Hillary Clinton's rabid and continuous attacks against Reverend Wright are extraordinary and worthy of speculative analysis. Is she exposing her position on the religious spectrum: Is Hillary incapable of tolerating a liberal Christian like Rev. Wright because she herself is a rightwing religious fundamentalist at heart? Does this contention against Rev. Wright she is expressing clarify her position on the religious spectrum? Is Hillary a 'closet' rightwing religious fundamentalist like her many friends in The Fellowship? Does trouncing Rev. Wright have symbolic as well as actual importance to her and her friends? Can we FINALLY ask Hillary Clinton what her position is on separation of church and state?!
And how does separation of church and state intersect with Hillary's attacks on Rev. Wright?
Is this why the Rev. Wright question is more important to her than say, explaining the conflicting Clinton positions and money stream connection with the union murderers in the Columbian government?
If the U.S. Government becomes dominated by a faction of rightwing fundamentalist religionists (such as the Dominionists), it seems that all liberal-hearted religions (like that of Rev. Wright) must be demonized first. Is this why Hillary just can't stop using Rev. Wright as a smear device?
These questions must be asked and clarified. I want to see someone ask Hillary Clinton why she supports religious subjects and prayer in public schools, definately an initial step in destroying separation of church and state.
"The Fellowship's long-term goal is "a leadership led by God-leaders of all levels of society who direct projects as they are led by spirit." [excerpted from Mother Jones article "Hillary's Prayer" Oct. 2007 issue]
The Fellowship's "leader" Doug Coe has recruited government leaders mostly and when that goal is applied to leaders in government the end product of such a goal is the death of separation of church and state. It's a tidy formula: Justify a rightwing governmental position on the basis of rightwing religious 'morality' and end up with both as part of government.
Indeed, Hillary Clinton, a participant in The Fellowship ever since 1993, has ALREADY proved she is personally pursuing The Fellowship's goal: she has made clear that she will embrace American rightwing majority 'morality' over government-guaranteed individual rights. "Clinton suggests as much herself in her 1990 book, 'It Takes a Village', where she writes approvingly of religious groups' access to schools, lessons in Scripture, and 'virtue' making a return to the classroom." [excerpted from Mother Jones' article] If teaching kids religion in public school is not a poster child for the Death of separation of church and state, I don't know what is!
The main assault on separation of church and state so far has been the millions of taxdollars diverted from government programs for health and human services and given to religious groups apparently without oversight. The Clintons were responsible for beginning this assault which Bush now has increased. If legislation promotes "conservative morality", Hillary Clinton has become a dependable promoter and supporter.
Hillary Clinton's long term involvment in The Fellowship MUST BE QUESTIONED a hundred times more adamantly than Rev. Wright's sermons and Barack Obama's church of choice.
And yet we get corporate-sponsored debates (so-called) like last night's ABC 'event' and only the further demonization of Rev. Wright is permitted. And once again, noone asks why Hillary is so upset about this and how her connection to The Fellowship influences her in her attacks on Rev. Wright.