Palin, 'The Family' Linked To F.C. Church Defectors
Two prominent Falls Church members among those who voted to defect from the Episcopal Church in 2006 played a major role in promoting Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be selected as the GOP vice presidential candidate, according to an article in the Oct. 27 issue of the New Yorker magazine.
The revelation also comes amid new information about the prominent role of a clandestine Christian fundamentalist political action organization among the defectors' ranks.
According to the New Yorker article, "The Insiders: How John McCain Came to Pick Sarah Palin," by Jane Mayer, Fred Barnes, executive editor of the Weekly Standard magazine, and Michael Gerson, former chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush and a Washington Post columnist, were among two groups of arch-conservatives who visited Gov. Palin in Alaska in the summer of 2007, bringing back to Washington, D.C. rave reviews of the then barely known governor as potential v-p material.
Both Barnes and Gerson are high-profile members of the so-called Falls Church Anglican, the name the defecting members gave themselves after voting to leave the Episcopal Church in December 2006.
http://www.fcnp.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3703:palin-the-family-linked-to-fc-church-defectors-&catid=13:news-stories&Itemid=76 (http://www.fcnp.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3703:palin-the-family-linked-to-fc-church-defectors-&catid=13:news-stories&Itemid=76)
One Northern Virginia politician not a member of the Falls Church but deeply entrenched here is the Rep. Frank Wolf of the 10th District. On the other side of the Potomac, in addition to a long list of current and former congressmen and former Republican administration officials like Dick Thornburgh, John Ashcroft, Ed Meese and James Watt, The Family claims sway over President George W. Bush, himself, from times in the 1970s when he was involved in a Family-run prayer group as part of his struggle against alcoholism.
Over the years, The Family, according to Sharlet's research (which included a stint infiltrating the group and interviews with its leaders), and its cohorts aided the efforts of such foreign tyrants and butchers as Duvalier in Haiti, Selassie in Ethiopia, Suharto in Indonesia, Savimbi in Angola, Franco in Spain, Marcos in the Philippines and Pinochet in Chile.
Obsessive paranoia is a dangerous thing.
But don't get help just yet, it's a hoot watching you self descruct.
.
Quote from: Philodox on July 10, 2009, 05:27:07 PM
But don't get help just yet, it's a hoot watching you self descruct.
Don't hold your breath. Dan seems as vital as ever. In a match between Dan's shining the spotlight on hypocrisy, and your beating the drum for Moose-hunter Barbie, I'll take Dan -- even without the points.
Quote from: LOsborne on July 10, 2009, 06:54:31 PM
Don't hold your breath. Dan seems as vital as ever. In a match between Dan's shining the spotlight on hypocrisy, and your beating the drum for Moose-hunter Barbie, I'll take Dan -- even without the points.
The self-destruction part appears to have been taken on by the christian right republicans. I really hope the book and these stories start getting traction in the mainstream media, but doubtful.
Quote from: Philodox on July 10, 2009, 05:27:07 PM
Obsessive paranoia is a dangerous thing.
But don't get help just yet, it's a hoot watching you self descruct.
.
Quote from: dan foster on July 10, 2009, 07:32:46 PM
The self-destruction part appears to have been taken on by the christian right republicans. I really hope the book and these stories start getting traction in the mainstream media, but doubtful.
You corrected Henry, but didn't correct Philodox? Were you listening when I said we had enough people correcting typo's on the forum? LOL :wink:
Quote from: pariann on July 10, 2009, 07:46:53 PM
You corrected Henry, but didn't correct Philodox? Were you listening when I said we had enough people correcting typo's on the forum? LOL :wink:
Yikes, you are correct. I didn't see that. Thanks for correcting me on not correcting Philo, after correcting Hank. I shouda, but I guess I am in the middle of my own self decruction. :biggrin:
Quote from: dan foster on July 10, 2009, 08:03:40 PM
Yikes, you are correct. I didn't see that. Thanks for correcting me on not correcting Philo, after correcting Hank. I shouda, but I guess I am in the middle of my own self decruction. :biggrin:
_______________________________________________________________________
Ya still got it wrong, can't ya tipe... It was descruct.
.
Quote from: LOsborne on July 10, 2009, 06:54:31 PM
Don't hold your breath. Dan seems as vital as ever. In a match between Dan's shining the spotlight on hypocrisy, and your beating the drum for Moose-hunter Barbie, I'll take Dan -- even without the points.
______________________________________________________________________
"Vital".. Did you say this guy is VITAL..? lol
Well, it seems you have a lot more time on your hands than one person could help ya with. The next time you have a few, I suggest you peruse Ebay & see what kind of deal you can get on a life.
.
Quote from: Philodox on July 10, 2009, 09:23:53 PM
______________________________________________________________________
"Vital".. Did you say this guy is VITAL..? lol
Well, it seems you have a lot more time on your hands than one person could help ya with. The next time you have a few, I suggest you peruse Ebay & see what kind of deal you can get on a life.
.
I see you really have a lot to contribute. Nothing real to say, even in your own language. So, to correct you, once again, if one is going to self descruct, then one would be in the middle of one's own self descruction. You don't even know your own language, let alone know anything of value to contribute to the conversation.
What do you expect, he's a philodox. Posting just to see his own words in print, because he is in love with his own opinion. Whatever that may be. I've yet to understand and I think I have a fairly open mind. :eek:
He's not even a philodox.
Just an ordinary, garden variety troll.
Don't feed.
Don't feed? But...I think he does tricks. Can't I throw him just a peanut or two?
Quote from: followsthewolf on July 11, 2009, 06:10:31 AM
He's not even a philodox.
Just an ordinary, garden variety troll.
Don't feed.
Yeah. No need to mobilize the PPDC.
He can't even craft an original insult.
I was going to add his cliches to the Lake Superior Banished Words List, but somebody already did.
http://www.lssu.edu/banished/discuss/?p=25
Quote from: dan foster on July 11, 2009, 12:18:20 AM
I see you really have a lot to contribute. Nothing real to say, even in your own language. So, to correct you, once again, if one is going to self descruct, then one would be in the middle of one's own self descruction. You don't even know your own language, let alone know anything of value to contribute to the conversation.
________________________________________________________________________
..of course, those w/ a modicum of sense would know that my reply re: the misspelling of 'destruct' was intentional & would simply chuckle.
Not you however, your inability to adjust to life without juxtsupposing some imaginary injurious outcome is absolutely hysterical.
...carry on
.
Quote from: pariann on July 11, 2009, 05:43:54 AM
What do you expect, he's a philodox. Posting just to see his own words in print, because he is in love with his own opinion. Whatever that may be. I've yet to understand and I think I have a fairly open mind. :eek:
________________________________________________________________________
Your failing to understand has nothing to do with an 'open' mind. It has everything to do w/ having a dialog with someone other than the few predictable posters who reside here. lol
.
Here, have a couple of peanuts.
Quote from: Philodox on July 11, 2009, 07:56:37 AM
________________________________________________________________________
..of course, those w/ a modicum of sense would know that my reply re: the misspelling of 'destruct' was intentional & would simply chuckle.
Not you however, your inability to adjust to life without juxtsupposing some imaginary injurious outcome is absolutely hysterical.
...carry on
...and nothing was said. When you have something to say, just say it. Your contribution, so far, amounts to nothing, but here's a couple more peanuts for ya.
Quote from: dan foster on July 11, 2009, 11:28:17 AM
...and nothing was said. When you have something to say, just say it. Your contribution, so far, amounts to nothing, but here's a couple more peanuts for ya.
_________________________________________________________________
That's because I've yet to read any logical material coming out of that keyboard of yours, fosterchild.
.
Quote from: Philodox on July 11, 2009, 01:22:49 PM
_________________________________________________________________
That's because I've yet to read any logical material coming out of that keyboard of yours, fosterchild.
.
Your logic? Try something. Couple more peanuts for you.
My question: Are there NO Christian Demoncrats?
Jimmy Carter
Quote from: Gardengirl on July 12, 2009, 01:19:54 PM
My question: Are there NO Christian Demoncrats?
My guess is if they are demon-crats, you are thinking devil, Lucifer, Satan, etc. They would be Christian wouldn't they? They bellieve in God, or else they wouldn't exist, right?
Quote from: Gardengirl on July 12, 2009, 01:19:54 PM
My question: Are there NO Christian Demoncrats?
I'm sure there are, but who cares?