ForumGarden

So, lately we have been seeing a new but familiar face getting a lot of attention.
Retired General Micheal Flynn is stirring up a lot of the Fright Wing loonies,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Flynn

https://apnews.com/article/reawaken-ame ... 8b227ca22e


By MICHELLE R. SMITH and RICHARD LARDNER
October 7, 2022
https://apnews.com/article/reawaken-ame ... 8b227ca22e
BATAVIA, N.Y. (AP) — By the time the red, white and blue-colored microphone had been switched off, the crowd of 3,000 had listened to hours of invective and grievance.

“We’re under warfare,” one speaker told them. Another said she would “take a bullet for my nation,” while a third insisted, “They hate you because they hate Jesus.” Attendees were told now is the time to “put on the whole armor of God.” Then retired three-star Army general Michael Flynn, the tour’s biggest draw, invited people to be baptized.

Scores of people walked out of the speakers’ tent to three large metal tubs filled with water. While praise music played in the background, one conference-goer after another stepped in. Pastors then lowered them under the surface, welcoming them into their movement in the name of Jesus Christ. One woman wore a T-shirt that read “Army of God.”

In the next presidential race, we could be in for quite a ride.

well, guess I need to remember to spell-check titles. [sigh]

Yet you claim not to live in a fundamentalist nation.

I think the evidence shows that back in the beginning of the nation - 1776 and all that - people got high on the political tree by being anything but fundamentalist. Christian supremacists were actively kept out of federal government, they were seen as a liability.

I think the evidence also shows that these days, being a fundamentalist Christian is a positive career move in Washington circles and has been since PNAC plotted their way into power by dangling a second-generation Bush as their figurehead. And it clearly led to selective promotions in the Pentagon.

What Eisenhower would have thought of this generation's disgrace to his profession should be a question in everyone's mind.

spot wrote: ↑Tue Oct 11, 2022 5:43 am Yet you claim not to live in a fundamentalist nation.

I think the evidence shows that back in the beginning of the nation - 1776 and all that - people got high on the political tree by being anything but fundamentalist. Christian supremacists were actively kept out of federal government, they were seen as a liability.

I think the evidence also shows that these days, being a fundamentalist Christian is a positive career move in Washington circles and has been since PNAC plotted their way into power by dangling a second-generation Bush as their figurehead. And it clearly led to selective promotions in the Pentagon.

What Eisenhower would have thought of this generation's disgrace to his profession should be a question in everyone's mind.

Ah, no, I never claimed that.
Though, we don't really. The Fundies are here, and we have to put up with them.
So far, we have managed to keep them from doing too much damage. But check back in about two years.

I'd find it interesting and informative if we picked on a few current Senators, say, or State Governors, and I delve into their public utterances on their personal born-again Jesus. I could dabble in at random if you like. I would then claim their assertions led to their being electable.

By all means, go for it.
So background reading that might be entertaining.

https://www.oah.org/tah/issues/2018/nov ... -politics/

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... n-00057736

https://time.com/5932014/donald-trump-c ... upporters/

I'm much impressed by that Politico piece.

Here's a useful paragraph and article.

A recent Gallop poll demonstrates that only about 60 percent of Americans would vote for a qualified atheist and that only a few more would support a similarly capable Muslim. While these numbers have increased over time and differ greatly based on party affiliation, it is probable that many non-Christian potential candidates justify not running on the grounds of these numbers.

https://bigthink.com/the-present/congre ... -religion/

I can find individual responses to survey questions on senators' religious witnessing, but no site where they're all gathered in a comparable sense. That's been a frustrating search.

LarsMac wrote: ↑Mon Oct 10, 2022 9:27 am So, lately we have been seeing a new but familiar face getting a lot of attention.
Retired General Micheal Flynn is stirring up a lot of the Fright Wing loonies,

I quite like this exchange from the Final Report: Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol, from https://january6th.house.gov/sites/demo ... mittee.pdf

Page 118:

Vice Chair Cheney: General Flynn, do you believe the violence on
January 6th was justified?
Counsel for the Witness: Can I get clarification, is that a moral
question or are you asking a legal question?
Vice Chair Cheney: I'm asking both.
General Flynn: The Fifth.
Vice Chair Cheney: Do you believe the violence on January 6th was
justified morally?
General Flynn: Take the Fifth.
Vice Chair Cheney: Do you believe the violence on January 6th was
justified legally?
General Flynn: Fifth.
Vice Chair Cheney: General Flynn, do you believe in the peaceful
transition of power in the United States of America?
General Flynn: The Fifth.

I believe that each respondent should be required to use the full official statement ,"Your honor, I respectfully invoke my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution on the grounds that answering questions may incriminate me."
Every time they respond. It may very likely be the only time in their sorry lives that they say something constitutional.