General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Family was founded as an anti-labor movement. More about power than religion.
Last edited Mon Jun 16, 2014, 09:17 PM - Edit history (1)
These quotes are from a couple of pages of Jeff Sharlet's book, The Family. I transcribed them from my copy of the book. I did that after reading some words in a Democracy Now interview with Sharlet, which indicated that Abraham Vereides founded the group in the 30s to fight against the labor movement.
This part showed a sharp contrast between the wealthy and the workers. They seemed to take the efforts of the unions to gain power very personally...or as Sharlet once said Vereides considered it a challenge to God's sovereignty. From page 104 about the 1934 union strikes:
Seven hundred policemen in dark blue patrolled the waterfront on foot and in black cars and on high chestnut horses. Twice that number and more picketed and searched for strikebreakers. The middle class began contemplating last minute vacations. The wives of the wealthy bunkered up at the Union Club, where Abram led prayer meetings for businessmen. As the blue tear gas sent tendrils up the hill, they must have felt frustrated by his optimistic lessons in biblical capitalism. Scripture has much to say about honest dealing and even more about handling the heathen, but not once does it mention organized labor.
From page 108:
The strike went on, but the shippers were defeated by the time the coffins went into the ground. Their old beliefs could not compete. Management-capital-would require a new faith if it was to survive.
The strike of 1934 scared Abram into launching the movement that would become the vanguard of elite fundamentalism, and elite fundamentalism took as its first challenge the destruction of militant labor. Destruction was not the word Christians used however. They called it cooperation.
There is more about Vereide in The New Yorker for September 2013. This is one of the best articles I have read about the Family, the Fellowship. It is very long and detailed. If you are really interested it is worth the time to read it.
Frat House for Jesus. The entity behind C Steet
When the big preachers came through Oregon in the early nineteen-fifties, Billy Graham among them, they all stopped by to visit Hatfield, and Coe began to develop a network of important connections. One who made a lasting impression was a Norwegian immigrant named Abraham Vereide, a Methodist preacher who had created a unique ministry that existed outside the organized churches and aimed to change the world by changing the hearts of leaders.
Vereide had arrived in America, which he called the land of the unchained Bible, in 1905, at the age of eighteen, with a burning zeal and uncommon drive. He soon made his way from preaching a horseback circuit to a prominent pulpit in downtown Seattle. On his recommendation, the citys civic leaders created the program that came to be known as Goodwill Industries, putting people to work at reclaiming and reselling surplus goods. In 1934, in a meeting with nineteen of the citys civic leaders, Vereide proposed that they try to order their lives according to the principles of Jesus. They met again the next week, and the next, with the understanding that the gatherings were utterly secret. This was an intimate circle, Vereide wrote, according to Modern Viking, a privately published authorized biography by Norman Grubb. We didnt dare tell anybody what was going on, or even include anyone else, Vereide continued. It was a sharing fellowship. Vereide began to hear from men across the country (Fiorello LaGuardia sought him out on a trip West), and what had evolved into the prayer-breakfast idea became a national movement. At Vereides instigation, a prayer group was started in the House, and then in the Senate, and they continue today. In 1953, Vereides friend Senator Frank Carlson, of Kansas, invited the new President, Dwight Eisenhower, to attend a prayer breakfast. It was the first instance of what has become the National Prayer Breakfast, attended annually by every President since.
The real work of the movement, though, was in the small groups of top men (as Vereide described his mission field) which proliferated across the country. Sam Shoemaker, the New York Episcopal priest who helped to devise the Twelve Step program for Alcoholics Anonymous, in the nineteen-thirties, was Vereides close friend and adviser, and made key connections for him in New York and in Washington. Thomas Watson, of I.B.M., summoned Vereide to discuss his groups, as did Marvin Coyle, the president of Chevrolet, and J. C. Penney. Prayer groups were spreading overseas, and, by the end of the nineteen-fifties, with Vereide in his seventies, the core group of men around him decided to bring younger blood into the leadership circle. Doug Coe was recruited into the organization, which was then called International Christian Leadership, as field director, in 1959, and when Vereide died, a decade later, Coe effectively became his successor.
Here is a video about Doug Coe and his influence. In this one he speaks of the kind of power wielded by Chairman Mao and Hitler. He actually compares it to what Jesus expects of us. It is a segment by Brian Williams and Andrea Mitchell at NBC in I believe 2008.
Take time to read the notes under it, click the More section. That is basically the NBC transcript of the Coe section.
There was an amazingly thorough post at Daily Kos in 2008 by Frederick Clarkson. He pulls a lot of stuff together. I remember the enormous amount of recommends this post had because people there recognized that ultimately this group is about power more than religion, that it is making contacts around the world with important people.
NBC News on Sen. Clinton & "The Family"
Access, and networking connections among the powerful is an important part of the modus operandi of The Family.
Sharlet and Joyce reported:
When Time put together a list of the nation's 25 most powerful evangelicals in 2005, the heading for Coe's entry was "The Stealth Persuader." "You know what I think of when I think of Doug Coe?" the Reverend Schenck (a Coe admirer) asked us. "I think literally of the guy in the smoky back room that you can't even see his face. He sits in the corner, and you see the cigar, and you see the flame, and you hear his voicebut you never see his face. He's that shadowy figure."
Coe has been an intimate of every president since Ford, but he rarely imposes on chief executives, who see him as a slightly mystical but apolitical figure. Rather, Coe uses his access to the Oval Office as currency with lesser leaders. "If Doug Coe can get you some face time with the President of the United States," one official told the author of a Princeton study of the National Prayer Breakfast last year, "then you will take his call and seek his friendship. That's power."
There's more from Clarkson, but from another source so I am not breaking copyright.
When Clinton first came to Washington in 1993, one of her first steps was to join a Bible study group. For the next eight years, she regularly met with a Christian "cell" whose members included Susan Baker, wife of Bush consigliere James Baker; Joanne Kemp, wife of conservative icon Jack Kemp; Eileen Bakke, wife of Dennis Bakke, a leader in the anti-union Christian management movement; and Grace Nelson, the wife of Senator Bill Nelson, a conservative Florida Democrat.
Clinton's prayer group was part of the Fellowship (or "the Family" , a network of sex-segregated cells of political, business, and military leaders dedicated to "spiritual war" on behalf of Christ, many of them recruited at the Fellowship's only public event, the annual National Prayer Breakfast. (Aside from the breakfast, the group has "made a fetish of being invisible," former Republican Senator William Armstrong has said.) The Fellowship believes that the elite win power by the will of God, who uses them for his purposes. Its mission is to help the powerful understand their role in God's plan.
The Fellowship isn't out to turn liberals into conservatives; rather, it convinces politicians they can transcend left and right with an ecumenical faith that rises above politics. Only the faith is always evangelical, and the politics always move rightward.
This is in line with the Christian right's long-term strategy. Francis Schaeffer, late guru of the movement, coined the term "cobelligerency" to describe the alliances evangelicals must forge with conservative Catholics. Colson, his most influential disciple, has refined the concept of cobelligerency to deal with less-than-pure politicians. In this application, conservatives sit pretty and wait for liberals looking for common ground to come to them. Clinton, Colson told us, "has a lot of history" to overcome, but he sees her making the right moves.
It also is a long post, but well worth the read.
The Family, the Fellowship, is on the surface about religion. But it is underneath about power and political contacts.
mike_c
(36,214 posts)Thanks for posting it.
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)A lot to read in the links. Appreciate the K&R
antigop
(12,778 posts)with her support for an increased h-1b visa limit and and her touting of the "advantages" of outsourcing of US jobs.
She co-founded the Senate India caucus with John Cornyn.
classykaren
(769 posts)Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)because it is an attempt at honest discussion based on research.
It is not about politicians and their religion, it is about ways that politicians make contacts and meet the power players of the world.
antigop
(12,778 posts)madinmaryland
(64,920 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)a couple of years ago. So Dems at least should already know something about this institution as I recall a lot of discussion about it at the time.
It seems there are quite a few 'organizations' like this working in the shadows behind our Government, influencing policies and sometimes using religion or some other popular issues as a front for their activities.
The Heritage Foundation, the Chamber of Commerce come to mind also. I fail to see how we can have a true democracy so long as all these organizations, and there are probably thousands of them, not as powerful as the Family perhaps, but working behind the scenes with lobbyists etc, to circumvent the interests of the American people.
Thank you for this OP MF, I haven't read all of it yet, but intend to. It's important to know who is influencing our elected officials.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)So she must have considered him credible.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)the family is very, and I mean this VERY dangerous. Unlike the Koch's they work in the shadows. The kochs used to.
Raksha
(7,167 posts)All the publicity they've been getting these past few years wasn't their idea by a long way.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)we can muster.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)How's that for a feminist icon?
Zorra
(27,670 posts)murielm99
(30,657 posts)this early?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Right now I am not about being anti-Hillary. I do prefer someone like Warren but wants don't count in politics.
I am against ganging up on people here for having a different opinion.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)I'm ready to go.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)We don't want a replay, so to speak.
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)She was frustrated by the denials. So was I.
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)appears Community Standards are not being applied equally around here especially since the information by LA was given respectfully.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)appreciate the effort made to bring information to the site.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)She so much appreciated the support. I think we all post in frustration sometimes.
murielm99
(30,657 posts)We need everyone's opinion here. I have only alerted a couple of times, and I use that feature very sparingly. Discussion should be welcomed.
rosesaylavee
(12,126 posts)I have been asking about this for years. I do appreciate Secy Clinton's service but really, this needs to be addressed. I will vote for whoever the DEM nominee is but if it is her, I would appreciate an answer as to whether or not she is still affiliated with The Family. And if she is not with them now, when did that end and why.
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)hootinholler
(26,449 posts)By folks who are not informed and think they are defending their preferred candidate.
I wonder if any of them know the role the Family has played in Uganda (and elsewhere) in repressing LGBT rights?
I wonder if they cringe when she uses religious dog-whistles?
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)I didn't see it until after it was hidden, but I rec'd it just to say that I thought it was screwed up. I was rec #16, I see more people have done the same thing.
Thanks, Luminous!
And thanks, MadFlo, excellent post!
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)good stuff:
Jeff Sharlett discusses The Family on Bill Maher's Real Time
Jeff Sharlett discusses the Prayer Breakfast, the Family, and Faith based programs.
Hillary's Quest for Power, Doug Coe, The Family and Tales of Genghis Khan
Tweety Provides Cover For C Street House Residents.....
Jeff Sharlett on State of Belief now...wrote Jesus Plus Nothing.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)Well, that and "coterminous."
The Swarm hasn't descended on the Coe/The Family/C Street threads yet... curious.
Frat House for Jesus
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)Unlike teh bogus hide, this thread isn't associating a popular figure who also isn't running for president with The Family even though the ties are clearly there.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)Edit: Oops, was yakking on the phone, watching TV, typing away, and just noticed this was in your OP... guess I can't walk and chew gum.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Not sure what I was thinking.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Typical guilt by association, when there is no proof she is even still associated.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)It matters tremendously to me if she accepts their philosophy. That she spent considerable time with their sponsored prayer group, that she is listening to the message that Doug Coe espouses and not leaving in disgust speaks volumes about her character.
Try this thread to get an idea of what they are about.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)I do not think that she espouses their views in any coherent way and it's been almost a decade since we last saw of her associations with them.
It's irrational to say she accepts their philosophy when she is for gay rights, womens rights, economic equality (indeed those things are part of the Democratic Party Plank).
I simply do not believe it is fair to pile on Clinton for these associations when Obama and even Kerry had similar associations. I also do not believe it is fair to pile on her for her religious background and her espousing her faith.
And if anyone really thinks it's going to work against her, the Rovian attack style, it won't. Clinton's 1993 book, a time when women were heavily marginalized in politics (as if they're still not) and at a time when she was vilified in the media on a regular basis, of course you can expect her to get whatever connections she can find.
Note: I am not saying this is a good thing, seeking connections, being politically two sided, but that's politics.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I just wanted to show there was really such a group. My personal opinion is that the group is used by many for political contacts. Surprised to see her connection because is usually just right wingers on the GOP side.
I don't think you can prove the influence of one's religion.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)But when Obama went to the same Senate Prayer Breakfast meetings I don't recall anyone saying anything about that. When John Kerry cosponsored legislation lobbied for by The Family, I don't recall anyone saying anything about that.
As far as I can tell at this level in government The Family is just there to push their agenda, and unfortunately it looks like a lot of Congresspeople are stuck belonging or associating with them for political gain. We see this at the National Prayer Breakfast where the President panders and which almost everyone in Congress attends.
It's "not just right wingers" who are part of that circle of elites. And it's clear that many of the ideals espoused by The Family are ideals which Clinton is openly against, womens rights, rights for gays, etc.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)KG
(28,749 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Use Religion on 'em.
Great post, madfloridian. Many Good DUers of Old also were interested in this subject:
Know your BFEE: The Fellowship Preys for America
The replies are pure gold.
As for those DUers today who think this doesn't matter: Wake up.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)But I guess it is to the young people.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)For some, unless they were there, it didn't happen.
For some others, it matters that people don't know what happened.
Thank you for the OP and thread, madfloridian. This topic is very important -- especially for those like me who don't fit the Aryan mold or in management.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)here that there is any controversy at all about discussing this dangerous organization. They sure wasn't when it was being uncovered by Rachel's excellent investigative work.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)The controversy is asserting that Hillary is influenced by them.
Personally, I believe she is but I don't know how much influence there is.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)the Family is a dangerous, shadowy organization that has had huge influence on our policies. Eg, covered by Rachel was their influence over Uganda's law to put people to death for being Gay. I posted a link to one of the shows she did on this below.
So to me, there really is not controversy about this, at least not for Dems. Glad to hear that is not the case.
As for Hillary praying with them, frankly I would distance myself completely from such a group, but that's just me.
Nay
(12,051 posts)that Ms Clinton, all these years, has chosen to associate herself regularly with that dangerous organization. There are many, many mainstream or liberal religious Bible study groups that she could have chosen to associate with. She did not. One may conclude that she associates with The Family because it is a powerful kingmaker bunch that can anoint leaders, but does not believe in any of its horrific principles. Frankly, it's crazy to think that such a group would ever anoint a female Democrat, no matter how long she has been in the group. It's also puzzling that Ms Clinton could make statements about "the RW conspiracy" and not recognize that The Family is a component of it.
When people declare that they have certain principles (such as democratic ones), it is worth investigating why they associate regularly with groups that hold the opposite views. As I said in another thread: if a friend works for the ASPCA saving animals from abuse, but then spends time going to dog fights and watching animals fight to the death, what are we to think of this person?
Would most ASPCA workers go to dogfights? I think most of us would answer 'no.' Why not? Because most such workers work there because they hold the principle that animals should not be abused. A worker who DOES go to fights is being a hypocrite at the very least. A disinterested observer would rationally conclude that the person did NOT hold the principle that dogs should not be abused; they would conclude that the person was fine with it.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)pray with them. I guess I am the one who is crazy, expecting our politicians to be crystal clear about their policies not just in their words, but by their actions.
JEB
(4,748 posts)and so is Kissinger.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)nenagh
(1,925 posts)bookmarked for later
SomeGuyInEagan
(1,515 posts)And certainly more about power than anything spiritual.
This is America - it is always about power and money. Always follow the money.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)It's important information that the younger DU'ers probably aren't aware of.
I was sorry to se "LA's" post hidden by jury decision. I assume the jurors weren't aware that this is important verified news. And, it certainly is important to the 2014 Election along with reflection on some of our Congress Critters who were very involved with this group which did affect their policy decisions.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I just realized it has been 5 or 6 years since these posts were common here...doesn't seem that long.
SamKnause
(13,043 posts)THANK YOU madfloridian for posting the FACTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)You sound like you mean it!
SamKnause
(13,043 posts)I am so extremely exhausted at the vicious attacks on labor and unions in this country.
I am disgusted that we can't discuss the harm that the majority of religions cause.
I am appalled that the majority of religions are anti women.
I am sickened that the Separation of Church and State is being questioned.
I am in disbelief that the United States of America has become a country that touts anti science, anti biology, anti anthropology, anti facts, anti higher education, anti equality, anti fair pair, anti women's rights, anti women's health care needs, the vicious attacks against the poor, disabled, and homeless policies.
I am frightened by our appalling penal system.
I am terrified of our two tier justice system.
I am nauseated that our country depends on wars and weapons of destruction to remain economically sound.
Our government is corrupt.
Our corrupt government writes and enacts the legislation that allows corporations and Wall Street to legally rob the wealth of this nation.
Hillary is not what this country needs.
None of the Tea Party or Republicans should have control over a lemonade stand.
The Democratic Party doesn't fight back. They allow themselves to be bulldozed and bullied. I can count the exceptions on 1 hand !!!!
The countries wealth is being cannibalized by greedy, evil, power hungry psychopaths.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Nay
(12,051 posts)TheJames
(120 posts)malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I'd like to rec your post right along with this OP.
niyad
(112,435 posts)SamKnause
(13,043 posts)I know it is hard to believe, but I do not know how to copy and paste.
niyad
(112,435 posts)thing) to either just before the first word, or just after the last word, left click, drag up or down, depending on which way you started. when the whole piece is outlined, go up to edit, click on copy. then go to gd or politics (or whichever forum you want) click on start new discussion, and when it opens, go to the body, click on it, and then go up to edit again, and hit paste. you know what to do from there, yes?
Raksha
(7,167 posts)Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)in bits & pieces in responses to Hillary apologists. The Family just isn't anything like those Methodists down the street. They were born in opposition to the New Deal.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)There was SO much more posted here about it a few years ago.
smokey nj
(43,853 posts)Thanks, madlfo!
47of74
(18,470 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)And, there is strong rumor that this Church helped author Uganda's genocide bill infamously known as the KILL THE GAYS bill.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)did some great investigative journalism on the Family, and specifically covered their influence in Uganda regarding that hateful bill:
Rachel Maddow and The C-Street Family's Uganda Ties]
Rachel asks Sharlet if there were any Americans at the 2008 Ugandan National Prayer Breakfast where the idea for executing gays in Uganda was floated. Sharlet says there were a number of Americans at the breakfast and possibly present, but they havent been able to confirm it yet, Sen. James Inhofe. Sharlet talked about a rift within The Family over supporting this legislation although as Rachel noted, none of them have been willing to come out publicly and say anything against it.
The last really disgusting item they talked about is the possibility of the Ugandan politicians who are promoting the kill-the-gays bill coming to America to speak at the National Prayer Breakfast next February and President Obama being scheduled to speak there as well. As Rachel notes:
Maddow: And if not theres the prospect of an American president speaking at an event before an invited audience that includes the guy who promotedwho introduced legislation to execute people for being gay in his country with the support and encouragement of American quacks like ex-gay therapists. Wow.
This is from four years ago, but I remember her exposure of this organization at the time.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)happyslug
(14,779 posts)Worse, the only report of the Catholic Attack on the Anti_Gay Uganda Law was reported by a Gay blog:
http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/pope-francis%E2%80%99-representative-uganda-concerned-new-anti-gay-law291213
Papal Nuncio to Uganda Archbishop Michael Blume was written to by Divine Word Missionaries Brother Brian McLauchlin on 21 December, asking him to speak to Catholic bishops in the country about the laws potential to abuse peoples human rights.
I am writing to you about a grave matter in terms of human rights abuses towards LGBT persons in Uganda, McLauchlin wrote.
Ugandas Parliament recently passed a bill calling for tougher punishments for homosexual acts, including life imprisonment for those considered repeat offenders. In addition, this bill also criminalizes the public promotion of homosexuality. Once the President of Uganda signs the legislation, it will become law.
I am gravely concerned that a number of human rights violations will occur if the President signs this bill. Although the Catholic Hierarchy may not approve of same-sex relationships or a homosexual lifestyle, I believe the Hierarchy would agree that everyone has the right to be treated with dignity and respect. Imprisoning someone for life would clearly constitute an abuse of his/her rights.
McLauchlin urged that Catholics use their influence in Uganda to make sure the bill does not become law......
Archbishop Blume directed McLauchlin to a statement released by Ugandas Catholic bishops in 2009 when the bill was first proposed.
The recent tabled Anti-Homosexuality Bill does not pass a test of a Christian caring approach to this issue, the bishops wrote in 2009.
The targeting of the sinner, not the sin, is the core flaw of the proposed Bill. The introduction of the death penalty and imprisonment for homosexual acts targets people rather than seeking to counsel and to reach out in compassion to those who need conversion, repentance, support, and hope.
The bishops then quoted Luke 6:36-37, which says Be merciful just as your Father is merciful. Do not judge and you will not be judged. Do not condemn and you will not be condemned. Forgive and you will be forgiven.
- See more at: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/pope-francis%E2%80%99-representative-uganda-concerned-new-anti-gay-law291213#sthash.p8DrSD24.dpuf
SleeplessinSoCal
(8,998 posts)And these people hate labor, and govt labor in particular. They're beginning to see the harm being done to the middle class via ending prevailing wage. Slowly but surely they'll throw away their copies of Atlas Shrugged and realize what pawns they've been.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)They cater to the powerful. Exclusively. Worldwide. They are deal makers.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)If we cannot agree about this we cannot agree about much.
Hillary supporters need to recognize that her position on The Family needs some help.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)and that's a good thing.
Bill USA
(6,436 posts)such as an indication of an anti-labor bias in her voting record?
I don't want to step on anybody's religion (belief in something without presence of empirical evidence or facts in support of said belief) here but ----
For something concrete to check out, here is some data on her voting record (probably only of interest to non-believers):
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/hillary_clinton.htm
[font size="4"]Hillary Clinton on Jobs [/font]
Click here for 24 full quotes on Jobs OR background on Jobs.
No salary increase for Congress until minimum wage increased. (Jul 2007)
Would accept minimum wage as president. (Jul 2007)
Stand up for unions; organize for fair wages. (Jun 2007)
Get tough with China and bring jobs back home. (Feb 2007)
Minimum wage increases havent kept up with Congress wages. (Dec 2006)
Passed 2 planks of 7-plank platform, New Jobs for New York. (Oct 2006)
Minimum wage should be tied to congressional salaries. (Jun 2006)
Pushed for extension of unemployment insurance. (Feb 2004)
The working poor deserve a living wage. (Oct 1999)
America can afford to raise the minimum wage. (Sep 1999)
actual voting record:
Voted YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks. (Nov 2008)
Voted NO on terminating legal challenges to English-only job rules. (Mar 2008)
Voted YES on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Jun 2007)
Voted YES on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Feb 2007)
Voted YES on raising the minimum wage to $7.25 rather than $6.25. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on repealing Clinton's ergonomic rules on repetitive stress. (Mar 2001)
Protect overtime pay protections. (Jun 2003)
[font size="4"]Rated 85% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record. (Dec 2003) [/font]
Allow an Air Traffic Controller's Union. (Jan 2006)
Sponsored bill linking minimum wage to Congress' pay raises. (May 2006)
Extend unemployment compensation during recession. (Jan 2008)
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue. (Jan 2009)
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination. (Jan 2009)
(much more)
As first lady she backed her husband's position on NAFTA. "By most accounts, Clinton was also unenthusiastic about the merits of the agreement, believing it would cause of loss of American jobs and would be politically unpopular.". Later, when campaigning for the Democratic Party's nomination for the Presidency, she emphasized the importance of enforcement of labor and environmental regulations in any trade agreements. As Senator from New York she voted against CAFTA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Hillary_Rodham_Clinton
mikeysnot
(4,755 posts)But after reading most of The Family, the only book I could not finish since the subjects in the book disgusted me, that I had to put it down for my health... and my wife's sanity, since I was shouting at a book.
"Mikey, you realize you are yelling at a book."
Uncle Joe
(58,112 posts)Thanks for the thread, madfloridian.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Sorry about that.
G_j
(40,366 posts)octoberlib
(14,971 posts)pa28
(6,145 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)SheilaT
(23,156 posts)religion is so dangerous. And insidious.
Bible study may seem sort of harmless. And it would be if those who chose to study it didn't attempt to stretch what they decide on from that study into something that should apply to everyone else. I have no quarrel with what someone may believe. Heck, I happen to believe in certain non-rational things myself. But I don't ever feel compelled to persuade others they need to think the same way, and I do not think terrible things will (or worse yet should) happen to those who don't believe as I do.
Unfortunately too many believers think they must persuade, by force if necessary, others to believe that way, and are willing to do terrible things to those who don't believe as they do.
I often thought back in the 90's that Hillary Clinton hid behind a supposedly benign and tolerant religious façade. Perhaps I was more right than I knew.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)in which someone quoted a section of one of her books where she was praising Coe to high Heavens and calling him a 'mentor'?
Or the links to investigative reports showing she'd been part of a 'cell' group of the Family for 15 years as of 2007? You can claim if you want that she's detached herself from them some time in the last seven years (although I'd want to see some proof), but don't think you can claim she wasn't associated with them for quite some time in the past.
Your standards of 'evidence' seem rather detached from everyone else's.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Her positions now do not mesh. If she's still associating with them it would be bad, but I can't see them wanting her in their ranks with where she stands on a host of issues.
Obama went to those payer breakfasts too, Kerry cosponsored legislation by them.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Can you document Obama's attendance other than the one time he spoke to them as a guest speaker?
TheKentuckian
(24,949 posts)She is up in this shit above a passing level at a once a year event (that decent people should shun as well).
I believe you to be cognizant of this otherwise you wouldn't attempt to excuse the connections by describing it as a tactical move to gain access to power (Puh-leassse, btw) and further excuse based on her need to do so because sexisim.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)TheKentuckian
(24,949 posts)No friends of mine and no connections decent folks should pursue and no juice in or constituents to appeal to in Democratic circles.
I consider the passage you quoted damning rather than a rebuttal of any sort. Being a damp junior member is not much of a meaningful separation.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)K&R
"There are no political solutions, only technological ones, the rest is propaganda." ~Jacques Ellul
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)niyad
(112,435 posts)will NOT go away!!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Is it possible that our politicians know LESS about these things than we do? And if that is the case, are they qualified to ask us to give them the most important job in this country?
I do know this, after watching Rachel Maddows excellent in depth reporting on this particular organization, it would be advisable for any Democrat who, perhaps without the knowledge Rachel provided for us, is in any way associated with them, to cut those ties as fast as possible.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)JEFF SHARLET: Yeah, dictator of Somalia. Its, to me, one of the scariest stories that I found in their archives. I was able to recreate this, because they dumped 600 boxes of papers in the Billy Graham archives. Siad Barre was a - not a likely candidate for Christian right recruitment, called himself a Koranic Marxist. But in the early 80s, the Soviets had abandoned him. There had been a power shift between Somalia and Ethiopia. He was in the market for a new patron. And working through Senator Chuck Grassley, Republican of Iowa, of course still in office -
AMY GOODMAN: Talk more about Chuck Grassley, who certainly is in the news now, who, together with Max Baucus, heads the Senate Finance Committee.
JEFF SHARLET: Indeed. And Grassley has been involved with the organization for quite some time, since the 80s, when he traveled to Somalia to join Barre, Siad Barre, in prayer to Jesus. And he brought with him a defense contractor named Bill Brehm.
And Barre was a kind of a cynical character, as you might expect for a dictator. He was very clear. He says, Im willing to pray to Jesus, and heres what I want in return. He says, I want my defense budget doubled. He says, I want meetings for my officials with the Reagan White House. And I want a sort of a hands-off policy while I crack down on some rebels. Doug Coe, the leader of the group, wrote back, in essence, Done, done and done.
And when we look at history, so it was. And Barre used those weapons, supplied to him in part by the US, to wage a war of almost biblical proportion on his own people, from which Somalia has not recovered to this day. The Family doesnt consider that a failure; they consider that Gods will for Somalia. http://www.democracynow.org/2009/8/12/sharlet
Thanks for the OP, Madflorian!
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I did find it in pdf form. I must have used the wrong search terms. Isn't that scary stuff about Somalia?
I found so much more we posted around here in 2008 and 2009. That's been 5 and 6 years since then. I guess I should not be surprised that many here would not have heard of it.
Thx for the link.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)for several years NOT remembering the info regarding the Family frankly. So thanks for the reminder although I have to say I did not forget what we learned several years ago.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)They also would have had to not watched or listened to very much in the way of progressive media, it has been covered on MSNBC a great deal, on several radio shows and I believe Democracy now, not to mention THE BOOK ABOUT THE FAMILY.
Either those that claim not to know about this evil group are lying, or they do not expose themselves to any progressive media.
Perhaps they are just right wingers? Hell, even the third way folks support liberal social issues and would theoretically be appalled by them even if they are into right wing economic policy.
I am thinking Republicans in (D)rag meaning they wear a (D) and tuck the (R) to put on a great show while lip-sinking liberal songs.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Part 1 Jeff Sharlet discusses "The Family" Secret Society on Democracy Now! 8/12/09
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Bookmarked to finish later.
Thanks madfloridian. Great info as usual.
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)This one paragraph from the New Yorker article in the OP really surprised me in several ways. It's about who "got it" and who didn't.
If international dignitaries view the Prayer Breakfast as a reliable means of unofficial access, some Presidentsmost notably, Bill Clintonhave been more accommodating than others. Bill and Hillary got it, says Doug Burleigh, who is Coes son-in-law, and a key figure in the Fellowship. They came early, theyd meet with the groups early and do a photo op with em, hug em. They got what this was about. George W. Bush, on the other hand, made it clear to Coe and the others from the start that hed show up at the Prayer Breakfast but not to expect much more. George came late, and left earlyhe did every year, Burleigh says. Now, I appreciate his honesty. He told Doug, You know, this isnt my thing. After Bushs first, perfunctory appearance, Clinton telephoned Coe to console him. He didnt badmouth Bush, he gave it the best spin, Burleigh recalls. He said, Hey, Bushll get it. He doesnt understand what this things about.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/09/13/100913fa_fact_boyer
Not what I would have expected.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)by men. Interview with Jeff Sharlet. She was essentially told that the men would handle the situation, she should not raise her voice in anger, her job was to keep Mark Sanford sexually satisfied. All that while he was out of the country visiting his mistress. He had been annointed by God for leadership.
He mentions Potomac Point where women live to apparently clean and cook for the men at C Street. Mentions that in all the archives he found...all that there was about Doug Coe's wife was sort of a tribute of her patience, like waiting patiently in the car for him.
NuttyFluffers
(6,811 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)I knew some of this...but the depth to which these psychos have penetrated the politics in this country is terrifying.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)He was convinced that the Kingdom of God would be secured if the best among us, the rich that is, guided by Jesus Christ, made decisions for the rest of us unfettered by such messy things as democracy and the rule of law. If the poor could be made to see that God intended them to be poor and humbly accept their lot all would be well."
The above was from an Amazon Book Review.
There are some interesting reviews on that page.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)This one paragraph from the New Yorker article in the OP really surprised me in several ways. It's about who "got it" and who didn't.
If international dignitaries view the Prayer Breakfast as a reliable means of unofficial access, some Presidentsmost notably, Bill Clintonhave been more accommodating than others. Bill and Hillary got it, says Doug Burleigh, who is Coes son-in-law, and a key figure in the Fellowship. They came early, theyd meet with the groups early and do a photo op with em, hug em. They got what this was about. George W. Bush, on the other hand, made it clear to Coe and the others from the start that hed show up at the Prayer Breakfast but not to expect much more. George came late, and left earlyhe did every year, Burleigh says. Now, I appreciate his honesty. He told Doug, You know, this isnt my thing. After Bushs first, perfunctory appearance, Clinton telephoned Coe to console him. He didnt badmouth Bush, he gave it the best spin, Burleigh recalls. He said, Hey, Bushll get it. He doesnt understand what this things about.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/09/13/100913fa_fact_boyer
Not what I would have expected.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)reminds me of all the fake Lincoln quotes created around this time as well http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Boetcker
valerief
(53,235 posts)be blessed by god with wealth and they would anger god if they didn't attempt to acquire as much wealth as they could. What a con!