Skip to main content

The big news, obviously, in the blogosphere today is John McCain's surprise pick for the Republican veep nominee--a relative unknown by the name of Sarah Palin, whom--at least in the more conventional political circles--would appear to be a complete cypher.

Unfortunately, if one digs just a bit deeper, Palin is found to have some very interesting--and very disturbing--connections...among them, being potentially the first Assemblies-linked VP candidate and having a number of links to dominionist groups targeting kids via "bait and switch" evangelism.

Sarah Palin's connections that McCain doesn't want you to know about

There are quite a number of extremely troubling links between Sarah Palin and neopentecostal dominionists--enough that, in truth, she may be ultimately as much of a "dream candidate" for the dominionist movement as Mike Huckabee was.  Even worse, she's running in a manner that has been frighteningly successful for dominionist groups since the early 80's--specifically, as a "stealth candidate".

Palin's Assemblies linkage

The first link in and of itself is a doozy--and one of the most damning indeed. No less than the official newsletter of the Assemblies of God of Alaska promotes her proudly as one of the denomination's own, and she was actually feted at an official function of the Assemblies' Alaska District as recently as this year:

The opening night banquet of the 2008 Alaska District Council was honored to have Governor Sarah Palin address the delegates and guests. Governor Palin spoke of her appreciation for the Assemblies of God and requested that the Council pray for both her and the State of Alaska. Superintendent Ted Boatsman, who was Palin’s junior high pastor at Wasilla Assembly of God, along with Pastor Mike Rose of Juneau Christian Center, where Palin presently attends church when in Juneau, laid hands on the Governor and led the Council in prayer.

Palin, who was elected Governor in 2007, is Alaska’s youngest governor and the first female governor of the state. She just recently gave birth to her fifth child, Trig. Palin spoke of the faith challenge she faced when learning that Trig would be a Downs Syndrome child. However, she and her husband, Todd, believe that every child is a gift of God, deserving of life, and that God was asking them to accept His will for their lives. The Alaska District Council believes that the State of Alaska is blessed to have a woman of faith and courage as Governor.

A look at the home website of Palin's church tends to be revealing.  Among other things, a particular Assemblies buzzword associated frequently with Hillsong A/G and New Zealand Assemblies churches shows up ("Destiny", here, is a buzzword for "Joel's Army", and is being preferred even as the phrase "Joel's Army" is getting enough negative spin that even the Assemblies is now having to do some rather massive spin control); cell churches are promoted (of the same sort that are linked to short-term and longterm psychological damage and are among the most coercive tactics ever documented in spiritually abusive groups).  The church, like a number of other large Assemblies churches, is the center of a dominionist broadcast TV center whose programming is carried across multiple channels in Alaska.

In a trend that has been recently documented by no less than Southern Poverty Law Center (in its recent report on the Joel's Army movement), the church operates a Seven Project-esque targeted recruitment campaign aiming at teens (this is common across the Assemblies and across "Joel's Army" groups in general; fully a third of the documented national-level front groups operated by the Assemblies target teens).  

And...believe you me, Palin's church is definitely "Joel's Army".

Mike Rose, pastor of Juneau Christian Center (Palin's church), is noted to be connected with the "Third Wave Movement"--a movement in neopente dominionist circles that is the major theological home of "Joel's Army".  In fact, he's quite closely connected with Rodney Howard-Browne, a major (in fact, for some years, the major promoter) of "Third Wave" neopente dominionism, and actively promotes this insanity in his church:

  1. Mike Rose

Mike is an AOG pastor in Alaska's capital, who had Rodney Howard-Browne minister in his church four years ago. At that time, they had a congregation of 200, but over the last 4 years, they have seen it grow to 600 in a community of 35,000.

The format that Mike uses is one which gives a balanced approach to church life, allowing for worship and the Word, ministry to the unsaved as well as impartation of the Holy Spirit.

To do this, he has followed a fairly traditional Sunday morning worship service with worship, communion and preaching of the Word, as well as all the other activities which occur in our morning services, such as dedications and so on.

If there are two or three people who are perhaps crying or laughing uncontrollably, the ushers will gently lead them into the prayer room where they can continue to enjoy the presence of Jesus without affecting those around them.

However, he is also open to the possible occasions when the Holy Spirit will just sweep over the service and the majority of the people will be either laughing, crying or worshipping at one time.

His Sunday evening service generally lasts for three to four hours, compared to the morning one of around two hours. At the conclusion of the evening evangelistic endeavour, people are invited to open up their hearts and hunger for a fresh touch of the Spirit. It was during these times that the powerful manifestations will take place and, having observed what has been happening in our Adelaide meetings over the last few weeks, these times have a great similarity to the old time Pentecostal camp meeting or tarrying services where people received a fresh touch of God.

Mike encourages his people to hunger and has taught them along that line. He helped them to understand and develop a new sensitivity to the ways of the Holy Spirit. His observations were:

* You cannot sustain a move of the Spirit without hunger.

* Corrections need to be made from time to time.

* Don't just get fascinated by the move of God, but rather keep your eyes on Jesus.

* Mission giving and outreach evangelism should be a prominent part of this move and the churches which don't reach out soon dry up.

He encourages us not to hype it up and that there needs to be a continual emphasis on holiness and that only qualified people should lay hands on those who have come for prayer.

Mike is also an adviser on Rodney Howard-Browne's Revival Ministries committee, along with three or four other AOG pastors in the USA. He informed me that he had sat in over 110 of Rodney's meetings and been impressed by the lack of pressure and hype, but by the powerful anointing of the Spirit which accompanies this young man.

As to why Howard-Browne's involvement is distressing--well, this previous article should give some pointers, but suffice it to say that another notable church he's had close connections with is the very church I am a walkaway from--hence how I know some of this up close and personal.  

Some of the fun includes literal imprecatory prayers and curses against critics and literally accusing critics even within pentecostal circles of literal blasphemy against the Holy Spirit:

Rodney Howard-Browne gave this 'prophesy' last year at New Life Center:  'Do not compromise.  For if you compromise, you shall not only lose the anointing that I placed upon you, you shall lose your life.'"  [T.A. McMahon, "Experience-Driven Spirituality," The Berean Call, May 1995, page 4]
. . .
"I'm telling your right now," [Rodney Howard-Browne] hissed, "you'll drop dead if you prohibit what God is doing!"  Dramatically he gestured toward the crowd [at Melodyland Christian Center, Anaheim, CA, 1/17/95] and warned them
that those like me, who would dare to question that what he was doing was of God, had committed the unpardonable sin and would not be forgiven in this world or the next."  [Hank Hanegraaf, "Counterfeit Revival" (1997), page 22]

Bad news...but it doesn't stop there.

Palin's links to "Feminists" For Life, a deceptive anti-abortion group

As if the Assemblies links weren't enough (and between this diary and the stuff that has been reported re John Ashcroft--much less George W. Bush's consistent support for Assemblies frontgroups--that should be a pretty big damn danger sign right there!), there's still more to indicate Sarah Palin may have been put in as a "stealth dominionist".

Among other things, Palin explicitly promoted "teach the controversy" by calling for the misnamed "creation science" to be taught in public schools (as now well documented in Kitzmiller vs. Dover School District, it's known that "creation science" is nothing more and nothing less than a method of putting young-earth creationism in public schools).

It also appears that Sarah Palin is a member of a misnamed group called Feminists for Life.  FFL in fact engages in "cultural appropriation" of women's suffrage icons to promote a very woman-unfriendly agenda that--despite attempts to sound "not like those crazies in Operation Rescue"--would not only criminalise abortion but the IUD and hormonal birth control methods, and potentially everything outside the rhythm method (the term "abortifacient birth control" is a codephrase in the dominionist "pro-life" community for hormonal birth control--partly due to a unique urban legend claiming "the pill" and other hormonal birth control causes abortion and partly because of a unique definition of pregnancy beginning at conception rather than at implantation (the latter is what most mainstream OB/GYNs use) and thus making anything preventing implantation potentially "abortifacient").  

FFL promotes such fun bogosities as "post-abortion syndrome" (the idea that having an abortion will inevitably lead to PTSD and insanity), and promotes mandatory waiting periods and misinformation guidelines that can be insurmountable for poor or rural women--even those forced to make the most heartbreaking choice because of a nonviable pregnancy.  In fact, one of their biggest causes isn't feminist at all--they actively promote the idea that the best choice for women is to stay home as fulltime mothers, and it can be well argued that the only traditionally feminist viewpoint they really support is women's suffrage!

One of the big things FFL promotes is deceptive "pregnancy counseling centers"--where pregnant teens are forced to essentially listen to an altar call on how "abortionists want to murder their children" whilst a pee-stick test clears--and if she tests "yes", she gets a hard-sell to keep the child or to check herself into a dominionist-run "halfway house for teenage moms" where she will ultimately be forced to sign her kid over.  (Yes, there is an entire private adoption industry in the dominionist community--mostly focusing on adopting out the infants of poor teenage mothers who have been forced to give their kids up and who have been either scared into it or checked into such facilities by their parents.)

Ironically, FFL itself is rather a "stealth" organisation in and of itself--yes, even the dominionists admit this.  Interestingly, despite their claims of being more "moderate" than most anti-abortion groups, very few real solutions are offered on how they intend to fund such things (which can be boiled down to "CHOOSE TO BREED").

Palin's links with Campus Crusade frontgroups

Palin's linkages don't stop there.  In Kaylene Johnson's book Sarah: How a Hockey Mom Turned Alaska's Political Establishment Upside Down (2008, Epicenter Press) it's mentioned that Palin was head of the local Fellowship of Christian Athletes branch in her school--up to and including leading team prayers.

It is helpful to know a bit of FCA's past history to know why this is a matter of concern.  FCA is, in fact, a known frontgroup of the coercive dominionist group Campus Crusade for Christ--yes, the selfsame Campus Crusade that has such close links to the Assemblies of God that it can be described as a "conjoined twin" of the Assemblies and the same one documented as having links to an ever-widening prosyletisation scandal in our Armed Forces.  FCA also gets quite a lot of cash from de facto Assemblies funding-front Hobby Lobby--a chain, of note, that has bailed out a neopente university and has even funded paramilitary "Joel's Army" groups targeting teens.

The links between FCA and a particular Hobby Lobby frontgroup, Bearing Fruit Communications, are particularly close.  At least one member of Bearing Fruit's board of directors (T. Ray Grandstaff) is a former Senior VP for Fellowship of Christian Athletes.

Regarding FCA itself, the group has been linked to dominionism in numerous ways; they are well known for "bait and switch" evangelism (in fact, they and Athletes in Action are among the two groups most frequently banned from public school campuses due to bait-and-switch "altar calls" marketed as anti-drug talks to the school administration).  More info here.  (Such tactics are a favourite of dominionist groups explicitly targeting youth.) It's also well known (and, apparently, explicitly by design) that Fellowship of Christian Athletes rather aggressively "dominionist-ises" any team they are let into (this tends to be bad even within the NFL, but even more so within FCA groups run in colleges and high schools).

Of particular note, FCA has close links with the US Air Force Academy religious coercion controversies (and is but one of multiple Campus Crusade frontgroups documented by Military Religious Freedom Foundation as involved in military religious coercion scandals), and the ACLU has had to fight them since the 60's because of religious coercion (in particular, Jewish people tend to be targeted, according to the anti-cult group Rick Ross Foundation); in addition, it is explicitly supported by dominionist groups, and explicitly partners with other dominionist groups targeting youth (including Chi Alpha (an Assemblies of God frontgroup), Campus Crusade for Christ, and even scarier groups like "See You At The Pole" (infamous for, among other things, nailing people's names to crosses and "praying" over them to essentially curse people in the name of Christ to convert or suffer) and Council for National Policy).

And finally, the dominionists themselves like her

As expected, many if not most of the dominionist groups in the US have given explicit approval for Palin on her anti-abortion bona-fides alone--including Concerned Women for America, Focus on the Family, and a pack of the more extreme dominionist anti-abortion groups.

I'm not the only one to have noticed the rather extensive dominionist bona-fides--Pastor Dan over on Street Prophets has noted this as well.  Frederick Clarkson over on Talk to Action has also noted salutations from two other dominionist leaders--one being Kenneth Blackwell, who was the "dream candidate" of neopente dominionists in his home state (fortunately, he lost the gubernatorial election).  

Chip Berlet has also noted on Talk to Action a further endorsement from Eagle Forum--the oldest dominionist political group aside from "The Family" and the Assemblies-linked FGBMFI.

In addition, it would seem she may well have quite a bit of approval from dominionists in general--that is, if the barometer of the Texas GOP Convention is to be believed.  (The Texas GOP is one of the most thoroughly steeplejacked GOP conventions in the US; many of the official party platforms are indistinguishable from Constitution Party platforms.)  The Houston Chronicle reports:

"It's a slam dunk. I think that people who are concerned about 'How conservative is Mr. McCain' are now going to say, 'If he can make a choice of Sarah Palin, then he can be trusted with our conservative ideals,' " said delegate Cathie Adams, Republican National Committeewoman-elect and president of the Texas Eagle Forum.
. . .
"I always thought he needed to pick a woman," said Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman, former president of the Texas Federation of Republican Women. "I think Hillary Clinton's campaign stimulated a lot of interest among women voters, and I think this is going to hit a chord."

But Kaufman added: "I look forward to learning more about her." She also noted that Palin is considered to be against abortion rights, and McCain "thought he needed to satisfy that wing of the party."

Here's hoping this article starts shining a little bit of light on the subject--the last thing we need a literal heartbeat away from the Presidency is a ninja dominionist.

Originally posted to dogemperor on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:21 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip jar (106+ / 0-)

    Yeah, I know, it's been forever since I posted here--had to deal with some family issues, but all is good now. :3

    PLEASE disseminate this info widely--we need to do all we can to keep Palin from being successfully stealthed.

  •  I can say....nothing has united this site... (15+ / 0-)

    more than this tool Palin.

    Can't wait to see what Brian Williams has to say.

  •  You know these personal attacks against Palin (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    perro amarillo, arodb, keenekarl

    here is not helping Obama's message nor his candidacy. Believe me, the Obama camp is vetting every syllable, every nuance, every day she's been alive. If there is something to use against her, they will. But all this crap that delves into her mean spirited demeanor, eating moose, and all this other crap is crap. The troopergate thing maybe a killer. However, we're no better than the republicans it seems when it comes to destroying someone's character. She's inexperienced. She's not ready for the job. That's legitimate and we should all stick to it. Her policy stances isn't worth a hill of beans because it's Obama versus McCain, period.

    You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war..... Albert Einstein,

    by tazz on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:28:42 PM PDT

    •  I would have expressed it differently.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stranded Wind

      but your message is on target.  The more she is attacked, the more she will appear as a victim of Liberal hostility.

      And there is the infant with Downs syndrome.  This is a powerful image, and the ultimate loss would be to cause this woman emotional harm.

      Then, and only then, could this terrible choice be McCain's gain.

      •  Nah (11+ / 0-)

        We're the surrogates.  Nobody takes us seriously anyway.  We're making the attacks that the Obama campaign can't because it would make the candidate look bad.

        And I'm totally impressed with the dirt that this community has dug up in one day.  Makes Rove's 8 years of work on us look like a vacation.

      •  I disagree (26+ / 0-)

        To note a politician's Dominionist connections is not in the realm of personal attack. The Dominionist movement has specifically political ambitions that are subversive to the whole concept of America as we know it. This is a type of information we need to know.    

        I worked inside the Fed Gov (civil service) for 20 years, including the first several years of the Shrub administration. We saw more and more clearly unqualified individuals, but with apparent Dominionist sympathies (certain colleges, and past employment with some organizations, would seem to be a valid marker), placed into decisionmaking positions as time went on.

        Dominionism may not be something to make a big issue in the traditional media, because few are prepared to pay attention. But we do need to know the organizational connections and philosophies we are up against.  

        •  Yes I deplore the dominionist movement.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          the only question is how you combat it.  I wish that Obama could confront it, but he finds it necessary to damn near embrace it.  Or at least say the words that those who believe it can think that he does.

          This is a difficult issue.  It's good that we know about it, but it just may not be usable unless handled with care....or with courage.

          •  Complete mischaracterization of Obama (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            aitchdee, dogemperor, LihTox, keenekarl, vadasz

            I am an atheist humanist and spend much of my time online combating dominionism, creationism, and all forms of religious extremism. And to suggest that Obama is, in any way shape or form, "damn near embracing" dominionism is absurd.

            Embracing the power of faith in the lives of individuals is a completely different matter than embracing faith as an instrument of political power.

            Dominionists advocate the replacement of the US Constitution with Old Testament law.

            Can you point to any statement by Obama (a prominent Constitutional scholar), at any time, during his entire political career, where he has made any statement in support of such as view?

            I can point to many instances where he has explicitly rejected it.

            Dominionists advocate a Constitutional Amendment that states that the US is a Christian nation, and explicitly reject the very notion of the Separation of Church and State.

            Can you point to a single instance where Obama has expressed anything but opposition to such a political viewpoint? On the contrary, Obama has championed a rational, secularist (in the traditional meaning) approach to government, education and jurisprudence at every turn.

            I could go on and on (and did, originally, but deleted most of it), but, basically, your assertion reveals that you either:

            a) don't know much about dominionism, or

            b) don't know squat about Obama.

            Which is it?

            One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

            by RandomActsOfReason on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 12:15:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  It's war (9+ / 0-)

      John McCain: noun + verb + P.O.W.
      Sarah Palin: hates polar bears

      by The Dead Man on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:42:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And my clarification. (15+ / 0-)

      First off, I actually think this sort of thing is BIGGER than Obama, BIGGER than the Democratic Party, dare I say it, bigger than America.  Dominionism, and religious extremism in general, is something that legitimately does threaten Western civilisation in the long run, and it is a problem that America has unfortunately exported to much of the world with tragic effect.

      And no, for the record, I don't think one politician can cure this ill--in the case of America alone, it's going to require a long national detox probably taking decades.

      That said--I do think it important to reveal Palin's dominionist linkage, precisely because she is running essentially as a stealth candidate.  This is, unfortunately, a tactic dominionists have taken since the early 80s to essentially steeplejack the GOP (and things like school boards and governor's mansions and Congressional seats), and has been successful enough that they're not likely to stop.

      Oh, and lest one think it's a problem for the GOP alone, there are some folks who've set their sights on targeting the Democratic Party for steeplejacking, too.  (It's my hope that "forewarned is forearmed" here and we can be far more resistant to this.)

      Hell, I've criticised Obama's naming choices before on "faith based" outreaches and I plan on voting for the guy. :D  I'm pretty well equal-opportunity here on this. :D

      I think that an active attempt by the GOP to run someone who is very deeply connected in the dominionist community, but whom would outwardly appear to be a cypher, is something we need to pay attention to and publicise.  (It's in part because this was NOT something people were aware of and publicised in the 80s that we ended up with the miserable years of Reagan and Bush the Elder.  We can't afford to make that mistake again, IMHO.)

      I survived 26 years of madness living under the theocracy that Palin et al would love to create.  I find no need to be concilatory.  I care too damn much for the country to see that happen.

      •  Save the GOP (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dogemperor, kurt, vadasz

        Even if they aren't successful in steeplejacking the Democratic party, we still need to see the GOP purged of dominionism, because who's to say whether some OTHER loony faction might take over the Democratic party one of these days?  If you think that can't happen, just ask the few remaining actual conservatives in the Republican party.  America needs at least two functioning political parties.

    •  As a Christian (12+ / 0-)

      Palin worries me because of her Dominionist views. Those people aren't ordinary Christians. They're radicals. They're the people the documentary "Jesus Camp" was made about.

      More people need to understand that.

      We sink or swim together.

      by BrighidG on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 06:31:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Monica Goodling (8+ / 0-)

      Do you think Monica Goodling's religion, education, and affiliations were irrelevant to her performance in the Justice Department?

      Don't you think it would have been helpful to know ahead of time that she would base her hiring practices on ideology? Or would digging for that information just have been mean, baseless attacks not helping the cause?

    •  apparently you don't know (7+ / 0-)

      exactly how dangerous the Dominionists are.

      You need to read a bunch of Dogemperor's diaries on this subject; there's enough there to turn into a book and it's all very well researched.  

      This is not about idle personal attacks or whatever.  This is about someone who is involved in a coercive cult that is as extreme as the Taliban and has been successfully infiltrating government to a degree that puts Scientology's attempts at infiltrating the IRS to shame.  Go look up the stuff by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation on what's been happening in the Air Force, for example.  It will scare you s---less.  For real.  

      Look, if someone was a member of the actual Taliban, we'd darn well say it was relevant.  The AoG is the same thing but in Christian garb.  

      Palin's involvement sure is relevant to what will happen if she sets foot in the White House.  

    •  Exposing Dominionism isn't "crap" (4+ / 0-)

      I suggest you read up on the term before you dismiss this as "crap".

      If a vice presidential candidate is actively involved with a movement that overtly and explicitly seeks the overthrow of our Constitutional form of government, and its replacement with a system based literally on Old Testament law, that is relevant to a discussion about his or her suitability to serve in public office - and the judgment of the presidential nominee who chose her.

      "Never Again" applies here. Dominionism is not just another flavor of faith, it is a dangerous, revolutionary political ideology that is incompatible with - is, in fact, explicitly in opposition to - the basic notions of government by, of and for the people.

      This is not about her religion. This is about her politics.

      One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

      by RandomActsOfReason on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 12:07:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thankyou dogemperor, (10+ / 0-)

    I'll be reading your excellent work here in detail later, just wanted to say thankyou for now and it sure doesn't surprise me.

    She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

    by Winter Rabbit on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:28:53 PM PDT

  •  Tipped and Rec'ed. (9+ / 0-)

    We need to make sure everyone knows the truth about McSame's VP choice. Not only is she unfit for office, her beliefs and stances on the issues are extremist and dangerous.

    We need to bring her down just as hard as we would have Mittens or anyone else.

    Like birding? Visit The Left Wing Sunday evenings.

    by Texas Revolutionary on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:30:12 PM PDT

  •  With the amount of stuff we have found today... (7+ / 0-)

    I have no doubt next week will be found an astounding amount of evidence of why she is unfit for VP.

  •  You don't have to convince me about this problem. (5+ / 0-)

    but let's take a critical look.  And I am accepting everything you say on face value.

    First, is this a battle that the Democrats want to engage in.  Personally, I would say, yes, but that's ot the party's position.

    During the Rick Warren faith discussion, it was Obama who went further than McCain in being closer to the dominionists.  His words were this (closely remembered)

    I will try to do God's will if only I (my failing, ego etc) do not get in the way.

    Obama is under the Gun as being a liberal secularist, and/or a Muslim. (logic doesn't count in these discussions)

    So, while this information adds to my rejection of McCain/Palin it just may be that the party may not be able to use it at all.

    •  My feeling is (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      G2geek, dogemperor, LihTox, kurt

      that McCain is actually much less religious than Obama.  His religion is more for show, he's more concerned with power.  McCain knows that the only way left open to him for a chance at the WH is to openly court these people.

      We are not princes of the earth, we are descendants of worms. Nobility must be earned. - PZ Myers

      by Mercuriousss on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:43:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Who should fight it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dogemperor, kurt

      Maybe Obama shouldn't fight this battle personally, but we the grassroots should spread the word around.  It's our job to say what the party can't, to pull the Overton window back where it belongs.

      dogemperor, what would make this diary more useful in spreading the word would be an early link to some sort of Dominionist FAQ.  Someone new to this will start reading and think "So what if she's a member of the Assemblies of God?"  I haven't followed your work, but I assume that this is merely one of a series of diaries on the subject; however, a self-contained article on Palin's Dominionist connections would be very useful indeed.

      •  Lots of folks are working on this. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LihTox, kurt, TickToaster

        Unfortunately, the subject of neopente dominionism (much less dominionism in general, much less Christian Nationalism in general) is a big enough subject that it can--and has--ended up in several books.  (I'm in the planning stages of a book myself, as are a few other researchers--Troutfishing here on DK being among them.)

        There is an attempt to do an ongoing wiki on dominionism (at Dark Christianity, a Livejournal community), and Talk to Action is also working on some's a big enough subject that a single FAQ isn't going to cover it all, unfortunately.

        My attempts in this journal--which in and of themselves could constitute a hefty book at this point!--are pretty much designed as a "Neopente Dominionism 101" for people unfamiliar with the subject--and so far, this is about as much as I've been able to boil it down to a "Dominionism for Dummies" level. :P

        •  I appreciate it (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          but there's gotta be a way to boil it down, if you want your average Joe to learn about it: my mom e.g. is not going to sit down to read one or more books about dominionism.  We need a pamphlet: what they believe, who they influence, what are their tactics.

          Tall order, I know, but vital.

          I admire your stomach for fishing through all this; I think it makes a lot of us sick to dwell upon for very long.

  •  How will she handle science issues? (19+ / 0-)

    It seems likely that McCain-Palin would take the same approach to science that Bush has: if a 'scientific conclusion' contradicts her favorite scripture, it must be suppressed, no matter how much public money (and work, and scientific process) has gone into it.  

  •  Jeebus, that was a scary diary (9+ / 0-)

     I can understand the "walkaway" thing, dog. good call.

    I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. -Galileo

    by Kordo on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:37:30 PM PDT

  •  Chip Berlet rocks! (9+ / 0-)

    You mention Chip Berlet ... I saw him present in Nebraska a few years back and I'm delighted to see that he is now a Kossack.

  •  The dissemination has begun (7+ / 0-)

     Terrible, nasty, no good diary here - I'm spreading it around :-)

  •  Wow! (6+ / 0-)

    Lot of work went into this post, dogemperor.  Rec'ing it up.  Seriously: nice work and very thorough.

    Scary people.  Scary times.  Where's Buffy the Vampire Slayer when you need her!  

  •  turnabout is fair play (5+ / 0-)

    If Obama has to endure guilt-by-association attacks based on Rev. Wright, then I don't see why we shouldn't inquire into Governor Palin's church and what it says about her . . .

    . . . that she's craaayzy.  

    •  20 years... (0+ / 1-)
      Recommended by:
      Hidden by:

      is a little more than guilt-by-association! That's an outright friendship.

      •  God Damn CaptainKidd (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dogemperor, browneyes

        I really despise dope smoking Republicans, the all the gay Republicans, they're such hypocrites.

        "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." John Lennon

        by trashablanca on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 05:52:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  For the record (0+ / 0-)

          I am no Rebulican, I do smoke dope, I have no problems with gays or their rights, I am pro-choice, etc. I don't toe ANY party line!! I consider myself a fiscal conservative and a social libertarian...if you are a consenting adult and what you want to do doesn't hurt anyone or infringe on anyone else's rights, then, by all means, knock yourself out!!

          •  So why did you insist on that stupid line (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            of attack out of the gate?  Did you think it would be productive??  

            A hard on doesn't count as personal growth...

            by browneyes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 06:22:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Didn't attack (0+ / 0-)

              Made an observation and then a comment...I went into attack mode when my comment was deleted for no apparent reason. And when I say apparent reason, I mean the following: I didn't use profanity, I didn't personally attack anyone on this site, I was not confrontational, the was no libel/slander to my comment, etc.

              I am all for removing a post that violates any of the above standards, but removing my comment simply because I disagree is not only unconscionable, it is un-American!

              •  Is this the one you're referring to? (5+ / 0-)

                WTF!! I am no fan of the Pentecostals (unfortunately I learned about them, first-hand, growing up), but how can you attack her church, with a straight face, after the Rev. Wright fiasco. If we were going on church and religious affiliation as a litmus test on the worthiness of a presidential/VP candidate, The Annointed One should have been THROWN OUT of the race long ago. As much as I don't like them, I never heard any pentecostal say "God damn America", but Obama's preacher did...and he sat there and listened to it for 20 years. Maybe we should shed ALOT more light on the church thing and let America decide. MCCAIN/PALIN '08!!

                I'm a Trusted User.  I can see hidden comments.  

                It looks pretty darned inflammatory to me.  Anointed one?  Come on.  You know that would get a lot of shit stirred!

                A hard on doesn't count as personal growth...

                by browneyes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 07:04:44 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Your point? (0+ / 0-)

                  So I took a shot at is that any different than what EVERY commenter here does...besides the fact that I didn't take a jab at the SAME candidate as everyone here?!? I still didn't use profanity, nor did I attack anyone personally here at this site.

                  In this thread, the original comment I replied to was titled "turnabout is fair play". Well, is it or isn't it?

                  •  My point, as per the FAQ's, (3+ / 0-)

                    is that this is a Democratic site.  We have a number of views here, ranging from very liberal, to progressive to left of center like me.  We also have some conservatives here.  

                    Kos welcomes all points of view.  This is a community site.  WE are the community.  It's just not appreciated for someone to come in and blast the Democratic nominee.  Yeah, there is criticism of Obama, but without an ounce of credibility, it's seen as an insult.

                    A hard on doesn't count as personal growth...

                    by browneyes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 07:15:42 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Without an ounce of credibility? (0+ / 0-)

                      Were you referring to Obama or me?!? Just kidding.

                      Look, all I am saying is that, despite his obvious shortcomings, I didn't dismiss Obama within a few hours of his announcement to run for president and I don't think it shows much 'credibility' on your part to do that to Palin in her run for VP. I have definite reservations about her religious affiliation (as I said, the first part of my life I was forced to go to an AOG church and it sucked). But as with any candidate, it ALWAYS comes down to more than one issue.

                      Truth be told, I don't like McCain much either. He has a few redeemable qualities (as does Obama), but if I counted them, I don't think I would need any more than one hand for each candidate.

                      Judging by some of the posts I have read here in the last few months, I have a feeling that many of the readers, and probably a few of the bloggers too, feel the same way I do. WHY, OH WHY CAN'T WE GET A CANDIDATE (on either side of the aisle) THAT WE WANT TO VOTE FOR INSTEAD OF VOTING FOR SOMEONE BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE WHO THEY ARE RUNNING AGAINST!

                      I know I have ALOT of differences with ALOT of people on this site, but can anyone back me up on this one point??

                      I doubt it, but was worth a try.

                      •  Well, you obviously don't know me. (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        dogemperor, RandomActsOfReason

                        That's ok.  I'm nobody famous.  I have a few friends here, that's all.  ;-)

                        I and a number of others have not outright dismissed Ms. Palin.  She's too conservative for my taste overall, but she does have admiral qualities.  And I do think that Obama is going to have to do more ground work than I had previously thought.

                        I voted for Bush.  Yep, I admit it.  My brother is a decorated Iraq war vet, wounded in combat.  I am no longer a fan of this administration.  Haven't been for quite some time.

                        Barack Obama is a positive candidate.  He may not be my ideal candidate, but no one is.  I think he'll bring a positive change.  I'm just sick of the gutter politics.  He hasn't rolled in the gutter, even when he was dared to in the primaries.  That is the most admirable thing about him.

                        A hard on doesn't count as personal growth...

                        by browneyes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 07:37:04 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Uh, she had admirable qualities, too! (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          dogemperor, RandomActsOfReason

                          Sorry, it's the vodka.  :-)

                          A hard on doesn't count as personal growth...

                          by browneyes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 07:42:48 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Fair enough (0+ / 0-)

                          When you lay it out there like that, I can respect your view and agree to disagree.

                          And just so you know, I voted for Clinton in '96 and for Bush in 04 I was so disgusted with the whole thing, I abstained because I just couldn't bring myself to vote for Bush or Kerry. I kicked around the idea of voting for Hillary and have been kicking around the idea of voting for Bob Barr (I tend to be more libertarian anyway). Biden didn't do anything for me and I need to do more research on Palin. With Hillary out of the race and Bob Barr having less than a snowflake's chance in Hell of winning, I have to say that I am tentatively on the McCain/Palin bandwagon...whether I stay there or not, only time will tell.

                          I don't want to be labeled a troll, but if I am because I have different opinions on here, then I will wear it as a badge of honor.

                          You seem to be a worthy the very least you didn't sink down to the level of some of your fellow commenters (I won't name names, but all you have to do is look) by calling me vulgar names and just writing me off as stupid which is, all too often, the M.O. around here.

                          •  I would love to discuss issues sometime (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            dogemperor, RandomActsOfReason

                            if you have the opportunity.  I'm usually around these here parts somewhere.

                            I think you may be surprised, when there is less hostility and labels are stripped away, many of us (including you, I'm sure) have much more in common than at first glance.

                            It may not seem so in many candidate diaries, but if you visit an issues diary, you'll see that there are various opinions here, and all are welcome.

                            Enjoy your weekend, and I look forward to engaging you in the future.    

                            A hard on doesn't count as personal growth...

                            by browneyes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 08:17:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  Technically, Captkidd420, Palin is not making (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:

                        a "run for VP."

                        She has been anointed by handlers and controllers, advisers and managers in the McCain campaign and in the Bush administration, to serve as McCain's VP pick.

                        She has accepted their offer.

                        She is now officially the Republican vice-presidential candidate, who is running with John McCain to try to keep the White House in GOP hands.

          •  if you're really libertarian, you'd read up on (5+ / 0-)

            Dominionism and recognize that it's as dangerous to individual freedom as Marxist-Leninist communism.  

            The commies are atheists, but the Domnionists are theocrats.  See also life under the Taliban in Afghanistan.  These people do not believe in live and let live, personal choices in religion, etc.  They want to impose their extremist cultism from sea to shining sea.  

            Go back and read all of Dogemperor's stuff, it's solidly researched and there's enough to turn into a book.

            BTW, progressive libertarian here.  Since about age 9 when I first learned about eminent domain and went ballistic about it.  

  •  You know... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dogemperor, trashablanca, browneyes

    I love politics.  I worked on the hill for years, I post on this site, and I follow the national scene closely.

    And, sorry to say, none of these "scandals" surrounding Palin are really sticking with me.  If this is the best we've got, we need another tact.  If I'm bored w/ them, I don't see how they are going to mean anything to the low-info voters.


    The Lone Wolf, climbing up trees, pulling down hate...and running with 0'Biden in '08! Protect the Polar Bear...they need the tip of the iceberg.

    by BraveheartDC on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 06:32:50 PM PDT

    •  I don't think that the trooper-gate scandal (4+ / 0-)

      will go anywhere.  If anything, it makes her look really tough on domestic violence.  I think the only reason she's being "investigated" is because she pissed off the Republican party good ol' boys in Alaska.

      A hard on doesn't count as personal growth...

      by browneyes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 06:37:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dogemperor, trashablanca, browneyes

        When even Olbermann concedes there's not much to troopergate, you know it wont have much legs.

        When I was a prosecutor, I was in DV court for a while.  If all that happened to this loser trooper was that he lost his job, he got off easy as far as I'm concerned.

        The Lone Wolf, climbing up trees, pulling down hate...and running with 0'Biden in '08! Protect the Polar Bear...they need the tip of the iceberg.

        by BraveheartDC on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 06:40:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Misuse of office for "Good" (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dogemperor, LihTox

        is still misuse of office. Sure the guy might have done some actionable stuff SEVERAL years ago and he was called on it but not fired...and Palin was only able to possibly get back at him AFTER she became governor. And maybe the ex-brother-in law deserved to become an ex trooper...But could it have been done less like a small town politician nudge-nudge wink, back scratch or else approach...EVEN FOR A "GOOD" cause. There is no excuse for double standards here... an apparent tendency to politicize personal wishes...too much of than with BushCo we need more of petty NeoNixonian manipulation and world view...?

        Pogo & Murphy's Law, every time. Also "Trust but verify" - St. Ronnie

        by IreGyre on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 04:05:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  straight outta the Chimperor playbook is right. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          That's not change.

          That's more of the same.

          The trooper is undoubtedly a mouth-breathing loser.  His boss or superior - the target of the gubner's office - seems to have been following procedure.

          Because if she's this concerned about EVERY case of domestic violence - and not the ones that affect her personally - I'll vote for her skinny azz.


          S. Palin: What is it exactly the VP does every day? S. Colbert: Easy. All you do is break ties in the Senate and shoot old guys in the face

          by tinfoilhat on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 04:37:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Troopergate is not food for pundits and lawyers.. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dogemperor's material for comedians. It's a wacky low-rent soap opera full of colorful characters and ripe for mocking. Enjoy the antics of Sarah Palin and her dysfunctional family!

    •  Dominionism is not just another scandal (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dogemperor, LihTox, TickToaster

      I urge you to read up on it.

      It is hard not to provoke accusations of violating Godwin's law on this one.

      Do you not think that, if (and I am not suggesting that in any way shape or form it has been proven that Palin is a Dominionist - we are arguing over whether it is worth investigating in the light of what we do know) a vice presidential candidate turns out to:

      a) believe in the overthrow of our Constitutional government - including, explicitly the entire Bill of Rights - and its replacement with a theocracy based on literal interpretation of Old Testament Law;

      b) be actively involved with organizations that overtly counsel infiltration of our government by its followers, counseling them to hide their "true" beliefs while subverting our democratic process;

      c) is his or herself hiding such relationships and beliefs;

      that a discussion about it is irrelevant scandal-mongering?

      Please Google dominionism and read.

      We are not talking about her serving on the same board of an unrelated organization where a Dominionist served as a board member.

      We are talking about active involvement in a movement that counsels covert subversion of our democracy.

      The American public has rejected candidates with such ideology before - even today's GOP has consistently rejected known Dominionists.

      The fact that you worked on the hill for years, and yet shrug off dominionism is itself quite alarming.

      Sorry it that "bores" you.

      One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

      by RandomActsOfReason on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 12:33:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oh, BTW, DogEmperor.. (3+ / 0-)

    I'm sorry your diary was hijacked by a stupid troll.  And that I got sucked in.  It's the best I've seen on Palin.

    A hard on doesn't count as personal growth...

    by browneyes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 07:06:15 PM PDT

    •  Eh, it's ok :3 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Not your fault--alas, 'tis the season for the poor trolls to come out, especially since the carnicerias and the Indian restaurants selling curry goat aren't open. :P

      •  Tacos good, hypocrisy baaaad! (0+ / 0-)

        I apologize to the author if I came off sounding like a troll, I certainly did not intend to. I just found it strange for the left to be in attack mode and scream bloody murder for the right bringing out the Rev. Wright scandal a few months ago, and then turn around and do almost the same thing to McCain's new VP candidate. The only difference is the right was attacking the minister/church and the left is attacking an entire denomination (not that either don't deserve it, but I am just saying)

        And BTW, don't know of many Indian joints around here but there is a carniceria up the street that serves one helluva taco plate...YUM!

        •  A difference (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dogemperor, spacecadet1, TickToaster

          Rev. Wright was criticized for specific comments that he made: what he SAID.  The Dominionists are being criticized for their agenda: what they are DOING.  Wright is one guy.  The Dominionists are a large movement who have infiltrated the Air Force etc etc.  I think there's a big difference there, though that's just my opinion.  Let's also see if Palin publicly criticizes and distances herself from the Dominionist movement.

  •  Oh no (0+ / 0-)

    she's devoutly religious. How we actually have anything of substance on her yet? If we beat this drum we're going to be dismissed. I've also read where some are trying to claim Palin's youngest child is actually her daughters. We need to be taken seriously here folks and this sure the hell ain't the way to do it!

    •  when "devoutly religious" (9+ / 0-)

      involves right-wing extremist Dominionism, that's substance enough that any informed person should be frightened at the very notion that this person could become President.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 08:25:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  more than frightened, alizard... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        alizard, dogemperor, tommymet

        ...scared s---less.  

        A heartbeat away from the presidency.  

        If McCain dies before he finishes his term, which is entirely possible given his age, it's going to be "one nation under (the Assemblies of) God."  And at that point it's time to start considering where to seek asylum.  

        •  entirely possible? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          G2geek, dogemperor

          I'd bet on it, even if Palin's backers don't decide to help the process along.

          Get your passport renewal paperwork in early, don't wait for November.

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 04:04:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY. (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          alizard, G2geek, LihTox, TickToaster

          In fact, to be honest--and this is an area I've not written on so far, because this is an area I am honestly hoping it's just PTSD kicking up--I honestly have to wonder if she was nominated precisely because there's been a thought that McCain is likely to kick the bucket before completing his term (if he were to be elected president). :P

          •  'been a thought'? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            G2geek, dogemperor

            My guess that there not only has been such a thought, but that it's been carefully nurtured by the "Insane" McCain campaign people.

            The "Maverick" thing seems to have damaged McCain among extremists offended by the very idea that a Republican might have a thought independent of Bush and too stupid to realize that regardless of what "Insane" says, he votes as he's told.

            A future "President Palin" is just what's needed to get the leadership of the crazies on board.

            Of course, unless they can fix things so Sarah Palin doesn't have to campaign, they're going to have to find some way to control press questions well enough to ensure the public doesn't discover that she's about as sane as another famous cultist we call Tom Cruise.

            Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

            by alizard on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:27:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Whatever the reason, it's very bad for McCain. (0+ / 0-)

            I can't believe he just picked her on a whim. Somebody suggested it to him. But I guarantee he does not understand her AoG connnection, or what it means. The old McCain would get very mad once he figured it out. The new McCain seems to be a zombie. McCain's body will still be breathing in four years, but he might not be competent to do much of anything, if he is slipping into dementia. He's still a huge problem for the dominionists, and it wouldn't be easy to get rid of him because he'll have good days sometimes where he seems ok. (Don't worry too much, Obama is our next president for sure!)

            One wedge issue for dominionists is whether women should work outside the home or not. Does their definition of "Feminist" in "Feminists for Life" mean "a woman who has a job at all"? A prolife person should be wondering who will actually raise her new baby. In my opinion you can really do a lot with down's syndrome children these days, but it requires constant love and trust in the mom-baby relationship, and she's obviously choosing to reject that or else she'd be nursing while giving speeches. She will have to address this in her campaign, but I doubt that she will go there. It is, however, killing that baby's developmental potential.

            In a democracy, everyone is a politician. ~ Ehren Watada

            by Lefty Mama on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 10:52:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  this isn't just "devoutly religious" (6+ / 0-)

      any more than being a fanatical Moonie is just "devoutely religious".

      This is about membership in a coercive cult group that has been expanding its influence in US politics since before the days when Phyllis Schafley (sp?) was on a rant against equal rights for women.  

      If you haven't read Dogemperor's disaries on Dominionism, I'd seriously suggest you do so now.  There's enough there to write a book, all of it solidly researched.

      Caution: have a tranquilizer or two available, you'll need them to get to sleep that night.  This dominionist stuff is scarier than a street gang doing drive-by shootings in your neighborhood.  

  •  It's a culture war (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    G2geek, dogemperor, Kimball Cross

    McCain with his maverick (there is a ranch and there are cows...) imagery chooses someone whose culture is beauty pageants, moose stew and fundamentalism.  All to combat the sophisticated world traveler image of Obama & Biden.  I wonder whether Palin has ever even been to New York.  Bill Clinton is the expert at fighting these kinds of culture wars.

    •  i hope you're right (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dogemperor, Kimball Cross, LihTox

      re. "Bill Clinton is the expert at fighting these kinds of culture wars."

      Thank goodness he's on-side with Obama now, 100%.  

      He & Hillary certainly showed that they are ferocious fighters, much to the dismay of many of us around here during the primaries.  But we need that willingness to take off the gloves, and especially when it comes to fighting something that fits to a T, Hillary's comment many years ago about "a vast right-wing conspiracy."  

      Dominionism is exactly that: a vast right-wing conspiracy.  And worse, it's a coercive cult movement right up there with the Moonies, and almost as extreme as the Taliban.

      Keeping her out of the White House belongs in the "fighting for your life" department.  If McCain dies and she takes the oath, she will make good on overturning Roe, and on overturning Griswold (contraception) as well.  And that will be just the beginning.  

  •  Excellent diary as always. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dogemperor, Mercuriousss

    And very quick yet thorough research.

    I own half a house- it's a duo.

    by EsnRedshirt on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 09:14:43 PM PDT

  •  Thanks d/e (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    G2geek, dogemperor

    I read something about Palin being AoG in another thread, and immediately went looking to see if you had posted anything.  As always, you're great at tying it all together.  

    PS:  I recently found an old copy of "The Cross and the Switchblade" (remember that really lame movie?) and was a bit surprised to see it was written by an AoG pastor.  

  •  rec it up, people! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dogemperor, Mercuriousss

    This needs to get on the rec list!

    I can haz sound economic policy?

    by Isara on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 09:32:33 PM PDT

  •  Greetings, lizardoids. (5+ / 0-)

    Here comes Chucky (wingnut site warning) smearing our good Daily Kos diarist thus:

    Of course, the Kos Kids are first out of the gate with a massive smear attack on Sarah Palin: Daily Kos: Sarah Palin: Dominionist Stalking Horse.

    Isn't ironic, dontcha think, 'cuz in the thread right before this, Chucky has this to say (wingnut site warning):

    LGF readers are probably aware that I am no creationist; in fact, I am strongly opposed to the teaching of "intelligent design" or "creation science," or any other name the advocates for creationism concoct in their relentless quest to promote pseudo-science.

    So I was disturbed to learn of Sarah Palin’s apparent support for creationism. However, as I posted in a comment earlier, she does not appear to be the fanatical type who wants to force or sneak the teaching of creationism into public school science classrooms.

    Denial ain't just a river in Egypt, Chucky.  You do know about the Wedge Strategy, don't you?  Google for "cdesign proponentsists" sometime while you're at it.  And get your head out of the sand.  

    Osama has killed his thousands, and Bush his tens of thousands.

    by Sura 109 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:09:00 PM PDT

    •  we need to go to LGF and let them know... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dogemperor mistaken they are about this one.  

      And we need to do it politely but firmly and with solid facts.  

      •  Chucky don't allow no Durn Libruls® in here (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        You've never been to LGF, have you?  Registration is open about 15 minutes every week, and anyone who dissents from the party line gets his account swiftly block.

        Osama has killed his thousands, and Bush his tens of thousands.

        by Sura 109 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 07:46:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  then do it subtly. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I've read a bit of stuff on LGF.  The guy in charge seems to at least be pro-science and anti-creationist.  Therein lies a crack into which a large wedge can be driven.

          For example:  "...we need to strengthen science eduction, otherwise the ChiComs* and the Russkies will have bases on the moon while we're teaching future astronomers that the red shift is God testing their faith..."

          That kind of stuff will fly.  Take it from this oldschool conservative (Eisenhower not Bush) turned progressive libertarian Democrat, it will fly.  And from there you can keep going:  science, science, science all the way, Silicon Valley Republican style, and zero tolerance for superstitious nonsense.  Build a track record and then come out saying that the idea that the Earth is 6,000 years old isn't a matter of religion, it's just plain false and you can't support a team that wants to go there.  


          *ChiComs: Chinese Communists.  Oldschool rightie word that today's righties will recognize.

  •  She's Just a Better Looking (3+ / 0-)

    Harriet Miers who won't last as long.
    Ideologically acceptable but totally

    I'm predicting she won't survive their

    If it really is a dog eat dog world, eventually you'll end up on the menu.

    by post rational on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 12:32:34 PM PDT

  •  TIME interview shows she is hiding affiliation (7+ / 0-)

    What's your religion?


    Any particular...?

    No. Bible-believing Christian.

    What church do you attend?

    A non-denominational Bible church. I was baptized Catholic as a newborn and then my family started going to non-denominational churches throughout our life.

    "Bible-believing" and, in particular, "Bible church" are codewords for fundamentalist literal interpretation and are used primarily by Dominionists.

    (every Christian believes in the Bible. Mainstream Christians don't commonly use those phrases, they are considered redundant.)

    As an explicit part of the Dominionist political agenda involves running for political office while hiding dominionist ties, this is a relevant topic for discussion. It goes directly to questions of integrity and of commitment to upholding the U.S. Constitution.

    A true Dominionist would be unable to fulfill the oath of office required by every public official.

    One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

    by RandomActsOfReason on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:25:04 PM PDT

    •  Sorry, forgot link to TIME interview: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

      by RandomActsOfReason on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:25:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yup, she's definitely stealthing. (6+ / 0-)

      Not only that, but there's been apparently an attempt to whitewash her Wikipedia entry similarly.

      Of note, "stealth Assemblies" congregations will often advertise themselves falsely as "independent" or "non-denominational" or "evangelical" and will only disclose their true denominational affiliation (Assemblies of God) to other members--it often takes looking at things like district lists of affiliated churches or district or national Assemblies of God newsletters/magazines to find the true denominational affiliation.

      (Sometimes you can find their affiliation by finding an Assemblies frontgroup like Royal Rangers or Virtuous Women there, but they're cottoning on to this too, so district newsletters tend to be more reliable as well as Assemblies-published directories of churches meant for members.)

      As she's a member of a pretty archetypical "stealth Assemblies" congregation (listed in internal A/G documents as Assemblies, promotes itself outwardly as a nondenominational "bible church" or "charismatic church", is likely promoted internally as Assemblies to its own members with advisements to not let this out to others, explicit attempts even in the website to hide denominational affiliation), I'm not shocked she's trying to stealth her own denominational affiliation as well (she is pretty much running as the archetypical "ninja dominionist" candidate, after all!).  It's an extremely common tactic in the Assemblies, unfortunately, partly because they know they have (very well deserved) bad press and partly because this is a tactic common to coercive religious groups in general (cref. the Scientology "personality tests").

      •  If she is so stealth... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dogemperor, spacecadet1

        ...I wonder if MCCAIN knows about it?  Their vetting process didn't seem to be very thorough.

      •  Is there a resource... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        ...where one could look up AoG affiliations of particular churches on the internet?

        Thanks much, btw, for the excellent diary, dogemperor!

        •  This gets difficult at times in practice. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lefty Mama, TickToaster

          One of the more reliable sources is with the Assemblies' own website (there's a link where you can look up local churches), but again, with the "stealth Assemblies" churches this can get problematic.

          The issue is, there are Assemblies-affiliated churches that do try very hard to hide their denominational affiliation--you almost have to do a search on the church name, or its pastor, and "Assemblies" or "assembly of God" in Google to find leads to follow up.  

          With some "stealth Assemblies" congregations, even this becomes problematic--sometimes you have to look for "statements of faith" that turn out to either be carbon copies or or redirects to the Assemblies' website, or one has to go digging in the "Ministries" section for known Assemblies frontgroups/"ministries" (like Royal Rangers/Missionettes, or Seven Project, or Youth Alive, or whatnot).

          Suffice it to say that it is not always easy to determine, and there are still some cases that it is still considered iffy as to whether the church is essentially in the process of "budding" from the Assemblies or is a very well stealthed Assemblies church (New Life Church in Colorado Springs would fit here--it's not officially listed in Assemblies directories, but there are numerous links to the Assemblies (some of which were revealed in the Harper's article "Soldiers of Christ" and the movie "Jesus Camp", and some which have come out in the fiascos re Ted Haggard's attempted "degaying") including a major base camp for the Royal Rangers' equivalent of Eagle Scouting--which do tend to point to the church being a bit more closely connected than the typical megachurch "Assemblies daughter" like Cornerstone Church (Hagee's congregation) or World Harvest church in Columbus.)

          And yes, this is unfortunately done very deliberately. :(

          One thing that has tended to be helpful is keeping an awareness in trends in naming "stealth Assemblies" churches--pretty much anything with "World Prayer Center", "World Harvest Center", "City Church" (of a neopentecostal or "nondenominational" bent), "Destiny" somewhere in the name, lots of references to "Fire" (like being "on fire" or "fresh fire", etc.), or "Christian Life Center" or "Christian Center" tend to point strongly to "stealthed" Assemblies congregations and "Assemblies daughters".

  •  Thanks for the great research and an eye-opening (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    diary that truly deserves to be on the rec list until everyone has had a chance to read it.

    "When the powerful say that the price was worth the blood and treasure, you can bet your ass it wasn't their blood, nor their treasure."

    by sceptical observer on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 03:22:57 PM PDT

  •  HA! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Don't just get fascinated by the move of God, but rather keep your eyes on Jesus.

    Don't think too hard about God... because then the entire thing starts to fall apart in a poof of logic.  Just keep your eye on the shiny prize of salvation, which will be provided no matter what you did in life or how many people you did it to, as long as you've declared yourself.

    Hey, kids!  Now you don't have to wait for the end of the Republic, you can vote for it!  McToast and Eggs '08!

    -9.25; -8.56 Just Say No to 'McToast and Eggs '08!' John McCain and the subprime mortgage crisis.

    by JAS1001 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 06:28:10 PM PDT

  •  So what? (0+ / 0-)

    Is this article suggesting that some religions are stupider than some others?

  •  Not Very Well Researched (0+ / 0-)

    Has any one noticed how unresearched this blog is??? In Juneau this blog is being circulated as something to laugh at....Juneau is not the largest city in Alaska...Juneau Christian Center has less than 100 members and only arouind 300 in attendance on Sunday mornings...they don't have a Sunday evening service....Palin is not a member of Juneau Christian Center and does not attend Church of the Rock in Wasilla...just knowing these few obvious errors makes me assume that the rest of the article is equally incorrect. Always check the facts for yourself.

    •  And my commentary. (0+ / 0-)
      1. Comparatively speaking in Alaska, and comparatively speaking for Wasilla's population (keep in mind this is a town of only about 9500 people or so), JCC pretty much is a megachurch, comparatively speaking.
      1. Palin has a documented history of having attended both churches.  (There are some recent reports she may be attending Wasilla Bible Church now, but this actually still counts as being in the "Assemblies family" of churches.)
      1. Never claimed Juneau is the largest city in Alaska (it's actually a relatively small city in Alaska, of note).
      1. Pretty much everything I've written has been backed up by other authors, including (among others) Frederick Clarkson, Chris Rodda, Bruce Wilson, and other researchers.  (This is, of note, despite explicit attempts to whitewash references pointing to Palin's connections--and they are extensive indeed--to neopente dominionist groups.)
      1. Palin has a record dating back from her early teens onward with involvement with multiple neopentecostal dominionist groups--many of which have a documented agenda, and had this agenda when Palin was an active member, of quite literally promoting the concept of a war with all non-dominionists.  This is something I can state with a fair amount of authority on--I am a survivor of the exact movement which Palin's churches have been involved in, and have seen it for myself.  (I will also note that this type of "God Warrior" theology is rife throughout the "Assemblies family" of neopentecostal denominations.)
  •  Not Very Well Researched....Again.... (0+ / 0-)

    Juneau Christian Center (JCC) is in Juneau...population 35,000....JCC has a membership of a little under 100 and Sunday attendance around 300...comparing the population of Wasilla doesn't make a small church in Juneau a one here in Juneau considers it a where close to the largest church even in this city....again...not very well researched.....

  •  Corrections (0+ / 0-)

    "Mike is an AOG pastor in the largest city in Alaska," would be a good idea to clip this part out of the blog then...incorrect info...

    Sarah has always said that she has attended Wasilla Bible Church for the past six years for the youth programs - it has never been associated with the Assemblies of God denomination and no one includes it as such....

    •  Noted. (0+ / 0-)

      OK, I've corrected the info re the size of Juneau, but there have been multiple reports indicating she attended Juneau A/G until fairly recently.  (Again, there is a strong probability that spin control is being conducted; I've seen this sort of thing pulled with Assemblies-linked candidates in past, especially if there's been some recent controversies like televangelist hanky-panky.)

      Re Wasilla Bible Church, I am conducting research on that--the church (and its parent church in Palmer, AK) do make it difficult to trace the theological history, but from what I have been able to uncover I am suspecting either "Assemblies daughter" or possibly part of the "Independent Christian Church" movement.  There are also clear signs of dominionist activity in both churches, which will be the subject of a followup post.

      I will also note, as a very minor aside, that one post is honestly sufficient to raise an objection. :3  Multiple posts don't get you anywhere but do tend to annoy folks.  (Not a slag, just a helpful hint for future.)

      •  A Few More Accuracies (0+ / 0-)

        Just thought that I should clarify on a few me - people are never annoyed by multiple corrections on these type of posts! The truth is why they're reading this anyway, right? Juneau Christian Center is in Juneau - about 550 miles away from Wasilla. It is not really a matter of Sarah attending up until recently. She doesn't live here, even though the mansion is here, she lives up north in Wasilla. During legislative session (which is held in Juneau, January-April for 90 days) she has attended Juneau Christian Center, but not a member. A medium size church for Juneau.

        There is really no such thing as an "Independent Christian Church" movement - there are non-denominational churches for all types of reasons - some broke away from a denomination - some started as non-denominational because they didn't want any oversight etc - but, that will be for another post!

        I'll try and explain neo-pentocolism and dominionism correctly as well. People can be so gullible on the 'net!

        •  Re corrections, clarifications, etc. (0+ / 0-)

          In regards to the "Independent Christian Church" movement, I'm afraid that in this case you are incorrect--there is actually a movement, and even an association, of "Independent Christian Churches" of this sort, and they do trend dominionist.  (This is, of note, completely aside from legitimately nondenominational churches not part of the neopentecostal or "Independent Christian Church" movement.)

          This is an area I do have some familiarity with, seeing as two of the largest dominionist churches in my state--both of which are major "power players" in political organisation, and one of which is the de facto FotF state affiliate headquarters in Lexington--are in fact part of this association and this movement, and the one close to my town (the largest megachurch in the state, Southeast Christian) has in fact had its tax-exempt status pulled in past for illegal electioneering.

          And in regards to dominionism and neopentecostal dominionism (I do this on a lot of posts, I'll go into detail here, just so there is no confusion):

          The sense in which I refer to "dominionism" is not restricted to Christian Reconstructionism, but also encompasses those particular varieties of "Christian nationalism" popular in neopentecostal circles (in particular, those churches and denominations descended from the Assemblies of God as well as the Assemblies itself) that do in fact promote versions of dominion theology as a reason for "Christian nationalism".  (Of note, the specific claim is different, some of the terminology has diverged, but both "Christian nationalism" and "name it and claim it"/"word faith theology" in neopente circles are in fact ultimately derived from dominion theology; I've done a writeup here on just how far back it goes.  One minor hint: "Latter rain" theology never really died in the Assemblies so much as was officially disclaimed whilst privately encouraged.)

          The major eschatological difference is that Christian Reconstructionists are postmillenial, whilst most neopente dominionists are premillenial (and rather than bringing in the Millenium, they see "Christian nationalism" as effectively a way of "naming and claiming" the country in a form of "spiritual warfare", also hold the US and Israel have dual statuses as "chosen nations", and fear damnation of the country if it is not "named and claimed").

          I use the term "neopente dominionism" to define the form of "Christian nationalism" common in these groups, and as a method of noting its distinctness from Christian Reconstructionism (the far better known variety of Christian Nationalism in the US); despite actually having a longer history (dating back to the late 20s-early 30s) there has been woefully little research done on "Christian Nationalism" within the neopente community, and I can count the major researchers in the field on one hand (and two have retired from active research, including Sara Diamond--whose book "Spiritual Warfare" was the first focusing on this distinct form of "Christian nationalism").

          As for neopentecostalism--pretty much every group traditionally considered neopentecostal is part of an identifiable family of denominations (including megachurches that essentially operate as one-church denominations, like World Harvest Church or Cornerstone Church) that ultimately derives from the Assemblies of God or descendant denominations (typically Foursquare or Vineyard via Calvary Chapel--itself a Foursquare descendant).  Even though chronologically the Assemblies and Foursquare would be considered "old pentecostals", theologically speaking they have more in common with neopentecostal groups than either non-Assemblies trinitarian pentecostal groups (such as pentecostal groups in the African-American community, Christian and Missionary Alliance, etc.) or "Oneness Pentecostals".

          In other words, here, I'm using less of a chronological and more of a "shared theology" definition.  Yes, I know this does tend to throw folks for a loop; unfortunately, outside of the apologetics community there just really hasn't been a whole lot of formal research or even informal research on this.

          I don't take offense at all at editing, certainly. :3  I did want to note where I am coming from--in a way, I'm writing about a field in which very little formal research or even standardised vocabulary exists, and what exists even within "Christian nationalist" communities within the Assemblies and "Bible churches" of this sort is in a constant state of flux (and largely by design).  Pretty much this is something I've done some consistent research on since even before I was able to fully walk away--at the beginning, for personal "exit counseling", and later as a way to explain to folks what I had been through and why I tend to have such a horror of "Christian nationalist" movements in general (neopente dominionist, Christian Reconstructionist, ultramontaine Catholic, or pure political "Christian nationalist" groups like Focus on the Family et al).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site