General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThere is no need for anyone to fly off the handle, but is HRC part
of that theocratic and very dangerous group called The Family?
I was shocked to read that in comments on Raw Story. If so, please, let us know. If not please show how you know.
I think that this is an extremely important question, yet I don't want to believe it.
I dislike her corporation romance (probably more of a serious affair), but, if true, this would blow me away.
milestogo
(16,829 posts)William769
(55,142 posts)DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Clinton declined our requests for an interview about her faith, but in Living History, she describes her first encounter with Fellowship leader Doug Coe at a 1993 lunch with her prayer cell at the Cedars, the Fellowship's majestic estate on the Potomac. Coe, she writes, "is a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God."
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/09/hillarys-prayer-hillary-clintons-religion-and-politics?page=2
sharp_stick
(14,400 posts)I especially love the classy "no need for anyone" line. Well done.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)was shocked, and just wanted to find out the truth about it.
sharp_stick
(14,400 posts)to show up at one of the black masses if you want to know the truth. Even better if you can find a virgin to bring.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)Are you shocked about them, too? And HRC's involvement with them, according to the article someone posted here, ended in 2001 -- a different era.
In the previous century, Dems and Repubs actually associated with each other. Shocking! Remember how Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch were good friends?
Everything is different now -- unfortunately.
http://www.thefullwiki.org/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)
brooklynite
(94,293 posts)Seriously, what position of "The Family" are you alleging she supports?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)why you are mocking the OP's question? There is no doubt that she is part of this religions organization. As for the illuminati, I know nothing about that. But The Family, yes, Hillary has been part of it since the early 'nineties.
From Mother Jones:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/09/hillarys-prayer-hillary-clintons-religion-and-politics?page=3
Throughout her time at the White House, Clinton writes in Living History, she took solace from "daily scriptures" sent to her by her Fellowship prayer cell, along with Coe's assurances that she was right where God wanted her. (Clinton's sense of divine guidance has been noted by others: Bishop Richard Wilke, who presided over the United Methodist Church of Arkansas during her years in Little Rock, told us, "If I asked Hillary, 'What does the Lord want you to do?' she would say, 'I think I'm called by the Lord to be in public service at whatever level he wants me.'"
Since she doesn't deny it, why the attitude from some in this thread?
A DUer asked a question, the answer is easily found. I can understand the reaction to The Family, considering its activities, it's ultra Conservative membership, it's associations throughout its history with dictators and govts like Uganda's current anti-Gay regime, eg. They think of themselves as above it all, a sort religious version of the Third Way.
But regardless of what they are, a cult with an enormous and troubling amount of influence on our government, the OP asked a simple question, and the answer is just as simple, YES, Hillary is associated with the Family.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)I predict we shall see the blind mockers ignore the sole factual post in this thread.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)the facts. There was never a question about this, as far as I know. We have known this for a long time. So I'm astounded at the diversionary tactics in this thread, as if the info is not available.
Unbelievable isn't it?
okasha
(11,573 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)since the early 'nineties. She most definitely is associated with the Family and even wrote about it in one of her books. She moved 'up' from the Female Prayer Cell into a more important group later on. She met its founder, Coe, in 1993 I believe.
You can read about it here, it's long, but worth the read:
Hillary Clinton's Religion and Politics
These days, Clinton has graduated from the political wives' group into what may be Coe's most elite cell, the weekly Senate Prayer Breakfast. Though weighted Republican, the breakfastregularly attended by about 40 membersis a bipartisan opportunity for politicians to burnish their reputations, giving Clinton the chance to profess her faith with men such as Brownback as well as the twin terrors of Oklahoma, James Inhofe and Tom Coburn, and, until recently, former Senator George Allen (R-Va.). Democrats in the group include Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor, who told us that the separation of church and state has gone too far; Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) is also a regular.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Sorry, I don't buy the "evil Hillary" bs.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)talking about FACTS. You stated, wrongfully, that there are no female members of The Family, you were wrong. I provided you with PROOF of that.
Hillary has been associated with The Family for decades, which SHE HERSELF has spoken about. If you think she's lying, that's your problem, I have no reason to believe she would lie about something like this. It certainly won't benefit her, this close association with a very Conservative Religious organization. So, I for one, believe her.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)it was okay to belong to the same prayer group that Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, John Glenn, and other Dems belonged to!
http://www.thefullwiki.org/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)women, so they were never a part of that prayer cell. The Family is predominantly populated by Far Right Fundies with few Democrats throughout its history. It would explain some of the policies and votes those who did get involved cast though. I always wondered what they were thinking, thanks for that info.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)look, I just wanted to know, if anyone would know about this. These bloggers claimed that she became a member in 1993 and has been with that group since then. Also that she does not answer questions about it at all.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)intimate that Hillary Clinton is very cozy with this extreme rightwing Cult.
I have read that Hillary considers Pastor Doug Coe of this Cult a "mentor, and close friend."
The Presidents Prayer Breakfast is operated by this Cult.
Also, this Cult owns "Frathouse for Jesus," which is situated within a stones throw of the White House, and this building is officially listed as a Church, and it offers residence for Senators both (D) and (R).
Plus, it is strongly rumored that THE FAMILY (also known as THE FELLOWSHIP) helped author Uganda's genocide bill notoriously dubbed the KILL THE GAYS bill in 2009.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)but I always assumed it was part of the religious right in the North East.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Gov. Sam Brownback
Vice President Dan Quayle
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
And, there was some particularly scary stuff about George W. Bush.
The book is def. worth a read. It's on Amazon. Print and Kindle.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)... in their secret propaganda project that infiltrates and spreads rumors about liberal politicians.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)puppets to deflect.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)All the conspiracy theory needs now is a book.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)but I would never have connected it to Ds. Still, they cited certain things, which made me bring it up here.
Change has come
(2,372 posts)Thanks in advance
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Unless she is under hypnosis, I don't see how someone admitting to something themselves can be viewed as 'secret propaganda' or a 'rumor'. She spoke highly of how the female cell prayer group she participated in helped her while she was in the WH.
William769
(55,142 posts)Oh wait Hillary Clinton!
Yes she is part of the family all right, just not the family you are thinking of.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)know much about that organization. They are a complex, though extremely conservative, religious organization who believe that regardless of one's political views, they can be 'overlooked'.
I have no reason to believe she would lie about her association with the Family. Why would she do that?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)really ugly things in her opposition to our basic rights. 17 years, I counted because I remember the day I realized she and Bill had betrayed us.
Go ask David Geffen why he refused to back her in 08, this is why. She has in fact spoken glowingly of the Family, of Coe. It's just a fact, man.
I'm sure she's 'evolved' and all that. I'm just a bit tired of the politicians who 'support' just in time to ask for money and votes. We can do better. Of course, Warren was a Reagan Republican, supportive of the most vicious anti gay policies our country has ever seen. So maybe we can't do better.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)The Family "associations" were her making connections and overall climbing the ladder in the only way a woman in the Senate could. She used her influence to help push anti-trafficing laws, for example.
There's no evidence of her "connection" with them after she left the Senate.
The more odious part in the book about Clinton is her anti-Cold War rhetoric. But then, he got it wrong on her feminism. In the book Sharlet claims that Clinton was / is distancing herself from her previous feminist background. Of course, Clinton never did that and her current policy speeches put feminism as a central core of her ideals. So it's questionable whether Sharlet's opinion should be trusted at all. Hell, his chapter on Clinton was a whole handful of pages, I think if I recall correctly it was less than 20 pages. It really didn't belong in an otherwise great book on how The Family is entrenched in upper level US politics.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)That doesn't do much to raise my comfort level with her. So she's willing to compromise her core beliefs and get in the sack with people who are diametrically opposed to everything she claims to stand for, just to make connections and climb the ladder.
The potential for a president to do a lot of mischief under the guise of associating for strategic reasons bothers me, particularly when she already shows signs of associating for strategic reasons with Wall Street and neocon foreign policy losers.
Are you aware of any other female senators who associated for strategic reasons with the family?
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)But her core believes don't match up with The Family.
I'm not sure I have a problem with strategic politicians.
As far as I know every female Senator attended the monthly Senate women prayer meetings and they still do to this day.
Response to blkmusclmachine (Reply #24)
William769 This message was self-deleted by its author.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)Here is what I've gathered and here is what is printed in the book.
The author states Clinton is, indeed, religious. Big surprise, right?
The first time Sharlet uses The Reverend Rob Schenck, the founder of a ministry called Faith and Action in the Nations Capitala knockoff of the Family, the theological equivalent of fake Gucci - as a source:
The author then explicitly states (and there really is no room for interpretation here):
And there you have it, folks. The most damning passage linking Hillary to 'The Family.' The rest of the book's commentary on Clinton is, in my opinion, a judgmental assault on Hillary for being religious, ambitious and being willing to mix the two. If you want to knock her for that, be my guest, but that is a technique many politicians (yes, even liberal ones) have used to great success.
But who else is mentioned in the book as a 'friend' of The Family? Al Gore (page 259)
You can find a PDF of it online (literally the fourth hit on google for the title and ".pdf" is the entire book). I posted to an extent about this idea here.
Basically it's a right wing smear against Clinton. Not to smear her because they would actually disagree with her being part of The Family, mind you, but to smear her in the eyes of the left and to make us shun her. In reality they would like for her to be part of The Family, but they know she's not, which is why on one hand they spread this meme while on the other they hate and despise her.
If you continue that chapter he does go on to say she's a "Cold Warrior," someone who evokes Cold War mythology, but even then that's not a big deal, she aged in that time, it makes sense. And later on he says she was distancing herself from her feminism yet we know that is objectively false with her latest speaking tours, where she has called for people to call her a feminist.
When I said "explicitly" I meant it. There's really no room for interpretation. Sharlet never said what people claim he said at all.
MADem
(135,425 posts)facts about Secstate Clinton.
Tick, tock...? Crickets...?
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Second time someone was "uncomfortable" for her not standing for some values but associating with some religious fundies when there was overlap.
I'm fine with strategic political partnerships. It means the politician in question knows how to play the game. I think Clinton would play it quite well. And given her past history with the right wing (she coined the term "great rightwing conspiracy" , she'll know not to play their game.
Know thy enemy.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I agree with your take.
When a Kucinich or a Sanders pairs with a wingnut to pass something, they get a pass.
When HRC does it, she's ... UNFORGIVEN.
And the sudden "concern" in these parts is just .... pathetic.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)When the very book they use to prove their lies doesn't say that as all, as you see by the quote, and you can find the entire book yourself if you just google the title and .pdf.
MADem
(135,425 posts)there is no "Excuse me, I was mistaken" or "Pardon me, my facts were in error" forthcoming.
That's the real shame, here.
840high
(17,196 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)meetings' with members of the Family. I didn't think there was any doubt about it. She certainly has never denied it to my knowledge.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Of course ...that's kinda the reasoning for centrism ain't it? ...you know ...getting votes from the other side.
The Magistrate
(95,241 posts)Leviticus and Numbers will replace Common Law, church attendance mandatory, non-believers, homosexuals, etc., will be rounded up for execution or re-education, people like Dobson and Klingeschmidt will be in the cabinet, only the born-again will be able to vote or hold office --- hell, even the Leather Nun will be on the run....
Stop this dystopia in its tracks --- vote for anybody but Hillary1!!!!!!!
"Christ but I do get tired sometimes."
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)bhikkhu
(10,711 posts)If someone told me someone was a part of "the family", first I would educate myself on the polices of "the family". Then I would educate myself on the policies and record of the individual. Then I would draw my own conclusions.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)This link might help answer your question:
Hillary Clinton's Religion and Politics
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.
Clinton declined our requests for an interview about her faith, but in Living History, she describes her first encounter with Fellowship leader Doug Coe at a 1993 lunch with her prayer cell at the Cedars, the Fellowship's majestic estate on the Potomac. Coe, she writes, "is a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God."
The Fellowship's ideas are essentially a blend of Calvinism and Norman Vincent Peale, the 1960s preacher of positive thinking. It's a cheery faith in the "elect" chosen by a single voterGodand a devotion to Romans 13:1: "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers....The powers that be are ordained of God." Or, as Coe has put it, "we work with power where we can, build new power where we can't."
There's lots more. I'm sorry people are poo-pooing your very legitimate question. This article, among others I've read confirm her relationship with The Family.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)moderates in the Republican party, before the rise of the tea baggers.
At one point people like Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch were good friends, despite their political differences. That's the context in which someone like HRC could join this prayer group.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)7 Mountains theology), an insidious extreme far rightwing Christianist movement that seeks to "raise up a Generation of Christ warriors to deny the enemies of God a voice in Government." To do that, you need money and political influence, and you need to get your people infiltrated into the political parties. From what has been written, the US group first organized politically in 1953 with their very first Presidents Prayer Breakfast.
The Magistrate
(95,241 posts)I am unimpressed with the idea Mrs. Clinton is a cat's-paw for theocratic rule here....
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)whether that makes her a 'cat's-paw' for theocratic rule, here or anywhere else, but her membership is well known and she has written about it herself. A very disturbing association imho, considering it is an ultra-Conservative Religious organization where she found common ground with people like Santorum, Brownback among others. Explained a lot to me regarding some of her policies, when I learned of her membership in that cult-like organization.
MADem
(135,425 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)own words, I doubt she's lying about her own beliefs and associations.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)You know, even 'progressives' have an agenda and as I've seen over they years they, too, are capable of intentionally embellishing the truth and omitting certain facts to push a narrative. The 'Progressive' press is guilty of that in this instance and some have bought it hook line and sinker.
In Living History - did you know Doug Coe, the leader of the Family, is mentioned exactly ONE time in Living History? ONE time. On page 168 in a passage in which Hillary is discussing her faith. It's a very brief mention in which she states, like the article states above, he assured her she was was she needed to be spiritually. What MotherJones and the rest of these 'progressive' muckrakers aren't saying (and I guess they're hoping you won't check yourself) is the same passage Coe is mentioned in covers several other religious contacts including Holly Leachman and Linda Lader who invited both Hillary and Tipper Gore to a bipartisan women's only prayer group.
All in all, the religious faith passage covers only six paragraphs of a 562 page book and very directly states this period was when Clinton was close to, and then did, lose her father.
MADem
(135,425 posts)saying "I've read dozens of articles" doesn't cut it.
Anyone can write a disparaging article, the right wing writes them all the time.
She has never said what you're claiming about her, that she is a "member" of "The Family."
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Prayer Cells, are you denying this? Frankly any organization that feels women need to be separated from men for anything of importance, including prayer, would be suspect to me right off the bat.
She was also involved with Walmart airc. I really don't care as I won't be supporting her anyhow, she is way, way far to the Right for this Liberal.
But she has been involved with the Family, there is no doubt about that at all. I don't know why you, not she, is denying it.
MADem
(135,425 posts)This isn't about ME "denying" anything--this is about YOU passing off misinformation as fact. AND being called on it. AND trying to wiggle away by asking me what I'm "denying" when we're discussing YOUR shopping of untruths.
And yeah, she was the first female board member at WALMART, and forced the board to create a eco-friendly store that used natural light, recycled, and used sustainable materials. Her insistence on this has become the paradigm for many big box stores, and Wallyworld is incorporating her models into their new construction.
But thanks for correcting your false assertion, even if you did it in a backhanded, non-forthcoming, way. At least there's no question at all where you're coming from.
You misspoke. That's the bottom line. And you do yourself no favors when you pull stuff like that.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)from her separating herself from that cult-like, and dangerously powerful organization. Given that, I have no reason to believe she has separated herself from them and all the 'friends' she made while participating in their 'practices'.
Provide me with a link, and I will make sure to point out that while she was associated with them, met their 'leader' and found him to be very impressive, she awoke to the fact of how dangerous they were and publicly detached herself from the organization.
Until then, I provided all the information that is available on this topic.
I look forward to your providing some new information.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)Seriously, even the author of the book that caused all this faux outrage states emphatically she's not and never has been a member. You're clinging to a myth that reality has long since proven false.
MADem
(135,425 posts)number!
Thank you very much for taking the time to do that and shining a HUGE light on what is evidently bias without foundation.
MADem
(135,425 posts)play Perry Mason with me.
By your own posts on this thread we know you. I encourage EVERYONE to read them, and then read post 33, which puts a major "correction" on your ludicrous assertions.
I don't have to provide you with anything--you've already been shown to be shopping misstatements. You need to correct yourself before this interaction can continue.
You haven't provided any "information"--unless you call crap right out of NEWSMAX "information."
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)So why are you using the present tense to describe her involvement with them -- an involvement that ended 13 years ago?
This "very disturbing" association is one that Ted Kennedy also had, to put it in proper perspective. No doubt Hillary assumed that a group people like Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, and John Glenn belonged to was okay for her, too.
http://www.thefullwiki.org/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)has been associated with the Family for many years. These sudden denials are more surprising to me than the fact that she was associated with them, participated in their Women's Prayer Cell, odd for someone who is so strong an advocate of Women's Rights btw, to participate in those old practices where women were separated from men on important stuff like this.
She was also associated with Walmart. I hope no one is going to jump in and deny that fact also! Lol.
It doesn't matter to me, I wouldn't be supporting her anyhow, she is way too far to the Right on so many issues, particularly on FP, where she and The Family have a lot in common.
MADem
(135,425 posts)You can't answer something that is complete and total nonsense to begin with.
It's a "When did you stop beating your wife?" type of question, one that is based on a falsehood and thus cannot be answered--I suppose "pins dropping" is better than saying what one really thinks.
MADem
(135,425 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)was deeply involved with the Family, it is a known fact which is why I don't get the hysteria over the mention of it. She was also deeply involved with Walmart, another known fact which hopefully is not also going to be denied.
I don't CARE, get it? I do not support people who adhere to the FPs of the neocons or who support right wing policies of any kind. Because, guess why? I am a Democrat.
Hillary was deeply involved with the Family, period. I have asked for a link to show that she has distanced herself from them. Clearly she has not, thank you.
MADem
(135,425 posts)to be inaccurate, and your false assertion was corrected in post 33.
It's not a question of how much you "CARE" (or not). The issue is that you misstated the facts and you refuse to acknowledge that.
It's this sort of thing that reputations are built upon. By your words we know you.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)She joined in 1993, according to your link, and was in the group for the next 8 years. That means her involvement ended in 2001.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5329733
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)a more 'elite' cell, which included men. She formed alliances with some pretty awful Right Wing Republicans during those years, read the article, and btw, that is just ONE of many, I am not interested in doing a dissertation on this, that was merely an example of the information out there on her long association with that organization.
She has also been involved with Walmart. I don't care about her associations, I do not and will not be supporting her. Her policies are way too far to the Right for me, I am a Democrat.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)like Orrin Hatch.
That is the way the Congress had ALWAYS worked until Obama's term, when the Rethugs started obstructing almost very single bill that Obama supported. Democrats and Republicans worked "across the aisle" to get legislation passed.
The article in the OP was a hatchet job on Hillary without any perspective on the larger picture.
You are free of course not to support her. But it's ridiculous to portray her as anything but a liberal. Her Senate voting record consistently put her among the most progressive Democrats, and light years away from the Rethugs you condemn her for associating with.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I agree with your comments about HRC forming alliances--it's what every politician does, even the ones who get the Holier Than Thou treatment for being "fighters" and "on OUR side" (until they're tossed under the bus for not being "pure" enough).
I am also amazed that we haven't seen a retraction of the false "membership" assertion.
But maybe I'm not really amazed at all.
TheKentuckian
(25,012 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)Egggggg.....selll.....ennnnnnnt!!!!!!
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)I may get the book from the library; still, from Rachel's account it is very powerful and- to me- very dangerous because it hides itself. The right wing Evangelicals are open at least, so one can try to answer them somehow.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)Here is what I've gathered and here is what is printed in the book.
The author states Clinton is, indeed, religious. Big surprise, right?
The first time Sharlet uses The Reverend Rob Schenck, the founder of a ministry called Faith and Action in the Nations Capitala knockoff of the Family, the theological equivalent of fake Gucci - as a source:
The author then explicitly states (and there really is no room for interpretation here):
And there you have it, folks. The most damning passage linking Hillary to 'The Family.' The rest of the book's commentary on Clinton is, in my opinion, a judgmental assault on Hillary for being religious, ambitious and being willing to mix the two. If you want to knock her for that, be my guest, but that is a technique many politicians (yes, even liberal ones) have used to great success.
But who else is mentioned in the book as a 'friend' of The Family? Al Gore (page 259)
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)She was a good girl, went to school, got married. No hippie commune life complete with mass murder for her, no-sir-ee.
2banon
(7,321 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)pnwmom
(108,951 posts)And it turns out that people like Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, and John Glenn were already members when she joined.
http://www.thefullwiki.org/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)
Tom Ripley
(4,945 posts)Member? I honestly don't know.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)That was a different era -- when Dems and Repubs, people like Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch, still tried to get along with each other.
Tom Ripley
(4,945 posts)I can deal with that barring any nostalgic reunions...
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)with the Fellowship.
If it was okay for Ted and Al, why not for HRC?
http://www.thefullwiki.org/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)
Tom Ripley
(4,945 posts)nor do I think he will be a contender again.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)when she went to DC, and they probably introduced her to it. Big deal.
She left in 2001, when American politics was a different world than it is today.
http://www.thefullwiki.org/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)And she probably got involved because people like Ted Kennedy and Al Gore introduced her to it.
http://www.thefullwiki.org/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)Here is what I've gathered and here is what is printed in the book.
The author states Clinton is, indeed, religious. Big surprise, right?
The first time Sharlet uses The Reverend Rob Schenck, the founder of a ministry called Faith and Action in the Nations Capitala knockoff of the Family, the theological equivalent of fake Gucci - as a source:
The author then explicitly states (and there really is no room for interpretation here):
And there you have it, folks. The most damning passage linking Hillary to 'The Family.' The rest of the book's commentary on Clinton is, in my opinion, a judgmental assault on Hillary for being religious, ambitious and being willing to mix the two. If you want to knock her for that, be my guest, but that is a technique many politicians (yes, even liberal ones) have used to great success.
But who else is mentioned in the book as a 'friend' of The Family? Al Gore (page 259)
---------------------------
Post 37: Where a DUer provided a link to the actual book for all to read PLUS gives further information on the chapter about Hillary Clinton:
If you continue that chapter he does go on to say she's a "Cold Warrior," someone who evokes Cold War mythology, but even then that's not a big deal, she aged in that time, it makes sense. And later on he says she was distancing herself from her feminism yet we know that is objectively false with her latest speaking tours, where she has called for people to call her a feminist.
When I said "explicitly" I meant it. There's really no room for interpretation. Sharlet never said what people claim he said at all.
--------------------------------
Post 61: Where a DUer points out her 'association' with them ended in 2001 .
--------------------------------
Post 40: Where a DUer still clings to the now debunked belief she was a member of the family by quoting the same MotherJones article that incorrectly (intentionally or unintentionally) interprets a passage in Hillary book, Living History.
Did you know Doug Coe, the leader of the Family, is mentioned exactly ONE time in Living History? ONE time. On page 168 in a passage in which Hillary is discussing her faith. It's a very brief mention in which she states, like the article states above, he assured her she was was she needed to be spiritually. What MotherJones and the rest of these 'progressive' muckrakers aren't saying (and I guess they're hoping you won't check yourself) is the same passage Coe is mentioned in covers several other religious contacts including Holly Leachman and Linda Lader who invited both Hillary and Tipper Gore to a bipartisan women's only prayer group.
All in all, the religious faith passage covers only six paragraphs and and this period was when Clinton was close to, and then did, lose her father.
--------------------------
Post 68: Where a DUer points out Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, John Glenn and others were 'associated' yet there has been ZERO wailing and gnashing of teeth over that.
So this is where I'm going to do a little creative speculation. I hear the word bounced around a lot on DU: Misogyny. Here we have a book that progressives have misquoted and misinterpreted in an effort to prove Hillary is some kind of nefarious cult member. Yet the book plainly states she was not and that others like Ted Kennedy and Al Gore shared the same
association.
The book finds fault with Hillary for being religious, ambitious and being willing to mix the two yet doesn't raise an eyebrow at her male counterparts for doing the same. Why is that?? Think about it.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)I would never have taken time to pull all this together. Appreciate your efforts.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)Every sitting United States president since 1953 has been associated with the group. That would include JFK, LBJ, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.
http://www.thefullwiki.org/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)
MADem
(135,425 posts)Oh, the huge manatee!
That IS a problem! If we're to be CONSISTENT that is....!
MADem
(135,425 posts)When I read your post, I hear this in the background....
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)You can understand the Tiger Beat Progressive Teeny Boppers (and I say that because that's how they act) taking the words of MotherJones, Rachel Maddow and the like at face value. Why would they knowingly lie? It isn't like they have an agenda that is served by running Hillary Clinton into the ground. Is it?
But that's the bigger issue - these so-called progressive journalists who only needed to do 10 minutes of Googling to get an idea their reporting wasn't factual. They're either hack journalists or mislead people on purpose. I wonder if they even bothered to read the book?
MADem
(135,425 posts)Are they actively pushing to marginalize this potential candidate, or are they trying to shave her margins to make it/fake it to appear to be more of a horserace?
How can they generate audience share if there isn't any drama? (They might try mature analysis and INFORMED commentary--but maybe that costs too much? Listening to bloviating bullshit from the likes of that scurrilous product of nepotism, Luke the Puke Russert, is about as good as they can do, I fear.)
Of course, this is turning a lot of people (like me) off. And that causes a lot of people (like me) to vote with their remote. And all of the newschannels are feeling the pain--people are getting sick of uninformed assholes with big heads yammering and yammering, and saying little to nothing--and that is what a lot of those stations are churning out. I'd rather read the papers and watch reality (gag) TV!
The bottom line is, as you have so ably reported, any media journalist who reports that HRC was a "member" of this group is not telling the truth. They are inventing facts to suit an agenda, and they really should be ashamed of themselves.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)Even in the general election, that will be their aim.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)Iggo
(47,534 posts)Thanks for brining it to our attention.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)tried to help me understand this issue!
Thus our country's politicians use the conservative churches for their own purpose, and one can just hope that the reversal would meet with a rebuttal. That at least is my conclusion. The only thing that bothers me still is the fact of such a rather powerful group existing in relative secrecy, no matter to which party these people belong.
Thanks again.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Not saying she is or isn't. I have no idea. It is like trying to guess which world leaders are part of the Illuminati. Impossible. Just my own gut feeling...no not at all. Seems to be in The Family, you have to be a RW-religious-wackadoodle and I really don't get that impression from Ms. Clinton.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)And neither is Al Gore or John Glenn.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Much more centrists than anything else imo. Nothing like RWing fundamentalists.
pnwmom
(108,951 posts)He wasn't a RWer at all. But he did have friends across the aisle, including, famously, with Orrin Hatch.