did sort of some impromptu testing, field-testing of parents out there?

Johnny Temple: Definitely.


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, August 23, 2011 at 2:08 pm Link to this comment

Can you give examples where each one came to the same end? I’d be very interested Lew Ciefer to see it.

Report this

By mintu_kumar, August 23, 2011 at 5:32 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This is a must see video… you have you prepare yourself and your loved ones before it’s too late.

Report this

By Lew Ciefer, July 20, 2011 at 1:34 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, July 19 at 8:43 pm
I would like you to expand on this glib statement. Since on the face of it you are wrong. And the power elite aren’t all of them, mostly none of them.

How do you know who the Power Elite are? The Power Elite is not just people. It is people AND the institutions—in a state of flux—through which they function. Then there’s the henchmen class; where do we classify them? Are they part of the Power Elite or tools utilized by the Power Elite?

All of the different ideologies are no different in how they eventually end. They are all nothing more than different paths toward higher degrees of tyranny and monopolized privilege. They start off very differently and that’s why we see collectivist systems collapsing after only a generation or two and capitalist systems lasting much longer. They all—eventually—end with a more highly concentrated Power Elite as the system increases in monopolization of wealth, resources, and means of production and diminished hope and innovation.

The common weak link with all of the different human designed political/economic systems and ideologies is the Homo sapiens. The imperfections of all systems are why humans are constantly trying to design a better mouse trap. Imperfect beings—Humans—refuse to accept the fact that humans prevent any system from being perfect and the result is always massive amounts of deaths and suffering.

If this universe is designed, as many believe, there’s no wonder why the so-called Intelligent Designer is and has been A.W.O.L. for billions of earth years. It also means that we have to redefine ‘intelligent.’

Report this

By Lew Ciefer, July 20, 2011 at 1:30 pm Link to this comment

@ culheath, July 20 at 1:36 am though capitalism or markets are not a religion as well?
secondly i doubt that the elites are as impenetrable as you suppose. there wouldn’t be such visible turmoil if they were actually as smart and effective as you paint it.
people don’t rebel against strong masters, they rebel against weak ones.

> You fail to realize that it’s not the economic system/theory that one worships as a god. It is the State. The majority of the population in a libertarian political system with some form of a capitalist economic system does not—generally—hold to the ideology that the State is the great equalizer and guarantor of equality of outcome.

> The ‘visible turmoil’ is theatre. The Power Elite is always in a state of flux. It’s never the same people. It’s the same type of people. The institutions morph/evolve, old ones are sometimes discarded and new ones developed .The Power Elite fight amongst themselves because they are apes too. But while they fight amongst themselves for increased power and wealth they also know what is good for them. And what’s good for them is rarely good for us. The Power Elite is NOT just apes; it’s apes AND institutions. To prevail over the Power Elite one has to destroy the apes AND the institutions through which they maintain privilege and exercise power.

Consider the current ‘debt ceiling turmoil’ for the past few months. It’s all theatre. There’s never been any doubt that the ceiling would be raised. Only fools fall for the scaremongering propaganda. It’s been raised 78 times since 1962! The ‘battle’ or ‘visible turmoil’ is a façade concealing what is really going on ... the plan by The Party to raise the extortion rate on workers’ wages for the benefit of the Power Elite, functionaries—Boobus Americanus—in government, and the dependent class which cannot survive without governmental extortion of its neighbors.

> Most people don’t rebel until their stomacha are growling from hunger and there is no other option left to them. Even then most will simply lie down and die. What human beings seek above all else is security from precipitous and violent death and some guarantee—however hollow—that they’ll have adequate shelter, food, clothing, and education for their offspring. That’s why history shows apes always evolving to societies of higher complexities. The 20th century showed us that a very large number of human beings are more than willing to surrender personal liberties in exchange for some form of collectivist system that promises them security. In this they are like believers in Jesus’ return on a white horse or those that believe Mohammed flew a horse to a meeting with an angel. They believe in mythology, because the 20th century also shows us that collectivism kills people and increases human misery on an even greater scale than traditional theocracies.

If you doubt what I say, get off your arse and hit the streets calling for revolution. Don’t forget to send your prison address so that we can send you a care package once in a while.

Report this
culheath's avatar

By culheath, July 20, 2011 at 1:36 am Link to this comment

@Lew C though capitalism or markets are not a religion as well?

secondly i doubt that the elites are as impenetrable as you suppose. there wouldn’t be such visible turmoil if they were actually as smart and effective as you paint it.

people don’t rebel against strong masters, they rebel against weak ones.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, July 19, 2011 at 8:43 pm Link to this comment

iIt matters not—in the long run—whether the ideology is considered and/or believed to be conservative, communist, socialist, libertarian, left, progressive, etc. They’re basically all the same. </i>

I would like you to expand on this glib statement. Since on the face of it you are wrong. And the power elite aren’t all of them, mostly none of them.

However I do agree with your last paragraph.

Report this

By Lew Ciefer, July 19, 2011 at 4:22 pm Link to this comment

@ Night-Guant3

The problem was your use of a term that is employed by the so-called American Left to label the so-called American Right—Reich wing—and the awkward sentence from the other thread and here once again. There is no Left. The Left in the U.S. is primarily the Democrats. The Democrat Party was long-ago taken over by the Socialists. All ideologies come down to nothing more than an elite ruling over the masses with different degrees of liberty afforded to them. It matters not—in the long run—whether the ideology is considered and/or believed to be conservative, communist, socialist, libertarian, left, progressive, etc. They’re basically all the same. They are nothing but different paths to totalitarian rule of the masses by privileged, super-wealthy, and powerful Elites. 

We’ve much more in common than it first appeared. I hope—for your personal well-being—that you aren’t one of the delusional who believe that successful revolution against the Power Elite is possible. It isn’t. The technology at their disposal is insurmountable at this time without a major revolt of some kind in the armed forces.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, July 18, 2011 at 3:11 pm Link to this comment

You still don’t get that I’m not playing partisan sides. They are both involved in this because of the crypto-fascists that are in both of them, and the Libertarians too and maybe others. So it takes both to screw the pooch, and they have done it. This isn’t politics as usual. No very different these days. The few who are against it are that, a few. The ones who still resist the power of corporations and their owners. It is very bad and we are sliding that much faster to an authoritarian state with theocratic nuances. And your remedy of “let the Liberals join” the military is ignorant of just who is running the military or how deep the rot is. How both parties are part of it.

There is no fear from the Left hurting our Republic, their power has been waning for some time. The rise of the Second Guilded Age is upon us. If we don’t stop it many will die here, like myself, as they destroy the safety net. Who needs to waste money on death camps when the targeted people can’t get food or medicine or medical care and die at home? Send in a for profit coroner’s service to take their corpses away and have no liability for any hospital and its done.

It’s happening but quietly.  So unless you dig for it, spend time away from friends and family to track it down and read it, it will remain little known. is a good place to find out just how much of this is wide spread. Not just in this country but in others as well like Uganda. Read up on it sometime.

Report this

By Lew Ciefer, July 18, 2011 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

@ Night-Gaunt, July 15 at 3:26 pm

So Reagan, George H.W. Bush & G.W.Bush don’t count for anything?

I didn’t say that.

Look at the data. Two of the three aforementioned had to deal with Democrat Houses throughout their terms and half of the twelve years with Democrat Senates. During Dubya’s first term the Senate, from 2001-2003, while officially Republican was a 50/50 Senate.

So who’s been screwing the pooch?

I don’t know how you defend this. If you want us to believe that the Democrats are so inept, and incompetent that even with all the advantage that they have enjoyed the Republicans were able to bend them over like little girlie men and win the day ... that’s okay with me. I have to ask though; why do you keep voting such obviously incompetent and inept fools back into office?

Take a quick read of comments, especially those to do with taxes, corporations, and finances. The threads are filled with Demmies complaining about corporations—especially TNCs—and the rich not paying their fair share. Well, the Mocha Crusader enjoyed a two-year span with a Demmie majority in both the House and the Senate. Name me a single piece of legislation from the Demmies closing tax loopholes on corporations. Why didn’t the Demmies, led by their Mocha Savior, legislate some of that ‘Hope and Change’ while they enjoyed legislative authority?

Consider for a minute the Botox queen. From 2009 to present her worth has increased from, reportedly, $21.7 million to $43.4 million, minus $8+ million in liabilities; she accomplished this during record high unemployment and recession with the Mocha Savior driving the bus off the cliff. Even the Sobbing Orangeman is reported to be worth only about two million. I had no idea struggling for liberal causes du jour paid so well. How do commies/socialists/lefties accumulate such fortunes without being part and parcel of all that predator capitalism they love to say they hate? And why do they hang on to those fortunes rather than ‘share’ it with the ‘people’? Hypocrisy?

The belly-aching about the supposed Christian takeover of the military is easily resolved by Lefties joining the military. But they won’t do it. In typical fundamentalist fashion they are on their knees, in humble supplication to their god—The State—begging that it legislate the problem away. What do you people want? Should the government forbid Christians from serving? Perhaps you want a ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell if you’re Christian’ law?

The military has a position known as ‘Chaplain’ and Chaplains are paid by the State. The State also provides Chaplains for prisons and in Congress there’s some guy who acts on behalf of religious faith who pretends that those demons in government pray to a god other than their corporate masters. 

Perfect separation of Church and State is impossible to achieve. I like the idea because it would be one method of ridding the State of commies and socialists, the most fanatical and dangerous believers in myth on the planet. Their gods, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc., are responsible for an estimated 110 million deaths and immeasurable human suffering in about a 75 years span during the 20th century. Other religions required centuries to match that.

Report this

By Lew Ciefer, July 18, 2011 at 12:52 pm Link to this comment

@  RayLan, July 16 at 4:44 am Link to this comment
No kidding. I didn’t say he was. The ‘church’ as a unified structure with an orthodox body of beliefs didn’t really exist until Constantine mandated ‘Christianity’ as a state religion.
What followed could be considered the furthest thing from what its Founder had intended - a Roman hierarchy.
So the ‘true’ Christians as disciples of Christ who knew his teachings and were moved by the Spirit to preach His message died out rather soon to be replaced by members of an imperial hierarchy, which has done nothing but try to control the world through political means ever since.

You don’t know who the ‘founder’ of Christianity was and with 25-37 thousand different sects, denominations, and cults there is no single ‘true’ Christinity. The Jesus of the New Testament didn’t exist. You may ask how I know that, well, because virgins don’t have babies and men don’t rise from the dead after a day and a half counted as 3 days. Might there have been a religious fanatic running around Judah around BCE 96 to 4CE? Certainly! Might one of the many religious fanatics running around Judah at the turn of the first century been the source of the biblical Jesus myth. It certainly is possible as well as probable.

The separation of Church and State is a great idea. I agree wholeheartedly with it. But, like all human designed systems and institutions it’s flawed. You cannot have a total separation of the Church from the State because of humans. Believers are society and like it or not they are going to strive for a society that fits within their belief structure. We don’t want to forget the the Boobus Americanus in government who take advantage of those belief systems in order to hold on to their power and privilege. It’s no different with commies and socialists; they strive for a society based on their belief system also—and their belief system is every bit as mythological and based on prophecies as all the rest. The main difference between the commies/socialists and the Christians is their gods. For the Christians, their god is some complicated imaginary trinity. For the commies/socialists their god is the State. They both want the same thing; to rule and tell other people how they should live their lives.

It’s the way of the Ape and it’s been like that since Ape ancestors crawled out of the primordial slime. Either dominate or be dominated.

Report this

By christian96, July 17, 2011 at 4:44 am Link to this comment

A Christian is an individual who tries to follow the
teachings of Jesus(Yeshua in Hebrew) Christ(the
anointed one.) Because they live in human bodies
Christians are going to make mistakes.  When they
do they ask Jesus for forgiveness and get back on
the Christian track with their lives.

Report this
RayLan's avatar

By RayLan, July 16, 2011 at 6:25 pm Link to this comment

A better question is ‘What is a Christian?”

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, July 16, 2011 at 6:13 pm Link to this comment

Just like any other extremist believes not only that they are right and all others not like them are wrong. They must enforce their point-of-view as the law of the land. That includes killing or incarcerating those they deem dangerous and apostate to them. Religious or secular force is the primary means of making their demands met by all others.

What is your version Christian96?

Report this

By christian96, July 16, 2011 at 2:42 pm Link to this comment

What is a Christian extremist?

Report this
RayLan's avatar

By RayLan, July 16, 2011 at 4:44 am Link to this comment

@Lew Ciefer
“Jesus wasn’t a Christian”
No kidding. I didn’t say he was. The ‘church’ as a unified structure with an orthodox body of beliefs didn’t really exist until Constantine mandated ‘Christianity’ as a state religion.
What followed could be considered the furthest thing from what its Founder had intended - a Roman hierarchy.
So the ‘true’ Christians as disciples of Christ who knew his teachings and were moved by the Spirit to preach His message died out rather soon to be replaced by members of an imperial hierarchy, which has done nothing but try to control the world through political means ever since.

Report this
culheath's avatar

By culheath, July 16, 2011 at 1:47 am Link to this comment

It’s astonishing that at this late date so many people in this country cannot fathom that their religious convictions have no bearing on nor authority over the decision making process of fellow citizens who are guided by their own lights.

Report this
culheath's avatar

By culheath, July 16, 2011 at 1:46 am Link to this comment

Find some lithium.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, July 15, 2011 at 3:26 pm Link to this comment

So Reagan, George H.W. Bush & G.W.Bush don’t count for anything?

Report this

By Lew Ciefer, July 15, 2011 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment

@ RayLan, July 15 at 2:21 am
The last true Christian probably died in the first century.

Jesus wasn’t a Christian. He was a Jew living under the Pharisaic Law. Christ is English for the Greek ‘Khristos’ which means ‘anointed.’  He was believed to be the ‘anointed one’ that Jews were/are waiting for. A Christian would be a follower of Christ or the Anointed one.

“Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.  For I came to SET A MAN AGAINST HIS FATHER, AND A DAUGHTER AGAINST HER MOTHER, AND A DAUGHTER-IN-LAW AGAINST HER MOTHER-IN-LAW; and A MAN’S ENEMIES WILL BE THE MEMBERS OF HIS HOUSEHOLD.”—Matthew 10: 34, 35

“And He said to them, When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?” They said, “No, nothing.” And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment. They said, “Lord, look, here are two (40) swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough” -Luke 22:35.38

The ‘Anointed’ clearly states that he did not come to bring peace to the world but rather turmoil and division. The ‘sword’, in Matthew, is metaphor for division and strife. Jesus and/or belief in him—Christianity—is that ‘sword’ of division. Looks like he was right judging by the fear-mongering on the two threads about Christians taking over the military, huh?

In Luke he clearly orders his followers to arm themselves because they are now going to have to fend for themselves without his presence on earth. Do you understand that he not only ordered them to arm themselves but he left with at least two armed companions in his presence.

There is NO prohibition for Christians to be warriors or to go to war. Paul takes it up a notch when he talks about Christians’ real battle being not against flesh and blood but against powers and principalities in high places. He speaks of demonic powers that blind men to the truth of Jesus and control human governments… all those democrats and republicans are under demonic control. I can’t argue with that because I know who the demons are that control them.

Report this

By Lew Ciefer, July 15, 2011 at 3:00 pm Link to this comment

@ Inherit The Wind, July 15 at 5:02 am Link to this comment

Truthdig had a large article on the taking of the Air Force Academy back in 2008.  It was my hope that the election of Obama and the 60 seat Senate majority as well as a dominant Democratic House would make it a no-brainer that the AFA would be cleaned up and the fundies rooted out of there, along with that crazy AF general who said we were fighting Jesus’ war.

But no.  In yet another betrayal of their voters, the Democrats did NOTHING, as usual.

Why don’t you Democrats / Lefties / Progressives / Marxists / Leninists / Trokskyists / Maoists / Pol Potists / Ho Chi Minhists / HilliaryClintonistas / Che Guevaristas / Chavistas / Alinskinistas /Huffingtonistas / NYTimistas / Peloseristas / Reidistas / Mochaistas, etc. enlist in the Air Force, the Army, the Navy, and the Marines and take back the Academies?

You can all meet at your ‘Headquarters of World Revolutionaries for Peace and Equality’ and recruiters—knowing they’re going to get signatures on the dotted line—will drive down to Starbuck’s, order Iced chocolate carob carrot coffee crapsalottas—caffeine free @ $6.95—and gladly show all you brave souls where to sign. And voilà! The majority in the U.S. military will be right-thinking Lefties who’ll take control of the Academies and the General Staff.

Consider this:

“In yet another betrayal of their voters, the Democrats did NOTHING, as usual.”-ITW

with this:

“Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress have been mostly incapable of doing anything beyond providing weak opposition to the Democrats’ bad ideas. Rarely do Republicans demonstrate the courage and integrity necessary to return the nation to prosperity and common sense.” - Charles Gross

The facts:

From 1933 to January 2011, DEMOCRATS have been the Congressional big dogs. They’ve had the majority in the House for 62 years; 40 of them consecutively from 1955-1995. In the Senate they have had the majority for 56 years of those 78.  In that same 78 year period the Democrats had control of the House, the Senate, and the Executive for 14 consecutive years, 1933-1947, for 4 consecutive years, 1949-1943, for 8 consecutive years, 1961-1969, for 4 consecutive years, 1977-1981, for 2 consecutive years, 1993-1995, and for 2 years with the current Mocha Apollyon, 2009-2011.

In contrast the Republicans have…

Controlled the House, the Senate, and the Executive for 2 consecutive years, 1953-1955, and for 4 consecutive years, 2001-2007.


For 34 of 78 years the DEMOCRATS have had legislative control while the Republicans, in contrast, have had legislative control of the government a meager 6 years of 78.

I’m no fan of Republicans but it’s obvious just who it is that’s been screwing the pooch.

The solution to the Christian take over of the armed forces:

In the navy
Yes, you can sail the seven seas
In the navy
Yes, you can put your mind at ease
In the navy
Come on now, people, make a stand
In the navy, in the navy

Lah, lah, lah… Tip toe…

Report this
James M. Martin's avatar

By James M. Martin, July 15, 2011 at 2:41 pm Link to this comment

The saying, “there are no atheists in foxholes,” is a lie.  In their proselytic zeal, Christians show a willingness to stoop to any fib to foist Jesus off on anyone willing to listen.  They do it outside abortion clinics, they do it at gay pride events, and they do it in military barracks.  They even proselytize with the dead: witness their cynical, fraudulent attempts to put causa mortis words into the mouths of Einstein and even Darwin (the latter while the proselytes are simultaneously claiming fossils were only an example of God “fooling the evolutionists”).  Remember, when the lies did not work during the witch pogroms (against women who helped abort unwanted babies), they went auto da fe and used fagots (yes, one “g”) for kindling.  In other words, the same crimes they are laying at the feet of evangelical Muslims in general and Wahhabists in particular, Christians and especially evangelicals themselves prove guilty. 

It’s our way or the highway.  Our God is the only God and he wrote or dictated every line in the Bible/Koran. But both religions cherry pick their dogma and most Christians don’t even practice the basic tenets of the faith proposed by their own prophet.  How can you deny women and LGBT people basic rights or rights not equal to the “average” heterosexual male and claim that you are compassionate?  Why are we ignoring diurnal reality in favor of things that existed on the ground circa 5,000 B.C.E. (O.T.) and circa 800 C.E. (Koran)?  Those people didn’t even have printing presses for God’s sake! 

(Ooops. Naw, I don’t believe in god, but I have a nostalgia for him.)

Report this

By jr., July 15, 2011 at 10:55 am Link to this comment

Let u.s. remember, the christian church has had a place reserved for it within the military bunkers of america, just in case of national emergency, for at least the past thirty years; i know, i’ve been in a few.  The church validates that with the excuse, well, the military, also, has followers who need a place of worship.  That be security the average citizen doesn’t have.

Let u.s. also remember, the words of the pledge of allegiance, and why it’s called a pledge of allegiance, “one nation, under god, (and this is the key word): indivisible”.  Liberty and justice are tooo subjective to even comment on.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 15, 2011 at 5:02 am Link to this comment

Truthdig had a large article on the taking of the Air Force Academy back in 2008.  It was my hope that the election of Obama and the 60 seat Senate majority as well as a dominant Democratic House would make it a no-brainer that the AFA would be cleaned up and the fundies rooted out of there, along with that crazy AF general who said we were fighting Jesus’ war.

But no.  In yet another betrayal of their voters, the Democrats did NOTHING, as usual.

Report this
RayLan's avatar

By RayLan, July 15, 2011 at 2:21 am Link to this comment

The last true Christian probably died in the first century.

Report this

By Dave24, July 14, 2011 at 10:53 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Enjoy, everyone:

Report this

By gerard, July 14, 2011 at 9:06 pm Link to this comment

Patrick Henry might well have pointed out that the roots of this Christian militarism were planted and grew to be humongous a thousand years ago during the century of the Crusades.  It was the same theme of “dominionism” that seized the Popes in Rome by the throat and sent “signs in the sky” (Constantine” appeared to hordes of ignorant peasants into many insane expeditions into “the Holy Land” to “reclaim the Holy City” from the “infidels.” 

The “infidels” (various nomadic and highly civilized kingdoms and tribes throughout the Middle East) were attacked and resisted, and tens of thousands of “knights” and “warriors” on both sides died horrible deaths—all either “fighting for Christ” or “defending Islam and their homeland.”

That horrid period was the fertilizer for the present holocausts, and it should not be surprising to see the ancient propaganda reasserting itself—again using religion as the impetus for mass murder.
“When will we ever learn?  When will we ever learn?”

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 14, 2011 at 4:08 pm Link to this comment

Now there’s an old theme. Brainwashing at its finest.

‘Onward Christian soldiers’.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, July 14, 2011 at 12:57 pm Link to this comment

Yes part of the conspiracy by the billionaires an religious fundies (several types) who want this country to become a Capitalist paradise and militant Dominionists who want a Holy American Empire. They moved to take over all the “7 Pillars (Mountains)” of society. And the military is one such pillar. A small number but very powerful and dedicated and funded. They failed in 1934 (but not punished) so they took a different strategy to win this time. They are so good with their security that we don’t known the ones behind this.

The main difference in theology between the standard Christian, Post-Millenial (for those who await the “rapture.”) and the Dominionists are Pre-Millenial. For them god will return only when they have conquered the earth—-literally. The entire earth population must not only to have “heard the word” they must be converted to their specific Crusader/Inquision kind. Also slavery and mercy killing (you won’t convert but they will save your soul.)

Ironically “zelots” originally were secular kind of revolutionaries. Not specifically religious motivated but nationalists. Like the “thieves” crucified with Jesus.

Report this

By konnie, July 14, 2011 at 11:59 am Link to this comment

boy are you a day late and a dollar short.  the air force academy was taken over 20 years ago.  their leadership makes it quite clear and impossible to not be an evangelical christian and graduate.  check the
records…........#1 on WHO gets the congresspersons recommendation to go there in the first place, and how many plebs are bounced out of there in the name
of “doesn’t play well with others”.  this should be
a huge scandal but nary a peep…...........

i can only assume the other academies are run in a
similar fashion. 

when are the rest of us going to take back our
country from these religeous zealots!  isn’t it
like against the constitution or something?

Report this

By TDoff, July 14, 2011 at 11:40 am Link to this comment

SarcastiCanuck, if religious people were rational, they’d know that ‘god’, his/her/it’s ownself, was Satan’s ultimate deception…

Report this

By SarcastiCanuck, July 14, 2011 at 5:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There is nothing more dangerous than a man who thinks he is fighting for his God.Just look at an Islamic suicide bomber and all of the atrocities committed in history in the name of God.
For you religous people,do you think that killing your fellow man in the name of God just might be Satan’s ultimate deception…

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide