This year, instead of the usual sparsely attended events, town hall meetings across the United States have turned into raucous free-for-alls as opponents of President Barack Obama’s health care reform proposals have taken to shouting down a host of senators and congresspersons.

Over the years, one could slice and dice just about any period of U.S. history and determine that a “civility” project might have been useful. During the past few decades, however, churlish and bombastic invective has often prevailed over carefully calibrated discourse.

When former Republican Party vice presidential candidate and former governor of Alaska Sarah Palin recently commented about Obama’s health care reform initiatives, she claimed that his “death panels” would decide who would live and who would die.

Palin was not only playing to the Republican Party’s wired up base, she was clearly displaying a lack of civility (she later reversed course and came out in favour of civility).

Mark DeMoss, a long-time Christian Right/Republican-oriented public relations expert who believes that today’s political landscape is completely out of whack, has launched “The Civility Project,” an attempt to provide guidelines so that political opponents can disagree without being disagreeable.

So if you were DeMoss, and you were starting up something as high-minded as “The Civility Project,” would you start off by bashing gays and lesbians?

Recognising society’s division and polarisation, and concerned “about the hate and animosity being aimed at men and women with whom we may disagree on one issue or another”, DeMoss, a conservative Southern Baptist whose clients have included the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, recently “reached out to some people from various political, racial and religious backgrounds to see if we could join our hearts and minds together in calling others to civility”, he wrote in a statement titled “Welcome to the Civility Project.”

Unfortunately, DeMoss started out by attacking gays and lesbians. “I had spent about two years volunteering for Mitt Romney, and I saw a lot of ugly rhetoric and behaviour aimed at Mormons and then at me,” DeMoss said.

“And then the results of the Proposition 8 vote in California [the constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage that passed last November'] contributed to my thinking – when you saw gay activists responding to the… vote by vandalizing churches and temples,” he claimed.

DeMoss’s comments were an odd way to get started in the civility business. Over the past several decades, the Religious Right’s fortunes have in part been built on demonising gays and lesbians. By recognising that history, DeMoss might have started out on better footing.

DeMoss is the president of a public relations outfit called The DeMoss Group, which, on its website claims that it is “the largest PR firm specializing in faith-based organizations and causes.” The DeMoss Group focuses on communications, media relations, marketing, non-profit management, and crisis management.

According to its website, “The Civility Project [is] a collection of liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, blacks and whites, and people of various faiths – or no faith – who agree that even in sharp disagreement we should not be disagreeable.”

“I decided to launch a project where I would talk not about unity, not about tolerance, not about getting along, not about compromise, but just about civility,” DeMoss said.

Participants are invited to “Take the Civility Pledge”, in which signatories agree to: “Be civil in my public discourse and behavior; be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them; stand against incivility when I see it.”

The key Democrat supporting The Civility Project is Lanny Davis, a tough political combatant who has been a longtime adviser to the Clintons, and who has served three terms on the Democratic National Committee.

According to CitizenLink, a news service of the conservative group Focus on the Family, “DeMoss was so impressed with Davis’s civil tone [while he was involved in Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign] that he wrote him a letter:

“I suspect that politically you and I may have nothing in common,” DeMoss wrote. “But as I’ve watched you conduct yourself in the public arena, I’ve always appreciated how you handled yourself, how you handle your adversaries, how you show respect for those who disagree with you, and for modeling civility in an increasingly uncivil town.”

Davis said the letter came as a surprise: “I’m getting all this hate mail, and I get this amazing letter from a perfect stranger who identifies himself as an evangelical Christian. I always try to give deference to somebody who disagrees with me. That is the point Mark made in his letter, that he noticed that about me, that I always try to be respectful of people who are of a different opinion.”

Writing about the Civility Project at Religion Dispatches, Candace Chellew-Hodge pointed out that perhaps the religious right was “taking its cue from George Barna’s book UnChristian, which calls for conservative Christians to be kinder [and] … soften their rough and often hateful rhetoric, especially toward gays and lesbians.”

“DeMoss has no intention of learning about the person on the other side of the issue,” Chellew-Hodge maintained. “He’s not interested in tolerating them, or finding a place of common ground where there can be unity, or compromising on his principles, or even getting along — it’s simply about being polite to one another — to not yell at one another, but to still push our own agendas.”

“In short, DeMoss has no interest in dialogue. He has no interest in learning about what those who oppose him think or believe, or even how they arrived at that thought or belief. He just wants them to smile, slap him on the back, and get out of his way while he pursues his agenda,” she asserted. “If they don’t, then he can paint them as the ‘uncivil’ person or group who is obstructing his progress.”

Many questions remain as to the efficacy of The Civility Project.

How will the third point in the civility pledge, the one about “standing against incivility when I see it”, manifest itself?

Does it mean that when former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin gives a speech, Ann Coulter writes a column, Rush Limbaugh broadcasts, and Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and Lou Dobbs take to the air, Civility Project folk will be monitoring their speech?

Thus far, the project has not issued any statements condemning the current Republican/insurance lobby-sponsored tactic of aggressively breaking up town hall meetings in districts of Democratic Party Congressional representatives.

Is DeMoss sincere with his plea for civility, or is he reading the political tea leaves (the Republicans and the Christian Right have hit low points in public opinion polls)?

Candace Chellew-Hodge characterised DeMoss having started out by gay-bashing as an example of “bigotry with manners.”

According to the New Bethel Church website, the “Open Carry Celebration” was held on a Saturday instead of a Sunday, so that it was clear that it was “not a church worship service, where the focus is on Jesus and our responsibility to Him. Rather,” Pagano, a former Marine weapons instructor, pointed out, “this is merely a church-hosted event, similar to any other event that any other church may do to celebrate their heritage.”

The “Open Carry Celebration” was held several weeks after Pagano had encouraged his parishioners to bring the guns to a church-sponsored picnic. “Honestly, I would really like to see this mushroom into a Thunder over Louisville, where we are just inundated with civil-minded responsible gun owners,” Pagano said.

“As a Christian, I believe, and as an American this country was founded on the deep-seated belief in God and firearms — without which we wouldn’t be here today,” Pagano told FOX News during the run-up to the “Open Carry” event. “There is nothing illogical nor immoral about being a God-fearer and a decent community-minded individual who believes in rights to bear arms and use firearms for self-defense if necessary or just for sporting purposes.”

Ministry Today reported that “Pagano got the idea after hearing several of his congregants voice concern over the Obama administration’s views on gun control.” (During last year’s presidential campaign, Obama’s comment during a San Francisco fundraiser — just before the Pennsylvania primary – that it was “not surprising” that in tough economic times, people then “get bitter, [and] they cling to guns or religion …“ continues to feed the right wing rumor mill that the Obama administration has plans to fiddle around with the Second Amendment.)

Pagano had recently “preached a sermon called, ‘God, Guns, Gospel and Geometry,’ and during the [‘Open Carry Celebration’] … he met applause after declaring, ‘But for a deep-seated belief in God and firearms, this country would not be here today,’” Ministry Today reported.

Pagano’s “Open Carry Celebration,” which had been announced on the heels of the murder of Dr. George Tiller in a Wichita, Kansas church, was not without its critics. “I’m not opposed to people having guns. I have three,” said Rev. Jerry Cappel, president of the Kentuckian Interfaith Community, a coalition of local religious leaders in the Louisville area, “You can be OK with the right to carry arms, but still find that joining the right to carry and Christ to be misguided,” Cappel added.

Pam Gersh, a Louisville resident who helped organize a Million Mom March against gun violence in the area in 2000, told ABC News that “The serious issue of gun violence [wa]s not being addressed. I don’t really understand the purpose of what Pagano is doing here.”

“Where there are killings of people like Dr. Tiller in church and there is no discussion of gun violence and only of abortion, then it shows there’s no real open dialogue about how to solve this problem,” said Gersh.

Lynn Joyce Hunter recently pointed out at politicsdaily.com that “Pagano’s plan may indicate the rise of a new phenomenon in American religion: the NRA Christian.” Hunter pointed out that “even putting aside the Sermon on the Mount and such biblical imagery as the beating of swords into plowshares, one must question whether an embrace of guns is the best way to claim a national identity and celebrate our patriotism — in or out of church.”

Hunter maintained that what particularly bothered her about “Pagano’s bring-your-gun-to-church-day, … [was] not the thought of Independence Day revelers enjoying a Second Amendment theme party, but the advent of NRA Christian evangelism. The murder of George Tiller was particularly eerie because he was shot and killed in his church. Christian churches have long been considered places of peace, and sanctuaries from societal violence. When this presumption of sanctuary becomes violated — from Archbishop Thomas Becket’s murder in 1170 in Canterbury Cathedral to the 1980 slaying of Salvadorian Archbishop Oscar Romero — there is a sense that our worship has been desecrated.”

Earlier this year, the Arkansas House of Representatives created quite a stir when it was considering a bill that would have allowed concealed hand guns in churches across the state. In late February, the state’s Senate Judiciary Committee voted not to allow that bill out of committee.

Pagano, who appears to maintain that without the Second Amendment – the right to bear arms – there would be no First Amendment – the right to free speech – and therefore no America as he knows it, has again placed the issue of carrying guns in the pews on the table. At the same time, his well-publicized event gave the pastor more than his fifteen minutes in the national spotlight.

As for the debate over guns, in a short post at Beliefnet, Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, author, radio and TV talk show host, and President of CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, asked: “Whatever one thinks about guns, gun ownership, or gun laws, do we really need any more religious leaders officiating over a marriage between faith and firearms?”

One Hirschfield reader responded unambiguously: “The US Constitution is divinely inspired, and nowhere is the hand of the Almighty in the creation of our country more evident in the glorious right of all its citizens to defend themselves enshrined in the Sacred Second Amendment. To me, bringing firearms to church, synagogue, or mosque is a joyful act of worship and thanksgiving for this our most sacred right, to defend our very lives from royal oppression.”

Over the past two months, right-wing extremists have assassinated an abortion doctor in Wichita, Kansas, murdered three policemen in Pittsburgh, and killed a security guard while attempting to shoot up the U.S. National Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C.

While all of these incidents appear to have been carried out by so-called “lone wolves” — right-wing extremists steep in movement politics but acting on their own initiative — all three killers have ties to, or have been involved with, radical right-wing organizations.

Scott Roeder, the alleged killer of Dr. George Tiller, has been identified with the right-wing Freeman movement, and was apparently related to the Army of God, one of the 1990s most radical anti-abortion groups.

According to friends of Richard Poplawski, the man accused of ambushing and murdering three Pittsburgh policemen, the killer was worried that the Obama Administration was poised to ban guns, a charge that has been repeatedly made by right-wing columnists and conservative hosts of talk radio programs. “If a total collapse is what it takes to wake our brethren and guarantee future generations of white children walk this continent, if that is what it takes to restore our freedoms and recapture our land: Let it begin this very second and not a moment later,” Poplawski wrote on a white supremacist Web site under the name Braced for Fate, the Anti-Defamation League recently noted. James W. von Brunn, the 88-year-old white supremacist who allegedly took a rifle into the museum and killed security guard Stephen T. Johns, an African American, was steeped in anti-Jewish, anti-Black and anti-immigrant hatred, was a Holocaust denier who had deep roots in the white nationalist movement.

The Wichita assassination and the Holocaust Museum attack occurred a month or so after the release of a report prepared by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis, which warned of the possibility of an uptick in violent activities by right-wing extremist groups.

The report pointed out that the election of America’s first African American president, the sharp economic downturn, rising unemployment, and unfounded rumors that the administration of Barack Obama would be pushing for stricter gun control regulations, could fuel a resurgence of “right-wing extremist groups,” bringing with it a spate of homegrown terrorist activities.

The DHS assessment, titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” — originally ordered up by the Bush Administration — pointed out that “Right-wing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.”

“The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the 1990s [during the Clinton administration] when right-wing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs and the perceived threat to U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers,” the assessment read.

“Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of right-wing extremist groups . . . The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by right-wing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement,” the report stated.

Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Sara Kuban said the assessment was one in an ongoing series published by DHS “to facilitate a greater understanding of radicalization in the United States.” An earlier report had focused on possible violence by left-wing activists.

“DHS has no specific information that domestic right-wing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but right-wing extremists may be gaining new recruitments by playing on their fears about several emerging issues,” Kuban pointed out.

Release of the DHS assessment incurred the immediate wrath of a number of right-wing talk show hosts, commentators, and columnists. The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson pointed out that “some conservative commentators tried mightily to paint the memo as an underhanded attempt by the Obama administration to smear its honorable critics by equating ‘right wing’ with ‘terrorism.’”

A group spearheaded by some of America’s largest Religious Right groups — acting under the name No Political Profiling — released an ad that claimed the DHS report, “declared law-abiding citizens who express their First Amendment Rights as: ‘the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States.’”

Jeffrey Mazzella of the Alexandria, Virginia-based Center for Individual Freedom was among the first who called for the firing of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.

Mat Staver, the founder of the Orlando, FL.-based Liberty Counsel, a conservative Christian legal operation, decided to “match fire with fire.” In a move both political and entrepreneurial, Staver invited supporters to get an official laminated, wallet-sized (”personalized with your name”) complimentary “Right-wing Extremist” card, “and Take a Stand against the New Administration’s Attack Machine.”

While originally pointing out that the card would be sent free (he now is apparently asking for a specific donation), Staver noted that “there are expenses associated with this national campaign, so any financial support you provide will be greatly appreciated and put to immediate use in advancing and protecting our precious liberties.”

In response to the criticism, the DHS pulled its report, promising to come up with a revised edition. Thus far, there has been no revised edition.

In a recent piece posted at PolitickerNY.com, Joe Conason pointed out that the Southern Poverty Law Center has reported that “authorities have discovered more than five dozen terror conspiracies by far-right groups, including militia outfits, neo-Nazi gangs and others claiming that their cause is above the law,” over the past fifteen or so years. “The Oklahoma City bombing was only the most notorious and tragic of those plots, which have cost lives, damaged property and infringed on our safety and freedom,” Conason noted. “The late Dr. Tiller, who was shot on an earlier occasion, was the eighth U.S. abortion provider murdered since 1977. At least 17 others have been targets for attempted murder.”

In its spring 2009 report, the SPLC, an Alabama-based watchdog group tracking hate groups for 30 years, found more than 900 hate groups — including the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, racist skinheads, and Black separatists — currently operating in the U.S., an all-time high.

“Right across the board, extremist groups are thriving right now,” says Mark Potok, Director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project. Potok, who attributed the rise in the number of hate groups to a number of reasons including the election of Obama and unresolved immigration issues, pointed out that “We’re looking at a kind of perfect storm of factors that really favor the continued growth of these groups.”

Responding to the murder of Dr. George Tiller, Attorney General Eric Holder sent federal marshals to protect doctors, nurses and abortion clinics from possible attack. But that may not be enough. And, in the aftermath of the attack at the Holocaust Museum, it remains to be seen how many people will be applying for Mat Staver’s “Right-Wing Extremist” card!

Meanwhile, as a guest on Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC program recently pointed out, protesters in front of health clinics across the country have been emboldened by Dr. Tiller’s assassination, and have been cranking up the rhetoric and violent threats. And, the announcement on Tuesday, June 9, by the Tiller family that the Wichita clinic would be closed permanently, is an indication that homegrown terrorists have won another round.

In the immediate aftermath of the murder of Dr. George Tiller, words came flowing forth from every conceivable direction. The media reported, longtime anti-abortion activists “condemned,” but few apologized for years of hate speech directed at Tiller.

In the hours following the murder of Dr, George Tiller, and the subsequent condemnations from Religious Right leaders, I remembered Jerry Falwell’s notorious post-9/11 remarks, blaming feminists and the ACLU, among others — and the uncomfortable flip-flopping that followed. It was clear that his comments represented what he was thinking. Yet it was also clear, as he tried to backtrack and apologize, that he realized he had monumentally goofed.

I was reminded of those wretched Falwell maneuverings on Monday evening while watching Frank Schaeffer — the son of the late Francis Schaeffer, one of the founding fathers and most revered figures on the Christian Right – point out during his appearance on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show that the condemnations of Tiller’s murder issued by leaders of the Christian Right seemed forced and empty.

The statements from anti-abortion leaders basically covered the same ground: they condemned the murder, expressed compassion for Tiller’s family, and hoped that the perpetrator would soon be captured and brought to justice.

“He reaped what he sowed”

It was left to Randall Terry, the founder of Operation Rescue, to pick up Falwell’s rhetorical baton. At a news conference at the National Press Club on Monday, June 1, Terry plainly stated that Tiller “was a mass murderer and, horrifically, he reaped what he sowed.”

Terry said that Tiller would be remembered as “one of the villains of history.” “I grieve for Dr. Tiller because he left this life, perhaps without proper preparation to face God,” Terry said. “The thought of him leaving this life with blood on his hands for having killed so many thousands of children and not having been prepared to meet his maker is a dreadful, terrifying thought.”

Terry appeared to be verbalizing what other, more “respected” Christian Right leaders couldn’t. Since Terry has been outside the mainstream for years, he had the license to say whatever he wanted; the more extremist his rhetoric, the more national media he would receive. For Dobson, Perkins, et al, they had the political realities to reckon with.

Sharing the blame

For Frank Schaeffer, the author of Crazy for God: How I Grew Up As One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Live to Take it All (or Almost All) of it Back, and who had for years been privy to the backroom conversations of Christian Right operatives, the condemnations were a sham. Schaeffer dramatically opened an op-ed piece in the June 2 Baltimore Sun by writing: “My late father and I share part of the blame for the murder of Dr. George Tiller . . . ”

He pointed out how his father had “compared America and its legalized abortion to Hitler’s Germany and said that whatever tactics would have been morally justified in removing Hitler would be justified in trying to stop abortion.” And Frank Schaeffer also noted, quoting from his own book:

“Angry speech has become the norm in American religion from both the right and the left. Words are spoken which, when taken seriously, lead directly to violence by the unhinged and/or the truly committed.”

While Schaeffer stated that abortion “should be legal,” he also believes “that it should be re-regulated according to fetal development.” Nevertheless, he recognizes that “the same hate machine I was part of is still attacking all abortionists as ‘murderers.’ And today, once again, the ‘pro-life’ leaders are busy ducking their personal responsibility for people acting on their words.

”The people who stir up the fringe never take responsibility. But I’d like to say that I, and the people I worked with in the pro-life movement, all contributed to this killing by our foolish and incendiary words.”

Common Ground?

Sometime during the day after Tiller’s murder, I received another condemnation in my in-box. This one was from Faith In Public Life, an organization working hard to establish “common ground” amongst conservative and liberal religious leaders. (Thus far, I have been agnostic about “common ground” efforts.) The headline read “Religious Leaders Seeking Common Ground on Abortion: Condemn George Tiller’s Murder, Say Act Offends Us All”:

In reaction to the tragic murder of Dr. George Tiller, religious leaders and groups who hold different views on the legality of abortion, but a shared commitment to working towards common ground solutions to reduce abortions by addressing its root causes issued the following statement this morning:

“We were shocked and saddened to hear that Dr. George Tiller was murdered at his church yesterday morning. Such violence is an affront to the teachings of all faith traditions and an attack on civil society. Houses of worship have served as sanctuaries providing a safe harbor even in times of widespread violence for millennia — that this act took place in Dr. Tiller’s church where he was serving as an usher on Sunday morning only underscores its abhorrence. We condemn it, and we pray for Dr. Tiller’s family, church and community.

“As people of faith working to create civility and common ground on abortion, this reprehensible attack reminds us of our moral obligation to respect the humanity of those on both sides of this issue. Wherever we stand, this act offends us all.”

The statement was signed by a host of religious leaders.

In this e-mail, Faith in Public Life asked if I had any questions. This was my (immediate, angry and not all that articulate) response:

In my mind, the statement does not go far enough. Why haven’t these highly respected religious leaders that are condemning the murder of Dr. George Tiller at the same time, also condemn the hate talk that is spewed daily against abortion providers by a number of so-called Christian groups?

What good is merely a condemnation of the murder if it doesn’t try to get to one of the reasons that ordinary people commit such acts — the hate speech (calling doctors baby killers or even calling the president a baby killer) that drives people to it. Keep in mind that even James Dobson and Tony Perkins have condemned the murder. What good is a condemnation of Tiller’s murder if the hate speech that often inspires — perhaps even drives — one to commit such murders is not also condemned?

Your thoughts?

No response yet.

For now, if you’ve been following the battle over same-sex marriage and you don’t know who the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez or Rubén Díaz are, you likely soon will.

Rodriguez, President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference (NHCLC), and Diaz, a New York state Senator from the Bronx a Pentecostal pastor in that borough, are two key players leading anti-same-sex marriage forces in New York State.

On Sunday, May 17, while much of the “culture war” crowd was focused on events at Notre Dame University — where President Barack Obama was heartily welcomed by UND graduates and their families — things were hopping in New York City. Thousands of anti-same-sex marriage activists marched in opposition to Governor David Patterson’s gay marriage bill. The Christian Post reported that the mostly Latino crowd, which gathered at the Governor’s Manhattan office, “stretched from 35th to 40th Street on 3rd Avenue in New York City.”

At the same time hundreds of marriage-equality advocates gathered at a rally near Rockefeller Center. Speakers at the pro–marriage equality rally included New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, City Council speaker Christine Quinn, state assemblyman Daniel O’Donnell, and actors Cynthia Nixon, David Hyde Pierce, Cheyenne Jackson, and Gavin Creel.

Last week, the New York State Assembly passed the marriage equality bill by an 89 to 52 vote. According to Box Turtle Bulletin, “The Assembly voted for a marriage bill in 2007, as well. But in that vote the count was 85 to 61. And while this year’s vote only has four more ‘yes’ votes, the margin of victory increased from 24 to 37.” How the bill will fare in the State senate is anybody’s guess.

Among the leaders of the protest was Rubén Díaz who had earlier charged Patterson with disrespecting religious groups by introducing gay marriage legislation on April 16, a few days before the weeks of Passover and Easter began. As if it would have been okay on May Day!

Charisma News Online reported that at this time, Diaz has expressed near certainty that the bill will not pass in the Senate, as it “lacks the 32 votes needed to pass the measure, even though there are 32 Democratic senators.”

“I have the commitment form six Democrats that they will not vote for it,” Díaz said. “So they’re going to have to go to the Republicans if they want to pass it in the Senate. But this is a Democratic agenda, and I doubt that the Republicans would jump on board to make the Democrats look good.” According to Charisma News Online, “Even if the gay marriage bill is reintroduced every year, Díaz promises to block it. ‘I’m a preacher. I’m not only a state senator. I would not vote for that.’”

Joining Diaz at the demonstration was a coalition that included Radio Vision Cristiana International, the New York Hispanic Clergy Organization, the CONLICO network of bishops and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference (NHCLC).

“Radio Vision has been motivated to respond to . . . Paterson and every other elected official, to let them know that we are not sleeping and that we will not stay idle with our hands crossed while they pressure and promote marriage between persons of the same sex,” said the Rev. Milton Donato, president of Radio Vision Cristiana.

Amongst this group of pastors and politicians, Samuel Rodriquez has the highest public profile and biggest national platform. In late April, Rodriguez’s NHCLC (NHCLC) and the Hispanic National Association of Evangelicals, sponsored the third Annual Hispanic/African American Evangelical Summit in the Baltimore Metropolitan area. “With approximately 1,700 in attendance, this event establishes the gathering as the premier Black/Brown faith event in our nation. The African American Hispanic Summit served the Christian community as it provided a venue for multi-layered, cross cultural interactions,” declared Dr. Angel Nunez, NHCLC Senior Vice President and National Director of the Hispanic/Black Evangelical Alliance.

“Hispanics and African Americans stand as the Peter and John of the 21st Century American Church. We stand before the Gate called Beautiful. Our communities once again lie crippled, paralyzed and without hope. We, the Black and the Brown may not have all the silver or the gold but what we have we give; In the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth we tell our families, communities and nation, get up and walk,” stated Rodriguez.

In early May, in a post at the “On Faith” website sponsored by Newsweek and The Washington Post Rodriguez criticized President Obama for “demonstrate[ing] his brand of political correctness by acknowledging a day of prayer and simultaneously rejecting the idea that the White House should somehow commemorate the day in an official event.”

As Frederick Clarkson recently pointed out at Talk2Action, Rodriguez was a signatory to a document titled “Come Let Us Reason Together: A Fresh Look at Shared Cultural Values Between Evangelicals and Progressives (CLURT)”, a document aimed at establishing “common ground” between evangelicals and progressive religious.

At the anti-same-sex marriage three-hour extravaganza, Diaz told the crowd: “They accuse us of homophobia. They accuse us of being radicals . . . They accuse us of many things because they want to close the mouth of the church.”

According to Gay City News, “Diaz credited Radio Vision Cristiana, a New Jersey-based AM radio station that broadcasts religious programming, with turning out the [huge] crowd” which, organizers claimed, included representatives from 3,000 churches from the tri-state area.

“They sounded the trumpet and here we are,” Diaz said. “The sleeping giant has awakened and nothing can make him go back to sleep.”

Rabbi Yehuda Levin of Brooklyn, a longtime anti-gay activist, played the fear card to its fullest possible extent: “If this legislation passes, God forbid, you and I will be considered by the state law as bigots, as discriminating. They will take away from our religious schools the tax deductions. They will not give us any government for our schools. They will make our marriage counselors counsel homosexual couples. Our accountants will have to do taxes for married homosexual couples. Our children will be brought in school “Heath has Two Mommies” . . . The full force of the state government will come down on us like a ton of bricks. We will be outcasts.”

And, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a Washington, D.C.-based lobby group, was also on hand. “The politicians are unleashing chaos on our children, on our families, and on our nation by redefining marriage . . . One thing stands in the way of this chaos — you,” Perkins told the crowd.

In between battling the homosexual menace in the U.S., hawking his notorious holocaust revisionist book The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, and declaring war against the Southern Poverty Law Center for refusing to remove his Abiding Truth Ministries from its list of hate groups, Scott Lively president of “Defend the Family” — a service of Abiding Truth Ministries — has again taken his anti-gay crusade on the road.

Earlier this year, UGPulse.com reported that the Family Life Network, “has organized a training seminar to equip Ugandans with information and skills to fight what it calls spiraling promotion of homosexuality in the country.” Stephen Langa, the executive director of Family Life Network “says that Uganda is now under extreme pressure from homosexual groups to de-criminalize homosexuality,” UGPulse.com noted. “He says homosexuals in the country were boosted by a December 2008 Court victory which declared that it is unconstitutional to discriminate against homosexuals and that they should enjoy the same rights as enjoyed by other Ugandans.”

Lively, who has spoken at previous African events organized by Langa, was joined in early March at the Hotel Triangle in Kampala by Don Schmierer from International Healing Ministries and a board member of Exodus International, and Caleb Lee Brundidge, who works with a ministry that, “rehabilitates homosexuals and lesbians.”

According to Don Burroway, writing at Box Turtle Bulletin, Schmierer, “the author of five books related to ex-gay counseling” — including An Ounce of Prevention, What’s a Father To Do?, and Celebrating God’s Design — has been “quite a globetrotter lately, having traveled to Seoul, South Korea, in March of last year, as well as to the Ukraine last summer.” According to Burroway, all of Schmierer’s books “have been translated into several languages, including Russian and Ukraine.”

Brundidge is a staff member at Richard Cohen’s International Healing Foundation, “which advocates the controversial ‘holding’ or ‘touch’ therapy to cure homosexuality,” Burroway pointed out.

At the Kampala conference, Lively is quoted by Ugandan activist Kasha Jacqueline from Freedom and Roam Uganda as saying that “The gay movement is very evil and we must stop it immediately.” Lively went on:

You have a gay movement in Uganda that is operating at a high level, which you must bear in mind. This gay movement around the world has a handbook that they use and that is what the Ugandan gay movement is using now. You must be ready to stop this gay agenda. And don’t think that fighting the gay movement is the solution — you will be fighting a losing battle because this movement has come to stop humanity. They have a clear vision, mission and strategies. The only way to defeat them is to compete with them. Their movement is 70 years old and that’s why they don’t care about you. They know you will die soon and they will replace you and take over the nation. They have decided to recruit the youth.

You have a lot of work to do. Homosexuality is immoral and we cannot sit back and see immorality controlling nations. Homosexuality is equivalent to pedophilia in many ways. Homosexuals cannot control their sexual desires and behaviors. If all of us acted upon our desires and feelings then where would the world be? Families would break up because of adultery. People would continue to molest children, etc.

This is only the latest stop for Lively on what might be termed an International Hate Tour.

A few years back, Lively — whose book The Pink Swastika is still advertised prominently on the home page of Defend the Family.com — arrived in the Russian city of Krasnoyarsk for a speaking engagement at that city’s Sverdlovsky Palace of Culture. “Many countries of the former Soviet Union, which had been the outposts of family values recently, have submitted to the pressure of homosexuals,” Gay Republic Daily reported Lively as saying at one of his Russian stops. Lively also noted that a gay parade that had taken place in Lithuania, and that there was an event in Kiev where the Ukrainian President stood “on one stage with George Michael, a homosexual singer, who has been caught making love in the bushes recently.”

Lively pointed out that in the Russian town of Omsk “homosexuals penetrated into a local university and formed their own club, which tried to breakdown” his lecture. “But I believe,” Lively went on, “that Russia will become a country, where ‘the blue plague’ will be stopped.”

A short time later, OneNewsNow, a news service operated by Donald Wildmon’s American Family Association (AFA), reported that Watchmen on the Walls (WOW) — designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group — had announced its “participation” in AFA-sponsored boycott of Ford Motor Company.”

WOW’s spokesperson is Scott Lively. According to OneNewsNow, WOW “says it will … help spread it [the boycott] to Russian-speaking countries near its headquarters in Latvia. OneNewsNow quoted Lively as saying that WOW helps “coordinate pro-family opposition to the international homosexual movement.” He added that, “the organization will promote the boycott using its network of activists in more than ten countries.”

OneNewsNow also reported that Lively maintained that the “people of the former Soviet Union’s Russian-speaking countries are among the strongest opponents of the homosexual agenda in the world, and he expects the automaker’s sales to significantly shrink once news of the boycott reaches InVictory.org, a Christian news service in those same countries with an estimated one-million readers.”

Lively co-founded Watchmen on the Walls, “a quasi-religious anti-gay hate group which calls homosexuality ‘inherently evil,’” Talk2Action pointed out in a December 2007 post. Lively’s “collaborators” include Alexey Ledyaev, the leader of the Latvia-based international New Generation Church, and Ken Hutcherson, a former National Football League player turned preacher who is the founder of Antioch Bible Church, another anti-gay enterprise located near Seattle, WA.

Hutcherson, who grabbed some headlines during this past December’s annual “War on Christmas” battle in the state of Washington, spoke at Ledyaev’s Latvian church in March 2007, according to Box Turtle Bulletin. “While there,” the Bulletin reported, “he claimed that he was speaking on behalf of President Bush, saying that the White House’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives named him ‘Special Envoy for Adoptions, Family Values, Religious Freedom, and Medical Relief.’ When the Seattle Stranger asked the White House about it, spokeswoman Alyssa J. McLenninghen said nobody gave Hutcherson any such title or authority to speak on behalf of the White House. Hutcherson promised to prove his status by producing video of him being given the “power,” but no such proof has surfaced.”

Last year, Lively moved from Temecula, California to Springfield, Massachusetts, where he joined the New Generation Christian Center as pastor and leader of The School of Christian Activism, Talk2Action’s Laurel reported. “Interestingly,” Laurel noted, “his arrival has only been announced on the church’s Russian page, not on the English page.”

The Murder of Satender Singh

Ledyaev made news in 2007, when members of his church in California murdered Satender Singh, a 26-year-old Fijian of Indian descent. At the time, Lively called the murder “unfortunate” and Watchmen on the Walls released a statement that refused to apologize for the murder. The statement insisted that the group is a “world association of men and women of all races, colors and nationalities who believe in the superiority of the natural family and marriage of one man and one woman.”

The statement noted that while the organization is “against cohabitation, divorce, abortion, adultery and other acts that undermine society on which civilization is based,” it is especially opposed to “homosexuality because this destructive practice in the evils of organized political movement and became the principal enemies of the natural family.”

Watchmen on the Walls maintained that it did not “support violence and did not condone violence.” However, it stated that it would “not apologize for the fight against homosexuality because it is inappropriate and harmful unnatural phenomenon, in both moral and physical, and psychological relationships.” The organization claimed that while “some hate homosexuals,” it is not among them. “We see homosexuals similar to alcoholics, that is, as the unfortunate people who have been held hostage by their harmful lifestyles.”

The statement extended the alcoholism metaphor saying that by “refusing treatment, they [homosexuals] are on a par with alcoholics’ right to privacy in their own dwellings. But public recruitment adherents of this way of life that is unacceptable.”

Watchmen spelled out it “task” as “merg[ing] with associates around the world and assist them in the approval of the natural family and traditional marriage, as well as the healing of homosexuals, which in this endeavor. We will help those who share our beliefs, to take key positions in education, business, government and the media around the world,” the statement warned.” The group pledged not to be cowed by critics that “believe homosexuality is normal and useful, especially journalists in Europe and America, many of whom are themselves homosexual or their active supporters.”

The statement concluded by declaring that it is “searching for the sense of cooperation between men and women in different countries and different nationalities. We do not like cowards, who, for example, dare to speak out against same-[sex] marriages, but does not dare to say that homosexuality is inherently evil. We do not need chauvinists who hate homosexuals in the same way as some people hate other races and strangers. We need a courageous and decent people who love the natural order of imams and the human family, wishing her approval, promotion, improvement and protection as the primary sources of any society on earth.”

In August 2007, one month after the murder of Satender Singh, Lively described the situation to an audience in the Siberian capital of Novosibirsk in the Russian Federation. The response from the audience was shocking, perhaps even to Lively.

Now, I’ve been working with the Russian community in Sacramento. And I want to tell you this is an example of how bad things are in the United States. Because we’ve come to a place in the United States where the homosexuals have achieved very high power. And they’ve begun to punish . . . They’ve begun to cause the political powers to punish anyone who says that homosexuality is wrong.

There was a situation in Sacramento a few weeks ago in a public park. There was a group of homosexuals and they were very drunk and one of the homosexual men was taking off his pants. And there were children in the park. And a Russian man went over to these homosexuals and he was rebuking them and there started a fight. And the Russian man punched the homosexual. [The audience starts to shout and applaud.] No, no, no, don’t . . .The man was very drunk . . . the homosexual was very drunk. He was very drunk and he fell down and he hit his head and he died. [Some in the audience start to applaud and laugh] No. . . no . . . .

Now the Russian man has been accused of murder and the FBI is seeking him. And all of the powers in Sacramento have been accusing all of the Russian community of being murderers. And the goal is to silence everyone who speaks against homosexuality. And this is a very dangerous situation because we don’t want homosexuals to be killed. We want them to be saved. Amen?

Lively Takes on Southern Poverty Law Center

In a recent piece titled “Help Expose the Southern Poverty Law Center,” Lively, clearly upset over the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) listing his organization as a hate group, maintained that he is “not the violent hatemonger they [the SPLC] portray me as,” and he suggested that readers go to his website to “confirm” that assertion. “After being placed on the hate list the first time,” Lively tried to get the SPLC “to remove us on the grounds that we really don’t belong there.” He discovered through a reporter’s inquiry of the SPLC’s Mark Potok, “that we were added because I am the co-author of The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party” and that he “would need to repudiate the claims of the book to be removed from the list.” Lively then states that he has “no intention of distancing [himself] from my accurate, factual documentation of the homosexual roots of the Nazi regime.”

Tired of “being smeared” and defamed on the internet by ‘gay’ apologists, Lively has “decided” that he “will not, by my silence, embolden the SPLC [efforts] to widen its attack on the pro-family movement beyond the several groups already on their ‘hate’ list (most of which as undeserving as ATM of this designation).” Lively, who is a lawyer, has decided not to sue. Instead he is embarking on a campaign “to give them a taste of their own medicine and expose the SPLC as the blindly partisan, anti-Christian hate group which it has become.” While “SPLC leaders have every right to their bigoted views . . . “they do not have the right, at the same time, to claim the status of independent, neutral arbiters of the homosexual issue.” (For more of Lively’s declaration of war against the SPLC, his fundraising plans for the campaign, and his three letters to the SPLC, go here)

Contrary to what Lively claims, Mark Potok, the director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala., told me via telephone, the SPLC does not “associate Lively with violent activities.” Potok acknowledged the fact that Lively contacted the SPLC and he said that he “replied to him about how he could get off the list.” Potok pointed out that the main reason Lively is on the list is because “in our view he consciously lies about, and defames, gay people. His theory of the Holocaust is equivalent to the flat earth theory. It’s obvious to us that he has to know his allegations are completely false.”

“In fact,” Potok added, “we don’t ordinarily list groups that say homosexuality is wrong or see it as a sin; we list very few anti-gay groups. They have to be very extreme in their views. We see Lively the same way we see Paul Cameron; the two of them in our view consciously promote easily provable false defamations. They don’t seem to care at all what the truth is.”

Potok had no comment about Lively’s new anti-SPLC campaign.

In your heart of hearts, you know that only you can save the rapidly declining fortunes of the Republican Party; not John McCain, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Joe the Plumber, or even Rush Limbaugh. To save the Party, you will do and say whatever it takes. If you need to go on bended-knee to Dr. James Dobson, and publicly acknowledge on his radio program that you have not always walked the straight and narrow, you’ll do that. If you have to align yourself with the likes of the American Family Association’s Donald Wildmon, you’ll do that. If you need to call out gays, you’ll do that.

The Internet is chock full of stories about your comings and goings. Here’s a piece about you jumping on the Tax Day Tea Party bandwagon. There’s a host of stories about your conversion to Catholicism.

You’re a 24/7 op-ed machine, a news cycle unto yourself as you breathlessly pass out opinions on Sunday morning network news shows or as a regular contributor to the Fox News Channel.

No one would accuse you of being a clothes hound or being coifed stylishly. You aren’t cut; no poster child for physical fitness. You tend to be on the rather schlubby side of the species. You’ve been a sore winner and a sore loser.

And, to cap it off, the public has never really liked you.

You’re Newt Gingrich and you’re thinking that it is now your time.

These days, Gingrich is all about building infrastructure. Not in the sense of advocating the building of roads and bridges; he’s more about building connections to as many sectors of the Republican Party as he can. In addition to multiple television appearances, in late March, “President Obama, and the Future of American Freedom” was the title of his lecture at Colgate University. He also recently spoke with college Republicans at the College of the Ozarks in Point Lookout, Missouri.

Douchebag/Tough Guy

In one of his essential and always illuminating “A Thousand words About Our Culture” columns for Esquire, Stephen Marche wrote that “the departure of W” signals that “the era of the douchebag is over.” Marche, surveying the landscape for the type of “tough guy” that can lead us out of the financial wasteland and into a dare-we-say-it brighter future, pointed out that “in a recent op-ed for The New York Times, Ron Chernow offered Ferdinard Pecora, the cigar-chomping son of a Sicilian cobbler who investigated corrupt financial titans after the 1929 crash, as a model for what Wall Street needs now. Pecora belonged to an even grander American tradition, though, a tradition older than the 20th century even, dating from George Washington kicking the British out of the colonies: Find the toughest son of a bitch you can to get rid of all the douchebags. This time, hopefully, it will be once and for all.”

In matters of character, family values, and affairs of the heart, Gingrich has always been more douchebag than tough guy. As Max Blumenthal recently reported, in the late 1990s, after Gingrich political strategies failed dismally, he “promptly … dump[ed] his second wife, Marianne Ginther. He announced his intention to divorce her just as he had done with his first wife, Jackie Battley — while she was lying in a hospital bed, immobilized after a major medical procedure. (Battley was recovering from cancer surgery; Ginther’s appendix had ruptured). He never bothered to tell his wife in person that he was leaving her for another woman. He called her on the phone, delivered the news and hung up.”

Oddly enough, for someone known for shooting from the lip on just about everything, Gingrich has been noticeably silent about his conversion to Catholicism, although that did not stop him from criticizing the University of Notre Dame for inviting President Barack Obama to speak at its commencement, saying that Obama’s “policies are so anti-Catholic values.”

Gingrich who previously had identified as a Baptist, has evidently decided to wait a while before talking openly about his personal conversion. In an interview with OneNewsNow, a news service affiliated with Donald Wildmon’s American Family Association, Gingrich said that he hasn’t “talked about this much in public, and I’m not going to for at least six months or a year, but I will say that I found myself deeply comforted, and a deep sense of belonging and of finding a peace in my soul in a way that I just found very, very powerful.”

Gingrich of course is open-mouthed about just about everything else. Before North Korea’s failed rocket launch, he told Fox News Channel’s Greta Van Susteren that he “would use whatever methods that were necessary for the missile never to be launched.”

After the launch, on “Fox News Sunday,” he said: “We do not appreciate the scale of threat that is evolving on the planet, and North Korea is a totally irresponsible dictatorship run by a person who is clearly out of touch with reality. One morning, just like 9/11, there’s going to be a disaster, and people are going to look around and say, ‘Gosh, why didn’t anyone think of that?’ Well, I’m telling you the time to think about it’s before the disaster, not afterwards.”

Those words were eerily reminiscent of comments he made during the summer of 2006 when he said that the Israeli/Hezbollah conflict was an indicator that we were involved in “World War III.” His tough guy solution: “Israel wouldn’t leave southern Lebanon as long as there was a single missile there. I would go in and clean them all out and I would announce that any Iranian airplane trying to bring missiles to re-supply them would be shot down. This idea that we have this one-sided war where the other team gets to plan how to kill us and we get to talk, is nuts.”

Gingrich also pointed out that the use of the term “World War III” could galvanize public support for Republican Party candidates by re-energizing the base of the Party. The message, he said, is “okay, if we’re in the third world war, which side do you think should win?”

‘Counterfactual History’

As Atlanta Journal Constitution columnist Jay Bookman recently pointed out, Gingrich “is a fan of ‘counterfactual history,’ the what-if stories that try to imagine what might have happened had events taken a slightly different course or leaders made a slightly different decision.” Amongst his books are those that ask “what if the Confederates had won at Gettysburg? [and] what if the Japanese had followed up the attack on Pearl Harbor more aggressively?”

So, Bookman asks, what if Gingrich had been elected president last November? “Well,” Bookman wrote, “hundreds of thousands of South Koreans and thousands of U.S. soldiers would probably be dead, much of Seoul would be a smoldering ruin, and an already overstretched U.S. military would be scrambling trying to respond to a desperate situation on the Korean Peninsula, with a million-man North Korean military on the move.”

Gingrich mimics Cheney: CNN reported that in an online Q&A session with Politico, Gingrich was asked: “Do you agree with Dick Cheney’s assessment that we are less safe under the Obama administration?” Gingrich: “Dick Cheney is clearly right in saying that between the Court decisions about terrorists and the administration’s [sic] actions the United States is running greater risks of getting attacked than we were under President Bush.”

According to Reynolds, an investigative reporter whose work on the religious right has been featured in Rolling Stone, US News & World Report, and 60 Minutes, “the group caught my eye because it was involved with holding support rallies for Judge Roy Moore, who, as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court defied a federal order to remove his 5,300-pound monument of the Ten Commandments from inside the state’s judicial building.” The statue was later removed from the building and Moore was removed from the bench.

“Later,” said Reynolds, “I discovered that America 21 was involved with former Texas Congressman Tom Delay and the Republican Party’s uber-lobbyist Jack Abramoff.”

According to Reynolds, America 21 “was run by an old anti-abortion ambulance-chasing lawyer and lobbyist named J Thomas Smith… [who] was working on behalf of some Christian evangelicals that were looking to set up shop in Kurdistan.” Those discoveries led him to Douglas and Marilyn Layton and Servant Group International, a project run out of the Belmont Church in Nashville.

While Franklin Graham was preparing to provide relief to beleaguered Iraqis (and to find Christian converts), Servant Group International had already been in Iraq for more than ten years. Again, Reynolds:

In September 2003, four months after US forces defeated Saddam Hussein, 350 evangelical pastors and church leaders assembled in Kirkuk, welcomed by Kurdistan Regional Government President Massoud Barzani. During the gathering, George Grant, the American director of the Classical School of The Medes, declared that ‘Jesus Christ is Lord over all things; He is Lord over every Mullah, every Ayatollah, every Imam, and every Mahdi pretender; He is Lord over the whole of the earth even Iraq!’

In a recent interview, Reynolds discussed the curiously strong presence that Christian evangelicals have established in Northern Iraq.

How did Christian evangelicals get so deeply involved with the Kurds?

You might say that it started after Saddam Hussein’s 1988 assault on the Kurds, which culminated in the chemical weapon attack that killed thousands in the village of Halabja. Some 14,000 refugees from Kurdistan made their way to Nashville, Tennessee, now home to the largest Kurdish population in the nation. Four years later, a group of Nashville evangelical Dominionists known as Servant Group International, departed from the Belmont Church—a megachurch occupying several blocks on Music Square—making their way to the mountains of northern Iraq where they set up shop.

Why is Kurdistan important to Christian evangelicals?

For evangelicals, Northern Iraq is prime real estate in what they call the “10/40 Window,” which is a geographical delineation at 10 and 40 degrees North latitude that opens across North Africa, through the Middle East, India and closes in Indonesia. The concept originated in 1991 with Argentine evangelist Luis Bush, and was expanded upon by his fellow New Apostolics C. Peter Wagner and George Otis, Jr. These zealous dominionists called it the “primary spiritual battleground in the world today…the Church’s final evangelistic frontier.”

When the “spiritual warriors” of Servant Group International headed out of Nashville for Kurdistan it was under this banner. With the compliance of the Barzani-led KRG and a sympathetic Bush Administration, these US evangelicals have established a solid base of operations in the Middle East for their aggressive and potentially inflammable brand of proselytizing. With tensions ratcheting up between the Kurds and Iraqi Sunnis over who will control the oil-rich regions of Kirkuk and the Nineveh plain, having these American end-time evangelicals trying to convert Muslims in Kurdistan with the blessings of the KRG is, as a longtime Kurdistan expert told me, “like striking matches in a room full of gasoline.”

What was Servant Group International up to?

The folks from Belmont Church had a very big agenda. They brought with them Kurdish-language bibles, medical equipment, lots of money, and a long-range plan to establish their “Father’s Kingdom” between the Turkish border and Iran. Since the time of its arrival in Northern Iraq, Servant Group International has widened its presence, establishing bases in Turkey, Liberia, Indonesia, Germany and Norway.

Can you describe how Servant Group International operates?

What is especially distinctive about SGI—and its partners—is its development of a military model of evangelism (‘spiritual warfare’), which includes covert action tactics (‘tentmaking’), intelligence gathering (‘spiritual mapping’). They have an ingrained animosity to Islam, and their Dominionist ‘Kingdom Now’ worldview, is a fusion of neo-Calvinist authoritarianism and ‘New Apostolic’ Pentecostalism, a cult-like millenarian sect of the Assemblies of God led by self-anointed ‘apostles’ and ‘prophets.’ Interestingly enough, its best known adherent is Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

The movement, marked by its obsession with demons and world conquest, grew under the guidance of C. Peter Wagner, head of an outfit called Global Harvest Ministries. In the November 2005 Global Harvest newsletter, Wagner wrote that ‘God has already raised up for us a key apostle in one of the strategic nations of the Middle East, and other apostles are already coming on board. Once we have the apostles in place, we will then bring the intercessors and the prophets into the inner circle, and we will end up with the spiritual core we need to move ahead for retaking the dominion that is rightfully ours.’ Despite such theocratic baggage, SGI shrewdly established themselves as valued assets to the KRG ruling families and the Bush/Cheney Iraq war effort.

In her groundbreaking 1989 book Spiritual Warfare: The Politics of the Christian Right, Sara Diamond defines the term as “A form of intense prayer – often accompanied by ‘charismatic’ practices such as speaking in tongues – intended to change either a material or supernatural situation.” Can you explain the role that ‘spiritual Warfare,’ plays with SGI?

In their 2000 book, Our Father’s Kingdom: The Church and The Nation, Douglas Layton, and co-author George Otis, Jr. declared that ‘if communists and Muslims can take nations—so can our God!’ And by ‘taking nations,’ Layton means that ‘Christ’s kingdom must rule over government and law, the arts and sports, education, business, economics, science and technology, the media, and the family.’

Otis, one of the generals in the Spiritual Warfare movement, heads The Sentinel Group, formerly known as Issachar Frontier Missions Strategies. Sentinel is essentially a global evangelical intelligence agency that deploys “field cells” with laptops who gather demographics in cities and rural areas in targeted countries. The data is then forwarded to computer banks at the Sentinel Group as part of its “spiritual mapping” project. It is currently operational in Central America, Uganda and the Middle East. Otis’s history in Middle East dates back more than two decades to when his father George Otis, Sr., a close friend of Ronald Reagan and former Lear Jet executive, set up the High Adventure radio ministry in Lebanon in 1980. Otis put the station in the hands of Christian Falangists during the Israeli occupation. The US State Department tried to shut him down without success.

Otis then launched Middle East Television, an evangelical broadcaster also in Lebanon. Otis later “gifted” MET to Pat Robertson who absorbed the station into his global Christian Broadcasting Network. At a New Orleans conference of evangelicals in 1987 one of George Jr’s Issachar associates told Sara Diamond that their group intended to make themselves more attractive to recruiters from CIA and State by working as ‘bi-vocational’ professional missionaries–like teachers, businessmen, consultants, engineers, diplomats and military personnel.

Douglas Layton is clearly an important figure in all this. Talk more about him.

Douglas Layton, the founding director of Servant Group International, is a veteran evangelical missionary to the Middle East. More than seven years ago, in a publication called The Forerunner, longtime Christian Reconstructionist Andrew Sandlin wrote of Layton and SGI’s evangelical push into northern Iraq: ‘If we are going to support missionaries, let’s support missionaries who are going around the world to recapture cultures, not simply win a few souls here and there,’ Sandlin wrote. ‘For example, consider Doug Layton in Kurdistan, northern Iraq, who is re-building a Christian culture: new Christian schools, new Christian businesses, and more. He is not content to build churches; he wants an entire Christian culture.’

Up until this year Layton served as the Erbil director of the Kurdistan Development Corporation, a KRG sponsored venture launched in 2004 to promote, facilitate and establish business and investment opportunities in the Kurdistan Region in Iraq. Layton transitioned from his post at the KRG Ministry of Health where he wrote speeches for the minister and directed the USAID-backed boondoggle, Health Care Partnerships in Northern Iraq.

The last I heard, Layton was operating a private venture called The Other Iraq Tours that arranges junkets for American businessmen and politicians into Kurdistan.

What is SGI up to now, five-plus years after the U.S. invasion?

These days, SGI is closely involved with the Kurdistan Regional Government, the ruling coalition of Massoud Barzani’s Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP), and Jalal Talabani’s Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), brokering international business concessions and oil drilling contracts, funneling USAID money into their missions, setting up a chain of ‘classical Christian’ schools and producing slick PR videos for the Kurdistan Regional Government that were broadcast in the US. It appears as if the KRG has given them the run of the country, often backing their ministries and schools with grants of land, buildings and other favors.

* Disclosure: Earlier this year, Reynolds and I worked together on a project investigating the right wing money behind the attacks on Barack Obama. Our work resulted in the publication of “The Palin Payoff: How Sarah Brings in the Christian Cash.”

This article was first published on Religion Dispatches.

At a Super Bowl party at my friend Al’s house, I was standing in the kitchen ladling some of my wife’s extraordinary chili into a bowl, when a friend asked what I was going to write about now that the Christian right is defeated and demoralized. Rushing to get back into the living room for third quarter action, I mumbled that I wasn’t worried about not having the Christian Right to write about anymore because I was reasonably sure that they would live to fight another day. In fact, I added, they might even prosper in the Age of Obama.

In his 1963 inauguration address, Alabama Governor George Wallace issued his famous battle cry, “segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.” It was a phrase that symbolized the intransigence of Southern politicians, and their constituents, to a changing civil rights landscape. These days, retooling of the phrase to “Culture Wars Today, Culture Wars Tomorrow, Culture Wars Forever,” might best reflect the stance that many conservative Christian leaders and their organizations are taking.

It is not quite four weeks into the Obama admninistration, and the Christian Right has been in full battle gear since Day One (some would arugue since the results came in on November 4). Earlier this month, a number of Christian and secular conservative organizations mounted an impressive effort aimed at taking down David Ogden, President Barack Obama’s nominee to be deputy attorney general. While the campaign failed in its objective—it appears that Ogden will get the Justice Department post—it reminded us of the tenacity of the Christian right campaigns.

Consider these headlines from an assortment of right-wing media outlets which appeared during the run-up to, and the days following, Ogden’s appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee:

“Take Action: Obama’s Judicial Nominees Stand on Anti-Family Principles” — CitizenLink (Focus on the Family), February 4.

“Obama Justice Nominee Used to Represent Playboy” — Fox News, February 4.

“Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Pro-Abortion Obama Justice Pick David Ogden — LifeNews.com, February 5.

“Justice Dept. Nominees Raise Eyebrows” — Christian Broadcasting Network, February 5.

“Deputy US Attorney General nominee linked to porn industry” — Catholic News Agency, February 5.

“Obama’s Choice for Deputy AG is ‘Pro-Obscenity,’ ‘Pro-Abortion’ and ‘Pro-Homosexual,’ Conservatives Say” — CNSNews.com, February 5.

“Obama’s Big Porno deputy” and “Justice nominee’s porn agenda raises alarms” — WorldNetDaily, February 5 and 6.

“Obama’s Recent Nomination Puts Families At Risk, Undermines Law”—Human Events, February 6.

“Justice Candidate a Threat to Parental Rights” — Home School Legal Association, February 6.

“Tax Cheats, Unethical Lobbying, Now Porn Pushers for Team Obama?” — Stop the ACLU, February 6.

In a two-hour hearing, Senate Judiciary Committee members “questioned Ogden about his work on cases involving abortion, the death penalty, foreign law, and obscenity, repeatedly asking whether he personally holds the views that he argued on behalf of his clients,” Legal Times reported.

There has been no date set for a vote on Ogden’s nomination. According to Legal Times, “Senators have until Feb. 12 to submit questions in writing, and the Senate has a recess scheduled for the week of Feb. 16, potentially pushing a vote to the week of Feb. 23.”

The campaign against Ogden was clearly a dry run for future anti-Obama efforts, particularly those related to the president’s judicial appointments. What are we learning from these early skirmishes about how the religious right intends to operate in the Obama era?:

You Snooze, You Lose: In the three-plus weeks since Obama has taken office, the religious right has seized upon every opportunity to criticize his policies and his personnel choices. And when there wasn’t a glaring opportunity, it created one. The Ogden nomination became an excellent test case for revivifying the movement.

Create the Message, Stay on Message: A message quickly emerged—Ogden was pro-abortion and pro-pornography—and dozens of groups and media outlets ran with that story.

Show the Anger: Although it could be counterproductive in the long run to be angry 24/7, showing righteous anger, with a dollop of dismay and disgust, allows the base to know what’s at stake and that it’s a deadly serious issue. Warning: Beware of the “Boy who cried Wolf” syndrome!

Culture Wars are Forever: In frightful economic times, culture wars issues can still be the gift that keeps on giving.

“The religious right has developed an extraordinary infrastructure, especially at the state level, that will restore and replenish the movement as the founding generation of religious right leaders passes from public life, and will regroup in the wake of national Republican electoral losses in 2008,” Frederick Clarkson, co-founder of the blog Talk2Action, wrote in Political Research Associates’ Winter 2008 issue of The Public Eye.

“Fresh battles will break out on different turf, in different towns and states… [and] even the issues will evolve,” Clarkson pointed out. “But the culture of denial regarding the ongoing potency and significance of the religious right in American public life remains as a stubborn obstacle to meaningful discussion about this powerful movement.”

+ + + + + + + + + +

Ted and Gayle Haggard Play Oprah

“Oprah is the closest thing we have to a high priestess of America’s new morality, and she seems obligated to push the politically correct idea that it’s OK to be gay.” — J. Lee Grady, editor of Charisma

There are not many bright spots that conservative evangelical Christians can glean from the Ted Haggard affair. The former pastor of Colorado Springs’ New Life Church, and the former head of the National Association of Evangelicals who had a direct line to President Bush’s White House was forced out of both positions when it was revealed that he was enmeshed with drugs and a gay prostitute. Haggard has since been sent into exile and is currently living in Phoenix and selling insurance.

Stories of the fallen often seem to titillate the public. And Haggard is taking full advantage of being granted another fifteen minutes. Over the past few weeks, Haggard and his wife Gayle have been making the rounds of television’s talk show circuit, most notably appearing with Larry King (for the full hour) and on Oprah’s popular talkfest, promoting the new HBO documentary “The Trials of Ted Haggard,” produced by Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

“Oprah tried her best to pin Ted down and get him to admit he is a homosexual,” J. Lee Grady, the editor of Charisma magazine, reported. “Ted balked, saying that his sexuality is complicated. He explained that he had sexual experiences in the seventh grade that confused him. He spoke of sexual impulses that he struggled with but didn’t act on until he hit 50.”

Then Gayle stepped in, telling an obviously agitated Oprah that “just because a person has certain inclinations doesn’t mean he has to act on them.” According to Grady, “Oprah got upset… [and] she got out of her chair and said to Gayle: ‘That’s where I disagree with you’—and her audience cheered.” Grady wondered if the audience “had been cued.”

Grady, while admitting that he has not been “too excited about Haggard going public with the story of his relationship with a male prostitute,” saw in Gayle Haggard a worthy challenger to Oprah as “she stuck her neck out and defied the false religion of our times.” According to Grady:

Oprah is the closest thing we have to a high priestess of America’s new morality, and she seems obligated to push the politically correct idea that it’s OK to be gay. She is paid a lot of money to promote this agenda, and she’s good at it. She is articulate in her arguments and velvety smooth in her affirmation. Just come to Oprah, all you who are weary and burdened, and she will console you.

Oprah’s feel-good doctrine is the same one adopted in the last 30 years by mainstream psychologists, Hollywood producers, gay rights organizations and some mainline churches. It basically says that if a person struggles with any level of same-sex attraction, they shouldn’t fight the urges or label this a sin or a sexual disorder. They should simply accept their gayness, celebrate their new sexual identity, and then hop in bed with whomever they please (unless of course they want to settle down into a same-sex marriage, which all state governments should legalize).

The issue on the table in this debate is whether homosexuality is (1) a sinful condition that can be overcome by the grace of God; or (2) an inborn genetic quality that should be accepted like skin color or a personality trait. Oprah and the majority of the mainstream media today are obviously pushing the second viewpoint. ‘Sin’ is not in their vocabulary.

We cannot be silent while this debate rages. Let’s tell our culture that Jesus Christ’s amazing grace has the power to transform people whether they are gay or straight or anything in between.

+ + + + + + + + + +

New leader of Coral Ridge Ministries to Deemphasize Conservative Politics?

Before his death in 2007, D. James Kennedy was an influential, albeit lesser- known, religious right leader and a profoundly partisan conservative voice. His Fort Lauderdale, Florida-based Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church was a multimillion dollar media ministry, and millions of people listened to and watched its broadcasts on radio and television, and purchased books, pamphlets, tapes and videos of Kennedy’s sermons, many of them attacking evolution, opposing gay rights and arguing that America is a “Christian nation.”

Shortly before Kennedy’s death, CRM shut down its Washington DC-based Center for Reclaiming America, its highly partisan political arm, saying that it would concentrate “on expanding its audience via its media productions,” People for the America Way’s Right Wing Watch recently pointed out.

Since Kennedy’s death, Coral Ridge has been in sort of a holding pattern, still offering a plethora of items for sale, but reasonably quiet on the political front. That was the case until CRM issued a recent “Alert!” entitled “President Unveils His Homosexual Agenda.”

The “Alert!” warned CRM supporters that President Obama has “announced his aggressive plan to force Americans to accept homosexuality”:

His just-revealed gay rights agenda, posted on the Whitehouse.gov Web site, is a dream come true for the homosexual lobby. Our new president wants to force Americans to accept homosexuality in the workplace and in the military. Plus, he will push hard to pass hate crimes legislation and give marriage benefits to same-sex couples.

CRM’s Alert came about the same time that several Florida newspapers reported that William Graham Tullian Tchividjian was in the process of becoming the new pastor of Ft. Lauderdale’s Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church. Tchividjian, the son of Gigi Tchividjian, the eldest daughter of Billy and Ruth Graham, and Swiss-Armenian psychologist Stephan Tchividjian, told The Miami Herald that “Dr. Kennedy came from a completely different generation, and my leadership by that fact alone will be different. The impression out there of Coral Ridge is that they are a church that is stuck in the past and unwilling to change. This move on their part corrects that assumption.”

South Florida’s Sun-Sentinel reported that “The proposed merger [between Tchividjian’s New City Church and Coral Ridge] would join different kinds of congregations…Tchividjian’s vigorous, 5-1/2-year-old church with attendance of 600 to 700, and an established, half-century-old church of 2,200 members and weekly attendance of 1,800.” According to the newspaper, “Tchividjian was cautious about discussing any changes he might make at the helm of Coral Ridge. However, he said the Coral Ridge leaders had asked him to bring the ‘vision’ he instilled at New City Church, a vision of ‘revival and renewal for all of South Florida.’ New City is also known for blending traditional beliefs with modern methods, mixing hymns and contemporary Christian songs.”

+ + + + + + + + + +

Focus on the Family turns to Tim Goeglein

He was Karl Rove’s golden boy. As the deputy director of the White House Office of Public Liaison under President George W. Bush, Tim Goeglein had it all going for him. Then the bottom fell out. Last February, Goeglein was forced into premature retirement when it was discovered that he had plagiarized 19 of 38 columns he had written for Fort Wayne (Indiana)’s News-Sentinel.

Now, he has joined up with Dr. James Dobson’s outfit, Focus on the Family Action, in the newly-created role of vice president of external relations, Focus on the Family announced in late January. “My job is to tell the Focus story to people and to groups of influence,” Goeglein told CitizenLink, Focus on the Family’s daily news alert. “It’s to build relationships, to build alliances, to shape debate. It’s very important we tell the Focus story to the rising generation of young Americans.”

“Tim brings with him a wealth of experience and relationships that will prove invaluable to our efforts to defend the sanctity of human life, protect the institution of marriage, and ensure the religious-freedom rights of Christians,” Focus on the Family Action President and CEO Jim Daly said. “He will be our eyes and ears in Washington, helping ensure people of faith continue to be heard on the important issues facing our nation.”

For my Media Transparency 2006 profile of the then up-and-coming Karl Rove protege, see “Tim Goeglein: Selling Brand Bush to the Christian Right.”

++++++++++

GOP’s Taliban Fever: Is They, or Is They Not Our Taliban?

Over the past half-dozen years of so since information about Taliban activities in Afghanistan first arrived on these shores, there has been a relatively hearty debate among religious right watchers whether that movement has anything in common with the Taliban. Most observers have been careful to point out that while religious right leaders and their supporters often step close to the line with their endless streams of radical rhetoric aimed at imposing their religious beliefs and morality — demonizing gays and lesbians, pro-choice advocates, and secular humanists — most have stopped short of branding conservative Christian evangelicals with the “T” word.

Now, Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, has done the branding himself. Sessions recently said that House Republicans should play the role of the “positive, loyal opposition” that should also “understand insurgency.” But Sessions didn’t stop there.

“Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban,” Sessions said during a meeting with Hotline on Call editors. “And that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person’s entire processes. And these Taliban — I’m not trying to say the Republican Party is the Taliban. No, that’s not what we’re saying. I’m saying an example of how you go about [sic] is to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with.”

+ + + + + + + + + +

RD Tidbits:

AFA’s Project Push Back: In a “personal note” to supporters dated February 11, Donald Wildmon, Founder and Chairman of the American Family Association, is looking for a million new members to join Project Push Back:

Here is how Project Push Back works. Order a packet of 25 Project Push Back cards. Take the cards to your church or Sunday School class and give them to your friends. Encourage them to join the AFA Action Alert team and get informed about issues that are critical to our families. It’s that simple!

Each packet contains one card with “information concerning AFA, including instructions on how to participate in AFA’s online Action Alert site.” You can give the other 24 cards “to your friends and family.”

Exactly what is being “Push[ed] Back”against isn’t quite clear. Wildmon doesn’t really say. One needn’t stretch one’s imagination much to get the sense that when push comes to shove, just about everything advanced by the Obama administration will be subject to “Project Push Back.”

Equality Forum 2009: Bad news and good news for the Rev. Donald Wildmon’s boycott happy American Family Association. The bad news? In Philadelphia from April 27 to May 3, Equality Forum—“a national and international nonprofit 501(c)(3) GLBT civil rights organization with an educational focus”—will present Equality Forum 2009, in collaboration with 65 nonprofit organizations. Scheduled are 34 panels, 10 special events, and 8 parties. There is no registration fee, and all substantive programs are free.

The good news for the AFA? So many sponsors, so many boycott targets! Sponsors included a host of gay organizations and media groups as well as Comcast, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Chase, Bank of America, and GlaxoSmithKline. More information here.

Wicca Pedia: According to The Barna Group, a polling and research organization that “provides leadership and unique, strategic information and resources that help facilitate spiritual transformation in America,” 55% of Americans say that they haven’t heard of Wicca. “Among the 45% who have heard of, the segments most familiar with Wicca include people younger than 60 (50% are familiar with the name, compared to 35% of older adults); Christian evangelicals (65%); Skeptics (61% of atheists and agnostics); Asian Americans (52%); upscale adults (62%); and those who describe themselves as socio-politically liberal in most cases (55%),” Barna pointed out in its recent report titled “Survey Reveals Americans’ Feelings about Wicca.” Read Barna’s report.

NAE searching for Mr. Right: The National Association of Evangelicals is in hot pursuit of someone to take the place of Richard Cizik as director of government affairs. Cizik, a thorn in the side of the NAE’s leadership for his stands of global warming, resigned in December after telling a National Public Radio audience that he had shifted his views on same-sex unions. According to the job description, Cizik’s replacement will be expected to “be responsible for representing the NAE before Congress, the White House, and the Courts and will work to advance the approach and principles of the NAE document ‘For the Health of the Nation: An Evangelical Call to Civic Responsibility.’” In addition, the job qualifications include: “personal faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, agreement to and affirmation of the NAE Statement of Faith, and participation in an NAE- affiliated congregation… Candidates must also possess knowledge of evangelical beliefs, history, and community, along with experience in government affairs and a familiarity with politics and policies of concern to evangelicals.”

If you watched any television at all since the holidays, you might have wondered why a company called Amway Global ran so many commercials. Were these ads for the same company that has, over the years, been widely accused of running a pyramid scheme, paid nearly $20 million in fines in a Canadian criminal fraud case, and whose image with the public in recent years soured faster than a carton of cottage cheese in the sun?

More recently, two former Quixtar distributors filed a class-action suit in the United State District Court, Northern District of California, charging Quixtar and several of its high-level distributors with fraud and racketeering. According to a report at CaseWatch (“Your Guide to Health Fraud- and Quackery-Related Legal Matters”), the allegations of the complaint include:

“Quixtar is an illegal pyramid scheme because most of its sales are to distributors rather than to retail customers. “

“Quixtar has ‘unconscionable’ arbitration policies that prevent most distributors from recovering their losses if problems arise.”

Despite these controversies, and after virtually dropping out of sight in the US around the turn of the last century, Amway—currently known as “Amway Global”—appears to be heading back home. Can the company, which celebrates its fiftieth anniversary this year, stage a successful comeback in the US, or are they throwing a very desperate Hail Mary?

“Heart wrenching testimonials”

Eric Scheibeler, author of Merchants of Deception: An Insider’s Look at the Worldwide, Systematic, Conspiracy of Lies That is Amway/Quixtar and their Motivational Organizations — available free on the author’s website — told me that the controversies stalking the company continue to this day. Scheibeler said that he had “worked with local victims and initiated a UK government investigation in which the DTI/BERR (Department of Trade and Industry/Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform) took legal action against Amway and is waiting for an appeals court decision to potentially ban them from the country.”

According to Scheibeler (a high level “Emerald“ Amway member who uncovered fraud and deception within the company and was ostracized for it):

UK Justice Norris found in 2008 that out of an IBO [Independent Business Owners] population of 33,000, ‘only about 90 made sufficient incomes to cover the costs of actively building their business.’ That’s a 99.7% loss rate for investors. The scheme appears to be falling apart in the US, UK and Australia hence the beefed up prime time ads in the US

Many of [Amway’s] highest level distributors have left to join other multi-level marketing groups, and I now have an internal management document detailing a five year 96% drop out rate. Thousands of Amway victims from countless nations have sent me heart wrenching testimonials. Quite a few involve losses in excess of $10,000.

Through his time selling Amway products, Scheibeler, who had developed a business that extended from North America to Europe, South America, and the Philippines, met a number of politically powerful Republican politicians and conservative Religious leaders, including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Iran/Contra figure, Oliver North, and then-Senator Rick Santorum. Religious leaders like Charles Stanley (a former distributor), Dr. Robert Schuller and the late Dr. D James Kennedy of Florida’s Coral Ridge Ministries — a multi-media, multi-million dollar ministry — gave the company and its founders a credibility that seemed to be beyond reproach. Former US Presidents Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush also spoke to Amway distributors.

In 1959, the Ada, Michigan-based Amway — an abbreviation of American Way — was founded by two high school buddies from Grand Rapids, Michigan, Richard DeVos and the late Jay Van Andel. In 2000, it became part of an umbrella company called Alticor Inc., which does business as Quixtar in the US and Canada and as Amway Corp. throughout the rest of the world. Whatever name it goes by, Amway is in the process of launching a major comeback in the US

A Scam by Any Other Name

Over the last four decades of the 20th century Amway became a phenomenally successful company, and is now the second-largest direct-selling company in the world. In 2007, Amway Global and other companies under the Alticor umbrella reported sales of $7.2 billion, marking the company’s sixth straight year of growth.

Van Andel and DeVos used a portion of their wealth as a de facto insurance policy, becoming major financiers of Republican Party candidates and Religious Right causes. According to Progress for America, Amway’s founders contributed $4,000,000 to a conservative 527 gropups in the 2004 election cycle. In April 2005, Rolling Stone reported that Amway CEO and co-founder Richard DeVos was connected with the dominionist political movement in the United States and that DeVos had given more than $5 million to the late D. James Kennedy’s Coral Ridge Ministries.

Despite the controversies and legal challenges the company continues to face, it never went out of business; it merely shifted the bulk of its efforts to overseas markets. These days, the company’s three hotspots are Russia, China and India. “In the late 1980s, about three-quarters of our business was here in the US,“ Steve Van Andel, Alticor’s co-chief executive and son of one of a founder, recently told the AP. “Now about 80 per cent of it is outside the country.“

According to the Associated Press, Alticor is “shelving the inert Quixtar label and pouring millions of dollars into reviving the Amway brand in North America with market research, national television commercials and ads in newspapers and magazines and online.”

The privately owned company, which is called Amway Global — though it intends to revert back to Amway in about a year — has several goals. Not least among them the corporation seeks to refurbish its tarnished image and to reacquaint the public with the company’s extensive product line of health and beauty items, home care products, jewelry, and water purifiers.

“We thought, well, if we’re going to build a brand, build the brand that everybody knows already,“ Alticor president and co-CEO Doug DeVos said in an interview with the AP. “It’s going to be much more successful and cost a lot less and happen a lot faster.“

While times may be tough economically for a sustained re-birth, company officials “hope to repeat in the United States the kind of growth they’ve seen abroad in the past—and to revive the mystique that helped the company spread throughout the Midwest and, by the mid-1960s, the rest of the US Amway’s hundreds of thousands of distributors dreamed of getting rich by selling cleaning products and by recruiting their acquaintances to join the fold,” AP reported.

According to the AP, the company is still “operating on that basic model, including prices that tend to be higher than those of their competitors, Amway saw global sales revenue top $7.1 billion in its 2007 financial year. The company predicts another $1 billion increase this year. And most of its recent growth, in such developing Asian markets as China, India and Russia, has been under the Amway name.”

Despite hiring marketing executives to help revitalize the re-launch, and despite the fact that an FTC examination into Amway’s business practices concluded in 1979 that it was not an illegal pyramid scheme because compensation is based on retail sales to consumers and because sales people are not paid for recruiting new colleagues, government investigations are underway in England, India and China.

Political Kingmakers

There is no question that the Amway story is a unique Horatio Alger-like American success story. What makes it even more fascinating is that the company’s founders—and their progeny—have become political kingmakers along the way.

In October, former Amway Corp. chief Dick DeVos, held a private fundraiser featuring President George W. Bush, to raise money for the National Republican Congressional Committee and the Republican National Committee. For nearly 40 years, the DeVos family has been a major benefactor of both the religious right and the Republican Party. Shortly before the 1994 election, the Amway Corporation gave the GOP $2.5 million which, at the time, was “the largest political donation in recent American history,“ according to the Washington Post. And, in 1996, the company donated $1.3 million to the San Diego Convention and Visitor’s Bureau “to help fund a Republican cable TV show to be aired during the party’s national convention,“ the Associated Press reported. The program featured “rising GOP stars as ‘reporters,’“ and aired on the Pat Robertson-owned Family Channel.

The Richard and Helen DeVos Foundation, which was founded in 1970, has provided major funding for such right wing groups as Concerned Women for America, the late Paul Weyrich’s Free Congress Foundation, Michigan Right to Life, Dr. James Dobson’s Focus on the Family, and Tony Perkins’ DC-based lobbying group, the Family Research Council. Foundations with the DeVos family name attached to it now include the Dick and Betsy DeVos Foundation (1990), the Daniel and Pamela DeVos Foundation (1992), and the Douglas and Maria DeVos Foundation (1992).

There is also a DeVos connection to Blackwater USA, the world’s most powerful mercenary army, and the largest contractor providing security in Iraq. That company too is currently up to its neck in Iraq-related legal problems. Blackwater was founded by former Navy SEAL Erik Prince, the son of Edgar Prince, a wealthy Michigan auto-parts supplier. The elder Prince is described by Jeremy Scahill, in his bestselling book Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, as a “radical right wing Christian mega-millionaire“ who is a strong financial backer of President George W. Bush, as well as a donor to a host of conservative Christian political causes.

In the 1980s, “the Prince family merged” with the DeVos family as Eric’s older sister Betsy married Dick DeVos, whose father Richard was a co-founder of Amway, according to Scahill. Together, the two families became one of the “greatest bankrollers of far-right causes in US history, and with their money they propelled extremist Christian politicians and activists to positions of prominence.“

In 2006, former Amway President Dick DeVos, decided to run for governor of Michigan. Running as a Republican against Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, DeVos was soundly defeated by 56 to 42 percent of the popular vote. He recently announced that he would not run again in 2010.

“Although Bernard Madoff allegedly swindled $50 billion from about 8,000 victims, he seems to be an amateur in comparison to Amway,” Eric Scheibeler noted. “Amway has brought in far in excess of that amount from tens of millions of consumers who invested in ‘their own Amway business’ and it seems near all did so and continue to do so at a loss. The difference is that the Madoff pipeline is shut down, while you may be recruited to an Amway meeting tomorrow.”

* * *

Note: We contacted Amway Global with several questions, including ones about the UK suit and its political donations. A public relations spokesperson answered a few general questions and said that he would pass the rest on to other company officials. We have not heard from any other company officials.

While former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, nominated by President Barack Obama to lead the Department of Health and Human Services and Obama’s would-be chief performance officer Nancy Killefer were forced to resign after it came to light that the former had failed to pay $146,000 in taxes on time and the latter had failed to make quarterly unemployment tax payments to the District of Columbia for a year and a half, if conservatives have their way, David Ogden, a partner at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, who goes before the Judiciary Committee on February 5, may very well wish that he had resigned.

OneNewsNow, the news service of the American Family Association, is reporting that both Christian and secular conservatives are mobilizing to put the kibosh on the nomination of David W. Ogden, President Barack Obama’s pick for deputy attorney general. It appears that a number of right-wing groups are attacking Ogden’s nomination on several fronts.

According to the news service, Heritage Foundation fellow Steven Groves “is urging the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask … Ogden some pointed questions [tomorrow] regarding his views on constitutional interpretation.”

“In the 2005 case Roper v. Simmons, Ogden succeeded in convincing a narrowly divided Supreme Court to declare the juvenile death penalty unconstitutional and spare the life of his client, who killed a woman in cold-blood nine months before he turned 18,” OneNewsNow is reporting.

“Groves says Ogden argued that the high court should look to laws, legal opinions, and decisions of foreign countries and international organizations regarding the death penalty. He notes that in particular, Ogden cited the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) — a 1989 treaty that bars the execution of people who commit crimes while under the age of 18.”

OneNewsNow also reported that “Social conservatives are also expressing concern about an amicus brief Ogden filed in the Supreme Court case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which he claimed that ‘abortion rarely causes or exacerbates psychological or emotional problems.’ In addition, other conservatives are uneasy with Ogden’s past legal representation of Playboy, Penthouse magazine, the ACLU, and the largest distributor of hard-core pornographic movies.”

The Alliance Defense Fund’s Pat Trueman told OneNewsNow that “The reason David Ogden is going to be trouble is that he is a pornography lawyer [who was] prominently involved in the Playboy cases representing Playboy, Penthouse, other cases. [And] he has fought against keeping public libraries free of pornography to protect children.”

Fidelis, a conservative Catholic group, continues the ‘porn lawyer’ theme on its Web site, featuring a story titled “An Obscene Choice: Obama Taps Porn Lawyer For #2 At Justice.” The group’s “Research Brief” maintains that “As an attorney in private practice, … Ogden has filed briefs pushing for gays in the military, for continued racial preferences, and for a virtually unlimited abortion license. He has negotiated numerous obscenity and pornography cases on behalf of clients like Playboy, Penthouse, and the ACLU.”

The “Research Brief” prepared by Fidelis, points out that Ogden was a “top aide” to President Clinton’s Attorney General Janet Reno, and was “leader of the Department’s tobacco litigation team.”

Ogden also “filed briefs opposing parental notification before a minor’s abortion, opposing spousal notification before an abortion, opposing the military’s policy against public homosexuals serving in uniform, and opposing the Children’s Internet Protection Act and the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act.”

Fidelis received a fair amount of publicity recently when its anti-abortion ad — co-sponsored by a group called CatholicVote.com, a project of the Fidelis Center for Law and Policy — was turned down by NBC for airing during the Super Bowl. According to LifeSiteNews.com, the ad that “centers around the theme: ‘Life: Imagine the Potential,’” ran on EWTN Global Catholic Network on Super Bowl Sunday.

The ad, according to LifeSiteNews.com, “shows an ultrasound of an unborn child, and then the words: ‘This child’s future is a broken home. He will be abandoned by his father, his single mother will struggle to raise him. Despite the hardships he will endure. This child will become the 1st African-American president. Life, imagine the potential.’”

Fidelis’ CatholicVote.com also ran an ad that aired repeatedly on January 20 on Black Entertainment Television in Chicago during coverage of the presidential inauguration. According to the group’s press release, “The :30 spot is the first in a series of ads to be released this year as a part of a new educational campaign titled Life: Imagine the Potential.”

“Our message is simple: Abortion is the enemy of hope. The purpose of our new ad is to spread a message of hope about the potential of every human life, including the life of President-elect Obama,” said Brian Burch, Executive Director of CatholicVote.org.

According to the Alliance defense fund’s Pat Trueman, Ogden also is strongly pro-homosexual and pro-abortion. “I think that you have a man here who is going to be trouble from day one to the end of his term — but there’s still time to defeat him,” he told OneNewsNow.

Those who watched television over the winter holidays may have wondered why there seemed to be so many commercials for a company called Amway Global. Were these ads for the same company that has over the years been widely accused of running a pyramid scheme, had paid nearly 20 million dollars in fines in a Canadian criminal fraud case 25 years ago, and whose image with the public in recent years soured faster than a carton of cottage cheese left standing in the sun?

More recently, two former Amway/Quixtar distributors filed a class-action suit in federal court in California, charging Quixtar and several of its high-level distributors with fraud and racketeering.

Despite these controversies, Amway — which is temporarily being called Amway Global — appears to be heading back home. Can the company, which celebrates its fiftieth anniversary this year, stage a successful comeback in the U.S., or are they throwing a very desperate Hail Mary?

Eric Scheibeler, author of Merchants of Deception, a highly critical look at Amway, told IPS that the controversies stalking the company continue to this day.

Scheibeler said that he had “worked with local victims and initiated a UK government investigation in which the DTI/BERR (Department of Trade and Industry/Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform) took legal action against Amway and is waiting for an appeals court decision to potentially ban them from the country.”

According to Scheibeler, a high level “Emerald” Amway member who uncovered fraud and deception within the company and was ostracised for it, “UK Justice Norris found in 2008 that out of an IBO [Independent Business Owners] population of 33,000, ‘only about 90 made sufficient incomes to cover the costs of actively building their business.’ That’s a 99.7 percent loss rate for investors.

“The scheme appears to be falling apart in the U.S., UK and Australia hence the beefed up prime time ads in the U.S.,” he said.

IPS spoke with an Amway Global public relations person who provided some corroborating background for this article. However, questions focusing on the British lawsuit and Amway’s political activities — which the company required to be submitted via e-mail — were never answered.

Amway — an abbreviation of “American Way” — was founded in 1959 by two high school buddies from Grand Rapids, Michigan, Richard DeVos and the late Jay Van Andel. In 2000, it became part of an umbrella company called Alticor Inc., which does business as Quixtar in the U.S. and Canada and as Amway Corp. throughout the rest of the world.

In the intervening decades, Amway has become the second-largest direct-selling company in the world. In 2007, Amway Global and other companies under under Alticor umbrella reported sales of 7.2 billion dollars for the year ending Dec. 31, 2007, marking the company’s sixth straight year of growth.

Van Andel and DeVos became major financiers of Republican Party candidates and Religious Right causes. According to Progress for America, Amway’s founders contributed four million dollars to conservative groups in the 2004 election cycle.

In April 2005, Rolling Stone magazine reported that DeVos was connected with the dominionist political movement in the United States and that DeVos was had given more than five million dollars to the late D. James Kennedy’s Coral Ridge Ministries.

Despite the controversies and legal challenges the company continues to face, it never went out of business; instead, it shifted the bulk of its efforts to overseas markets. These days, its three current growth hotspots are Russia, China and India.

“In the late 1980s, about three-quarters of our business was here in the U.S.,” Steve Van Andel, Alticor’s chairman and co-chief executive and the son of one of Amway’s founders, recently told the Associated Press. “Now about 80 percent of it is outside the country.”

The privately owned company, which is called Amway Global — it intends to revert back to Amway in about a year — has several goals, including reacquainting the public with the company’s extensive product line — which includes health and beauty items and homecare products, jewelry, water purifiers — and refurbishing its tarnished image.

While times may be tough economically for a sustained rebirth, company officials “hope to repeat in the United States the kind of growth they’ve seen abroad in the past — and to revive the mystique that helped the company spread throughout the Midwest and, by the mid-1960s, the rest of the U.S. Amway’s hundreds of thousands of distributors dreamed of getting rich by selling cleaning products and by recruiting their acquaintances to join the fold,” AP reported.

According to AP, the company is still “operating on that basic model, including prices that tend to be higher than those of their competitors.”

While there is no question that the Amway story is a unique Horatio Alger-like U.S. success story, what makes it even more fascinating is that along the way, the company’s founders — and their progeny — have become political kingmakers.

In October, former Amway Corp. chief Dick DeVos held a private fundraiser featuring President George W. Bush, to raise money for the National Republican Congressional Committee and the Republican National Committee.

For nearly 40 years, the DeVos family has been a major benefactor of both the religious right and the Republican Party. Shortly before the 1994 election, the Amway Corporation gave the Republicans 2.5 million dollars which, at the time, was “the largest political donation in recent American history,” the Washington Post reported.

And in 1996, the company donated 1.3 million dollars to the San Diego Convention and Visitor’s Bureau “to help fund a Republican cable TV show to be aired during the party’s national convention,” the Associated Press reported. The program featured “rising GOP stars as ‘reporters,’” and aired on the Family Channel which was owned by Pat Robertson.

In 2006, former Amway President Dick DeVos ran for governor of Michigan, as a Republican against Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm. DeVos, soundly defeated by 56 to 42 percent of the popular vote, recently announced that he would not run again in 2010. “Although Bernard Madoff allegedly swindled 50 billion dollars from about 8,000 victims, he seems to be an amateur in comparison to Amway,” Eric Scheibeler noted.

“Amway has brought in far in excess of that amount from tens of millions of consumers who invested in ‘their own Amway business’ and it seems near all did so and continue to do so at a loss. The difference is that the Madoff pipeline is shut down, while you may be recruited to an Amway meeting tomorrow.”

The editor of CovenantNews.com wrote:

The White House policies published on its new website confirms that Barack H. Obama intends to use his office to promote and maintain the sexual deviant criminal behavior of homosexuality (with malice aforethought).

… Civil officials who approve of homosexuality, make the civil government a vile cesspool from which the abominations vomit out across the land. By displaying such a contempt for the administration of Justice by promoting this criminal behavior, “such civil officials are not only the source of the defilement, they are the criminals, and a hostile enemy authorizing the destruction of the society in which we live.

In an American Family Association Action Alert, the Rev. Wildmon stated that “This is only the beginning of Obama’s plans to reshape society. His view is that unborn babies aren’t worth protecting and that homosexuals deserve special rights.”

Wildmon urges his followers to “Take Action!” and “Send an e-mail to President Obama. It will go directly to the White House.”

Big ups to Obama. Covenant News and the Rev. Wildmon? Not so much!

Civil Rights

The teenagers and college students who left their homes to march in the streets of Birmingham and Montgomery; the mothers who walked instead of taking the bus after a long day of doing somebody else’s laundry and cleaning somebody else’s kitchen — they didn’t brave fire hoses and Billy clubs so that their grandchildren and their great-grandchildren would still wonder at the beginning of the 21st century whether their vote would be counted; whether their civil rights would be protected by their government; whether justice would be equal and opportunity would be theirs…. We have more work to do.

– Barack Obama, Speech at Howard University, September 28, 2007

President Barack Obama has spent much of his career fighting to strengthen civil rights as a civil rights attorney, community organizer, Illinois State Senator, U.S. Senator, and now as President. Whether promoting economic opportunity, working to improve our nation’s education and health system, or protecting the right to vote, President Obama has been a powerful advocate for our civil rights.

Combat Employment Discrimination: President Obama and Vice President Biden will work to overturn the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that curtails racial minorities’ and women’s ability to challenge pay discrimination. They will also pass the Fair Pay Act, to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work, and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.

Expand Hate Crimes Statutes: President Obama and Vice President Biden will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation, expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act, and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice’s Criminal Section.

End Deceptive Voting Practices: President Obama will sign into law his legislation that establishes harsh penalties for those who have engaged in voter fraud and provides voters who have been misinformed with accurate and full information so they can vote.

End Racial Profiling: President Obama and Vice President Biden will ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police departments to prohibit the practice.

Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support: President Obama and Vice President Biden will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama and Biden will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.

Eliminate Sentencing Disparities: President Obama and Vice President Biden believe the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.

Expand Use of Drug Courts: President Obama and Vice President Biden will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.

Support for the LGBT Community

While we have come a long way since the Stonewall riots in 1969, we still have a lot of work to do. Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us. But at its core, this issue is about who we are as Americans. It’s about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect.

– Barack Obama, June 1, 2007

Expand Hate Crimes Statutes: In 2004, crimes against LGBT Americans constituted the third-highest category of hate crime reported and made up more than 15 percent of such crimes. President Obama cosponsored legislation that would expand federal jurisdiction to include violent hate crimes perpetrated because of race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or physical disability. As a state senator, President Obama passed tough legislation that made hate crimes and conspiracy to commit them against the law.

Fight Workplace Discrimination: President Obama supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and believes that our anti-discrimination employment laws should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity. While an increasing number of employers have extended benefits to their employees’ domestic partners, discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace occurs with no federal legal remedy. The President also sponsored legislation in the Illinois State Senate that would ban employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples: President Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples. Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions. These rights and benefits include the right to assist a loved one in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits, and property rights.

Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage: President Obama voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006 which would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman and prevented judicial extension of marriage-like rights to same-sex or other unmarried couples.

Repeal Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell: President Obama agrees with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili and other military experts that we need to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve. Discrimination should be prohibited. The U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops kicked out of the military because of their sexual orientation. Additionally, more than 300 language experts have been fired under this policy, including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic. The President will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals.

Expand Adoption Rights: President Obama believes that we must ensure adoption rights for all couples and individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation. He thinks that a child will benefit from a healthy and loving home, whether the parents are gay or not.

Promote AIDS Prevention: In the first year of his presidency, President Obama will develop and begin to implement a comprehensive national HIV/AIDS strategy that includes all federal agencies. The strategy will be designed to reduce HIV infections, increase access to care and reduce HIV-related health disparities. The President will support common sense approaches including age-appropriate sex education that includes information about contraception, combating infection within our prison population through education and contraception, and distributing contraceptives through our public health system. The President also supports lifting the federal ban on needle exchange, which could dramatically reduce rates of infection among drug users. President Obama has also been willing to confront the stigma — too often tied to homophobia — that continues to surround HIV/AIDS.

Empower Women to Prevent HIV/AIDS: In the United States, the percentage of women diagnosed with AIDS has quadrupled over the last 20 years. Today, women account for more than one quarter of all new HIV/AIDS diagnoses. President Obama introduced the Microbicide Development Act, which will accelerate the development of products that empower women in the battle against AIDS. Microbicides are a class of products currently under development that women apply topically to prevent transmission of HIV and other infections.

Are you ready?

According to the Associated Press, “The Trials of Ted Haggard,” directed by Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is set to air Jan. 29 on HBO. AP also reported that Haggard has agreed to promote the documentary.

Since Haggard’s story includes drugs and sex — I’m not sure how much rock n roll — think of the possibilities!

After all, it’s not television, my friends. It’s HBO.

Drugs and sex? Yes. Rock n Roll? Not so Much.

Haggard, resigned as president of the National Association of Evangelicals and was fired as senior pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs in November 2006 after a former male prostitute went public with allegations that Haggard paid him for sex and used methamphetamine.

He has said that while he bought the drugs, he never used them. And while he also bought the sex, he apparently participated in that transaction. According to the AP, Haggard “confessed to undisclosed ’sexual immorality’ and has said, ‘I really did sin.’”

“The reason I kept my personal struggle a secret is because I feared that my friends would reject me, abandon me and kick me out, and the church would exile and excommunicate me. And that happened and more,” he says.

After getting tossed from his Colorado church, Haggard and his family moved to Arizona and then Texas. AP reported that he “He re-emerged last month at a rural Illinois church, where he delivered guest sermons and said he was sexually abused as a second-grader.”

The Colorado Independent’s Cara DeGette reported that Pelosi “first hooked up with Haggard when she was filming a documentary, ‘Friends of God,’ about Christian evangelicals in 2006 — before Haggard’s trysts with gay escort Mike Jones forced him out of the church that he had founded.”

DeGette pointed out that “one particularly tittilating exchange captured on film in ‘Friends of God,’” had Haggard “talk[ing] about having the best sex ever.”

“‘You know all the surveys say that evangelicals have the best sex life of any other group,’ Haggard says on camera, grinning from ear to ear.”

“Haggard then asks a church guy next to him how often he has sex with his wife. The man replies, ‘Every day.’ Pastor Ted goes on to note that evangelicals have a lot of love. ‘You don’t think these babies come out of nowhere?’”

Haggard now sells insurance and, in the documentary, says he isn’t successful.

“At this stage in my life, I am a loser,” he says.

In a post at sliceoflaodicea — “news and commentary on the contemporary church” — Ingrid Schlueter pointed out that it is expected that a tell all (or tell some) book might follow the documentary.

“After the book comes out,” Schlueter cheekily wrote, “there will be appearances on every major talk show in the country, probably including Oprah. After that, Ted can leverage his comeback fame, stop selling insurance and start hosting seminars and workshops entitled, ‘Comeback-the Haggard Method.’”

Schlueter continued: “There is something inherently repellent about a fallen pastor making money off his deceitful and immoral conduct with a sordid movie. Ted dropped out of accountability and counseling sessions set up by several Christian leaders and against all counsel, has already made an appearance at a church as speaker. He wants a church again, big time. In the meantime, as he rebuilds his following, HBO will help pay the bills.”

Is there a Colson-like redemption down the road?

While it may not be front-page material in a time of financial crises, bailouts, extensive layoffs, and reports of a massive number of housing foreclosures, there is little doubt that President-elect Barack Obama is also thinking about how to fulfill his pledge to rethink President Bush’s faith-based initiative and create effective government/community/faith-based partnerships through his Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

Earlier this month, the Washington, DC-based Brookings Institute entered the discussion with the release of a new report titled “Serving People in Need, Safeguarding Religious Freedom.”

Co-authored by Washington Post columnist and Brookings senior fellow E.J. Dionne, and Melissa Rogers, director of the Center for Religion and Public Affairs at Wake Forest University Divinity School (formerly executive director of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and general counsel of the Baptist Joint Committee on Religious Liberty), the report provides an extensive set of recommendations on how governmental partnerships with religious and community organizations ought be approached.

According to Dionne and Rogers, “the key questions facing the next administration are: How will those partnerships function and how will the president-elect push for his agenda in this area to be institutionalized?”

“As you would expect from those two . . . [the report is] an extremely thoughtful and well-meaning effort, often taking excruciating pains to be even-handed and understanding of the two sides in the contentious debate over President Bush’s faith-based initiative,” Mark Silk pointed out at Trinity College’s Spiritual Politics blog. Dionne and Rogers strongly suggest that Obama veer away from the Bush approach that included the blurring of church-state boundaries, the politicization of the initiative, cronyism in awarding grants, and a lack of oversight. Instead, they encourage “more accountability, more transparency in how grants are administered, and a concerted effort to make sure that government funding goes to programs that work and are constitutionally sound.” The report “urge[s] extensive efforts to evaluate programs that receive government funding, and also favor a systematic study of the general practice of contracting out public services.”

However, it appears that Dionne and Rogers punt on at least one vexing issue: the question of religious organizations’ hiring practices. Should a religious organization that receives government funding to provide social services be allowed to discriminate in its hiring practices? Dionne and Rogers’ answer to this vexing question is a recommendation that Obama set up a commission to study the matter. Silk isn’t as fuzzy: “The government’s purpose in funding must be secular, so anyone willing to work for that purpose should be eligible to be hired. If the religious institution feels that its religious identity will be watered down by hiring outsiders, then it is asking the government to subsidize its religious identity. And the government shouldn’t be in the business of doing that.”

Another report of interest — “The State of the Law-2008: A Cumulative Report on Legal Developments Affecting Government Partnerships with Faith-Based Organizations” — was released by the Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy, a project of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, on December 2. Written by Ira C. Lupu and Robert W. Tuttle, co-directors of Legal Research for The Roundtable and Professors of Law at George Washington University, the report, the latest in a series since 2002, looks at the cumulative “state of the law pertaining to government partnerships with faith-based organizations.”

Lupu and Tuttle examine key legal developments since the inception of President Bush’s faith-based initiative in January 2001 and look closely at the most significant legal developments during the past year. Interestingly enough, Lupu and Tuttle point out that “The hiring freedom of FBO’s in partnership with government remains, as it has for eight years, embroiled in political passions. This has been and will continue to be fought out in the arena of politics and policy.”

Lupu and Tuttle note that the retirement of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and the elevation of Samuel Alito to the Court “raises the possibility that the Supreme Court could adapt less restrictive rules on direct aid for religious activity.”

There is no way he could win a Pulitzer or Nobel Prize and he wasn’t going to be honored by the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, but in the final — and often creepy — days of the Bush Administration, President George W. Bush took time out from his schedule to present Charles Colson, Watergate felon and conservative evangelical Christian extraordinaire, with a Presidential Citizens Medal.

“For more than three decades, Chuck Colson has dedicated his life to sharing the message of God’s boundless love and mercy with prisoners, former prisoners and their families,” the White House said in the citation. “Through his strong faith and leadership, he has helped courageous men and women from around the world make successful transitions back into society.”

According to the White House, “The Presidential Citizens Medal was established in November 13, 1969, to recognize U.S. citizens who have performed exemplary deeds of service for the nation. It is one of the highest honors the President can confer upon a civilian, second only to the Presidential Medal of Freedom.” Past recipients include boxer Muhammad Ali, baseball great Henry “Hank” Aaaron, civil rights icon Dorothy Height, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Think Progress reminded us that “Colson was President Nixon’s counsel from 1969-1973 and pleaded guilty in 1974 to obstruction of justice. Colson received a one to three year sentence, but served just seven months.”

David Plotz at Slate described Colson’s role in the Nixon Administration:

As special counsel to the president, he was Richard Nixon’s hard man, the “evil genius” of an evil administration. According to Watergate historian Stanley Kutler, Colson sought to hire Teamsters thugs to beat up anti-war demonstrators, and he plotted to raid or firebomb the Brookings Institution. He eventually pleaded guilty to scheming to defame Daniel Ellsberg and interfering with his trial.

In 1974, Time magazine wrote:

Colson took on the tough jobs for the President. He leaked damaging or misleading information to the press about people who criticized the President, had young men hired to pose as homosexuals supporting McGovern at the Democratic National Convention, and engineered mail campaigns in favor of Nixon’s policies. He allegedly ordered his close friend E. Howard Hunt to fabricate a State Department telegram implicating President Kennedy in the assassination of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem. At one point, according to Senate Watergate testimony, he urged that Washington’s Brookings Institution be fire-bombed as a diversionary tactic in a raid to seize some politically damaging documents. ‘Chuck could never play anything straight,’ says one of his former underlings. ‘Everything had to be contrived, a setup. Chuck always had to stuff the ballot box.’

A post by Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings pointed out that Colson “wrote the [now infamous] Enemies’ List, [famously] said that he would walk over his own grandmother if it would help get Nixon re-elected, and hired the ‘plumbers’ who carried out the Watergate break-in.”

Author Allan Lichtman in White Protestant Nation, wrote about Colson’s active involvement as an honored elder within Christian conservative circles:

Colson brought together politically conservative Catholics and Protestants for a statement of common beliefs, advised conservative politicians including Texas governor George W. Bush, and worked with Christian right leaders Pat Robertson and James Dobson on the development of political strategy. He disseminated conservative messages on sex roles, abortion, homosexuality, pornography, gay rights, and separation of church and state in his radio broadcasts and columns, reaching millions of Americans.

The arrival in theaters of the highly acclaimed film, Frost/Nixon, and the recent release of nearly 200 more hours of President Nixon’s tapes also brought Colson’s name back into the news.

In an interview with Terry Gross, the host of National Public Radio’s Fresh Air program, James Reston Jr., one of the researchers that helped David Frost prepare for the television interviews with former President Richard Nixon that is the subject of the film, “told some throat-grabbing stories about the information that he was able to come up with when he interviewed presidential aide Charles Colson,” Jim Stovall pointed out at JPROF, the “Web site for teaching journalism.”

In regard to the new tapes, Rick Perlstein, the author of Nixonland: The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of America, wrote in Newsweek that among the new excerpts were conversations between Nixon and Colson where they “compare George McGovern’s sanctimonious statements after losing the 1972 election to Hitler’s comment that ‘the German people don’t deserve me.’” In another Nixon-Colson confab, Colson briefs the president on the success of his efforts to sabotage the business interests of the Washington Post, the better to neutralize the sting of the paper’s Watergate revelations.”

Rarely at a loss for words, Colson, when asked about the recent resignation of Richard Cizik from the National Association of Evangelicals, said: “For better or for worse, Rich became a great, polarizing figure. He was gradually, over a period of time, separating himself from the mainstream of evangelical belief and conviction. So I’m not surprised. I’m sorry for him, but I’m not disappointed for the evangelical movement.”

In a June 2005 piece for Media Transparency tittled “The Resurrection of Charles Colson,” I wrote:

Despite being named by Time magazine as one of the 25 most influential evangelical Christians in America, having a Presidential Chair established in his name at Calvin Theological Seminary, and running a $50 million dollar faith-based prison reform organization, Charles W. Colson is likely to always be remembered as one of President Richard Nixon’s hatchet men during the Watergate years. In fact, since the recent revelation that W. Mark Felt was Watergate’s “Deep Throat,” Colson has received more media attention than at any time since the unfolding of the Watergate Affair.

…. seemingly profoundly affected by doing time, Colson reinvented himself and founded an organization called Prison Fellowship Ministries which aims to reform prison inmates through their acceptance of Jesus Christ as their saviour.

…. On October 3, 2002, Colson signed on to The Land Letter, which laid out ‘theological support for a just war pre-emptive invasion of Iraq,’ according to Wikipedia, [which was] [w]ritten by Richard D. Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Last year after several unfavorable court rulings temporarily stymied his prison faith-based programs, Colson took to singling out his critics, charging them with enabling terrorism. Colson’s charge that opponents of his faith-based prison programs are enabling terrorism is “shocking, despicable and inflammatory.” Annie Laurie Gaylor, the co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, an organization that has filed several suits against government sponsored faith-based programs, told me in a telephone interview from San Francisco. “It’s a gross insult to people who are opposed to Colson’s faith-based programs to link them with terrorism.”

And Colson singled out Barry Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, for special condemnation. “Unfortunately, opponents like…Lynn…are blind to this [the spread of Radical Islam in prisons], which puts more than the program at risk — because, as we saw in the case of the shoe bomber, Richard Reid, groups that are now operating in the shadows of our prisons are a real danger to us.”

“Colson’s comments were astonishing,” Lynn told me in a telephone interview at the time. “When I read it I could hardly believe what I was reading. There literally appears to be no level that Charles Colson will not stoop to these days. In this political climate, calling someone an aider and abettor of terrorism is the worst thing you can call somebody. He seems to have run out of any sensible arguments so he is turning to lies and character assassination.”

No longer plotting to bomb the Brookings Institution, or fighting to redeem his reputation, is Charles Colson really a kinder and gentler soul? Not so much!

More than three decades after Watergate, it is very strange indeed that he could stop by the White House and pick up a Presidential Citizens Medal. Is this a great country or what?

Nevertheless, two days after the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th president, thousands of anti-abortion supporters will gather in the nation’s capital.

Despite the bad news on Election Day, two deeply disappointed anti-abortion devotees are dead set on fighting against what they call the most pro-choice presidency in history. While the election saw a net gain in both the House and Senate for pro-choice forces, and some in the “pro-life” community may be weighing a change in their approach as a result of the election of Obama — labeled by some pro-life critics during the campaign as a “baby killer” — don’t count Jill Stanek or Marjorie Dannenfelser to be amongst the re-thinking crowd.

Stanek, the head of BornAliveTruth, an organisation that ran some of the most vicious and effective television advertisements against Obama in a handful of swing states during the campaign, will apparently have nothing to do with either Obama’s cadre of “counterfeit” pro-lifers or any compromises on abortion.

In an interview with National Review Online’s Kathryn Jean Lopez, Dannenfelser, the president and chairman of the board of the Susan B. Anthony List, described by Lopez as “a nationwide network of over 145,000 Americans dedicated to advancing, mobilising and representing pro-life women in the political process”, said that while the “pro-life” movement took a hit, it was “certainly not something we won’t recover from”.

The good news, according to Dannenfelser, was the re-election of Minnesota’s Michele Bachman, the controversial congresswoman who, in a pre-election interview on MSNBC, advocated the investigation of members of Congress that might not be “pro-American” enough for her liking.

The biggest setback Dannenfelser said was the fact that the pro-life movement “will be bereft of the pro-life, pro-woman perspective when and if the first Supreme Court President Obama nominee arises. This is an important and necessary perspective to counter the Boxer/Feinsten/Mikulski feminist axis who no doubt will work very closely again with Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and NOW on the next nomination process.”

NARAL is the National Abortion Rights Action League, and NOW is the National Organisation for Women, the largest organisation of feminist activists in the United States.

Dannenfelser maintained that despite the election results, “The pro-life movement will grow much stronger now. If the movement does its job, we can gain great ground in this climate. With our backs up against the wall because of FOCA [the Freedom of Choice Act], and all three branches of government under pro-abortion control, the movement will retrench, reorganise and re-energise as it did after Clinton came into office.”

In a WorldNetDaily column titled “Counterfeit pro-lifers: A case of mistaken identity,” Stanek responded to a recent USA Today editorial that declared “After 35 years of trying to outlaw the procedure nationally while chipping away at abortion rights state by state, they have decided to add a new and sensible initiative…[and] [t]hey’ll work with the other side to reduce the number of abortions.”

For Stanek, who in January 2003, was named by World Magazine as one of the 30 most prominent pro-life leaders of the past 30 years, the “authentic pro-life position is” that “preborn humans are persons to be constitutionally protected” and “abortion is therefore murder and to be remade illegal.”

In a story titled “The tidal wave of death” — posted at JillStanek.com — Stanek wrote that she hadn’t “written on Barack Obama’s cabinet appointments because frankly I found it too depressing. This is like watching a Culture of Death tsunami. Nothing we can do to stop it….”

There’s Tom Daschle, secretary of Health and Human Services, who is “a rabid pro-abort who also hates abstinence education and supports nationalised healthcare (taxpayer funded abortions)”; former NARAL legal director Dawn Johnson “who will serve on Obama’s Department of Justice review team”; and Obama recently named Melody Barnes, who “previously served on the boards of both Planned Parenthood and EMILY’s List,” to head his Domestic Policy Council.

In addition, Ellen Moran, Obama’s new communications director, will “be leaving her job as executive director of EMILY’S List, a group that raises money to elect pro-abort Democrat women.”

Stanek also had some advice for Pastor Joel Hunter, who prays with Obama and gave the closing benediction at the Democrat National Convention, and who has “lamented all the ‘fighting and… hostility of the culture wars” — labelled by Stanek as “a pro-life fraud… [that] has no stomach”.

She writes: “There is only one way to end this war. Tell your friends to repent or surrender. And you, too.”

On World AIDS Day, Monday, December 1, Rick Warren, pastor of the Lake Forest, California-based Saddleback Valley Community Church and who is well on his way to becoming one of the most recognizable and powerful pastors in America, will be hosting his Saddleback Civil Forum on Global Health at the Washington, D.C.-based Newseum. As part of the event, Warren will be giving President Bush the first “International Medal of PEACE” from the Global PEACE Coalition, in recognition of Bush’s “unprecedented contribution to the fight against HIV/AIDS and other diseases,” a Saddleback Church press release announced.

According to the press release, Warren will discuss with both Bush, and the First Lady, their “past accomplishments and priorities moving forward regarding international health issues — including HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.”

President-elect Barack Obama, who appeared with Senator John McCain at this past August at the Saddleback Forum on the Presidency, will provide a video-taped message addressing the future of global health.

“No U.S. president or political leader has done more for global health than this Administration, which has raised the bar on America’s role and responsibility for providing critical humanitarian assistance around the world,” Warren said. “Over the past eight years, the President and Mrs. Bush have traveled the globe as they and their staffs have worked tirelessly to bring awareness and solutions to pandemics such as HIV/AIDS, and we are privileged to honor their efforts on World AIDS Day.”

Bush, whose approval ratings with the American public is amongst the lowest recorded since polling firms began asking the question, will no doubt cherish receiving this award. It may be one of the few note-worthy aspects of his presidency.

Warren’s recognition of Bush revolves around the Administration’s “implementation and success of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which has provided $18.8 billion since 2003 to combat global HIV/AIDS,” the press release pointed out. “Congress has recently authorized an additional $48 billion for ongoing efforts to address this pandemic as well as tuberculosis and malaria over the next five years.”

“As my wife Kay and I have been implementing the PEACE Plan in 68 developing countries, we have seen firsthand many of the hundreds of thousands of lives that have been saved through PEPFAR and the President’s Malaria Initiative,” Warren said. “I hope that this Forum will show the American people that our global health programs represent more than compassionate humanitarian efforts, but are also a strong, prudent pillar of American foreign policy.”

Warren, recently dubbed a “celebripastor” by DMN News, is the author of The Purpose Driven Life, a book that has sold over 50 million copies. He recently announced a partnership with the Reader’s Digest association that will pool their international resources to develop an entity called The Purpose Driven Connection, a multi-media “platform to help people who are seeking their purpose in life and wish to interact with others on their spiritual journeys.” The will be “The Purpose Driven Connection” quarterly magazine; study materials delivered in DVDs, workbooks and downloadable discussion guides; and a state-of-the-art Christian social networking website.

Earlier this month, Warren “released his first book since his best-selling Purpose Driven Life as part of a special three-tool outreach for the Christmas season,” the Christian Post reported. The new book is called The Purpose Driven Christmas. “People are more open to the Gospel at Christmas than any other time,” said Warren.

According to the Christian Post, “All three tools are based off a Christmas message Warren had delivered two years ago at his Southern California megachurch that drew around 4,000 people and saw more than 2,000 accept Christ.”

Warren said that “Fox News then showed it on their television show the next year. The year after that, the Armed Services Network asked to show it to their entire Armed Services network around the world, so I decided, ‘Why don’t I turn this into a little booklet – kind of a handout for evangelism?’”

In August, Warren said: “I have never been considered a part of the religious right, because I don’t believe politics is the most effective way to change the world.” However, a week before the election, Warren told his congregation: “Here’s an interesting thing: there are about 2% of Americans [who] are homosexual, gay, lesbian people. We should not let two percent of the population determine—to change a definition of marriage that has been supported by every single culture and every single religion for 5,000 years. This is not even just a Christian issue, it is a humanitarian and human issue, that God created marriage for the purpose of family, love and procreation. I urge you to support Proposition 8 and to pass that on.”

After the initiative passed, hundreds of anti-Proposition 8 protesters targeted Warren’s church. According to CNSNews.com, a conservative news service, “the same-sex marriage advocates were expressing their anger at Warren, pastor of the Southern California mega-church, for speaking out in support of the California initiative.”

A mid-November piece at The Daily Beast, Max Blumenthal, one of the most intrepid reporters covering the Religious Right, pointed out that “In the past, Warren’s crusading against gay rights was generally ignored. When Warren shepherded his congregants to the polls in 2000 to vote for Prop 22, a California ballot measure banning same-sex marriages … [overturned by the state Supreme Court earlier this year; a decision that led to Proposition 8 being placed on the ballot], he hardly caused a stir outside evangelical circles.”

At the time Warren received a “letter of gratitude” from the Christian right godfather James Dobson, Blumenthal noted.

In 2004, “in the last days of the presidential race … Warren sent an urgent blast email to hundreds of thousands of evangelicals insisting they base their votes on five ‘non-negotiable’ issues: abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, human cloning, and euthanasia.”

At a time when the old timers on the Religious Right are passing on and/or losing their cache, Warren is clearly in line for the role of the Billy Graham of this generation: His August presidential forum; his close relationship with President-elect Obama; his multi-million dollar media deals; his willingness to extend the evangelical agenda to include AIDS, combating poverty and global warming; and his celebrity will contribute to his garnering the mantle of “America’s Pastor.”

Team Bush is looking for anything that might belie the fact that a majority of Americans believe that President Bush will go down as one of the worst presidents in U.S. history. At this point, it appears that the search has landed him back where he started when, a week after his inauguration in 2001, Bush, surrounded by a host of Christian, Jewish, and Muslim clergy, unveiled his faith-based initiative by issuing an executive order creating the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI). He followed that up with another executive order that eventually established Faith-Based and Community offices at 11 federal agencies.

Though Congress has never even come close to passing legislation legally enacting it, Bush’s faith-based initiative has spread its tentacles to a host of federal, state, and local government agencies — 35 governors and more than 70 mayors, both Democratic and Republican, have established programs modeled after the federal Faith-Based and Community Initiatives program.

On June 26, 2008 Bush appeared at a Washington, DC conference sponsored by the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, where senior administration officials, policymakers, and over 1,000 public- and private-sector representatives of faith-based organizations had gathered. Bush once again touted the successes of his faith-based initiative: “You’ve helped revolutionize the way government addresses the greatest challenges facing our society,” he told an appreciative crowd. “I truly believe the Faith-Based Initiative is one of the most important initiatives of this Administration.”

Two days later, during his weekly Saturday radio address, Bush again praised the faith-based initiative, talking about his “new approach called ‘compassionate conservatism’…. Because of you, I’m confident that the progress we have made over the past eight years will continue. Because of you, countless souls have been touched and lives have been healed.”

Coincidentally, on June 28, an op-ed piece by Jim Towey, the head person at the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives from 2002 to 2006, appeared in the Washington Post. Towey’s article “Who’ll Keep the Faith-Based Initiative?” also praised the achievements of the program and argued that regardless of who is elected president, the initiative should be continued and enhanced.

That same week, Ryan Messmore, the William E. Simon Fellow in Religion and a Free Society at the Heritage Foundation, penned a column for the Modesto Bee titled “Success of faith-based initiative proves the power of the personal.” Messmore wrote: “Those who stand in Washington, DC, typically see problems such as poverty, homelessness, and drug addiction in terms of statistics, costs, and caseloads. This view nurtures the mindset that these problems can be solved only by government programs fueled by ever-increasing spending.”

Messmore assured readers that it isn’t government that can respond to these dire situations. It is “religious and community-based organizations, which President Bush has rightly highlighted from the earliest days of his campaign right up through today …[that are t]he best expressions of this reorientation toward the local, the flexible and the personal.”

From the outset, Bush’s faith-based initiative has been rife with controversy. In the beginning, religious right leaders such as Rev. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson opposed the initiative because they thought it would funnel money to groups like the Church of Scientology and the Nation of Islam. (Falwell and Robertson later changed their minds.) There have been a number of lawsuits challenging the use of such groups in prisons. Faith-based groups have also been criticized for how they have used government money, including religious discrimination in hiring, religious proselytizing, and disregard for church-state separation.

Earlier this year, Jay Hein told the Washington Times that it was time for critics, who he called “alarmists,” to get over themselves: “‘Can a religious charity provide a social service?’ is no longer a question. The question is ‘How?’”

Hein may be best remembered for a U.S. Supreme Court case, Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF). The Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare reported that in 2007, “The Supreme Court ruled in the White House’s favor that FFRF, an advocate of church-state separation, did not have the right to sue the federal government for sponsoring national conferences to promote the goals of the Faith-Based and Community Initiative, partially because the White House expenditures were not specifically authorized by Congress.”

Barry Lynn, executive director for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a Washington, DC-based watchdog group, said “As far as we’re concerned, Hein just continued to spread the Bush Administration’s misguided faith-based agenda. He seemed to have the same disregard for basic civil rights and civil liberties as his predecessors in the office. If Hein is remembered, it will likely be because his name is on a Supreme Court decision that undercuts the right of Americans to go into court and challenge misuse of tax dollars for religious purposes.”

Proof of “Outcomes?”

Frederick Clarkson, co-founder of the blog Talk2Action wrote in an e-mail interview: “Given the Rovian politicization of the grant process — an updated version of the old fashioned spoils system; dressed-up and inoculated from criticism by the term ‘faith-based’ — I would wager that a serious study would prove Mr. Bush wrong.”

According to Clarkson, “The premise at the outset of the White House Office was that religious agencies were discriminated against or otherwise disadvantaged in obtaining federal grants and contracts…[a claim that] former Faith-Based Initiative official David Kuo has acknowledged that there was no evidence to support.

“Whether coming from the point of view of warm-hearted evangelicalism, or ruthless Republican preferences for privatization of social services, the result has been the same: a diversion of federal funds from existing programs to fund inexperienced and unproved agencies for the sole reason that they were religious and almost exclusively Christian,” Clarkson added.

Documented studies continue to be pretty much non-existent. While there are many anecdotes that the president likes to pass off as proof of its success, there is no body of scientific evidence showing that faith-based organizations perform better than, or equal to, secular or government organizations providing similar services.

Ironically, Bush’s mini-campaign hyping his faith-based initiative came only days after ABC News revealed that the faith-based initiative was rewarding contracts to administration cronies. According to ABC News, “A former top official in the White House’s faith-based office was awarded a lucrative Department of Justice grant under pressure from two senior Bush administration appointees, according to current and former DOJ staff members and a review of internal DOJ documents and emails.”

ABC pointed out that a $1.2 million grant “was jointly awarded to a consulting firm run by Lisa Trevino Cummins who previously headed Hispanic outreach efforts for the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, and a California evangelical group, Victory Outreach. The grant was awarded,” ABC found, “over the strong objections of career DOJ staff who did not believe that Victory Outreach was qualified for the grant and that too great an amount of funds was going to Cummins’ consulting company instead of being spent on services for children.”

ABC News revelations were only the latest information that contradicts the president’s rose-colored view of the faith-based initiative. In his book, Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction, David Kuo, former second-in-command of the White House Office, provided an insider’s account of how the Bush White House politicized the initiative, sometimes rejected applications for federal faith-based funds because they came from non-Christian applicants, mocked leaders of the Christian Right, and betrayed the essence of the faith-based initiative’s charge to help the poor.

Kuo “confesses that he and [Jim] Towey hatched a scheme to hold faith-based conferences in congressional districts where Republican incumbents were in political trouble in the 2002 elections,” Joe Conn, of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, recently reported.

“The events would showcase the Republican candidates as friends of the disadvantaged and hold out the prospect of federal funding to clergy and charity officials. White House political operatives loved the idea. The scheme was carried out and 19 of 20 targeted GOP candidates won,” Conn wrote. In his mid-March interview with the Washington Times, Hein denied that FBCI has served as a political vehicle.

“Compassionate conservatism” and Bush’s faith-based initiative comprise a religious patronage system, the political packaging of the conservative movement’s long-term goals of limited government, privatization, deregulation, and the creation of a new social contract. “Compassionate conservatism” was “promptly abandoned in favor of tax cuts for the rich, program cuts for everybody else and out-of-control budget deficits driven by the military debacles in Afghanistan and Iraq,” the Sacramento News & Review’s R.V. Scheide recently pointed out.

With Bush scrambling in search of a legacy, it is interesting that he would turn back the clock to the early days of his Administration when his faith-based initiative appeared fresh and promising.

While supporters and critics chew over the legacy of President Bush’s faith-based initiative, and speculate about its future under an Obama Administration, the administration has chosen Jedd Medefind, a hitherto unknown figure, to oversee the activities of the White House Office on Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until the end of the president’s term.

Medefind’s claim to fame? He is the author of several articles that sharply critical of liberals, and gays and lesbians; articles that have been scrubbed from his Web site.

In early October, the staff of Team Bush’s faith-based initiative convened the 40th and final conference that provided technical assistance and support for faith-based organizations seeking grants from the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives and faith-based offices at a host of government agencies.

“The gatherings have been hailed by small nonprofits — particularly faith-based nonprofits — and by state and local officials promoting their own partnerships with such charities as invaluable sources of information and inspiration,” The Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy recently reported. “They have simultaneously been derided by church-state separationists, disillusioned believers and other critics as a political tactic to garner votes, especially among the evangelical Christians that some of those opponents say the conferences illegally favor.”

“The goal in a nutshell of all of these events is to make America’s frontline nonprofits better at what they do,” said Jedd Medefind, who in the wake of the resignation of Jay Hein as director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, was appointed acting director of agency and will oversee operations of the Office until the end of Bush’s term in January.

Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, a longtime opponent of Bush’s faith-based initiative, pointed out that since “Every storefront, startup church is eligible to apply for these grants … the government expends considerable money simply training them in the basics of setting up a nonprofit and applying for government funding.”

Gaylor added: “That money would be far better used directly serving needy Americans. I further object to the ‘privatizing’ of social services, as I feel Americans should be able to call on their government to provide basic needs and emergency assistance, without being referred to religious groups.”

A ‘well-prepared’ ideologue takes over

In the announcement of Medefind’s appointment, Hein assured faith-based initiative supporters that Medefind was “well prepared to lead the federal effort to support America’s armies of compassion.”

In an earlier report, the Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy pointed out that prior to his appointment, Medefind had been special assistant to the President and deputy director of the Office since mid-2007, and prior to joining the White House, he was director of the Faith-Based and Community Initiatives Center at the U.S. Department of Labor.

Before coming to the Bush Administration, Medefind served as chief of staff for Tim Leslie, a Republican member of the California Assembly from Tahoe City until 2007, and held communication jobs with several national and international organizations, including the C.S. Lewis Foundation and PriceWaterhouse in Moscow.

In 2000, Medefind co-founded and co-directed the California Community Renewal Project, which provides training and resources to groups revitalizing inner-city communities. Medefind has spent time in more than 25 countries, and has served with development organizations in Guatemala, Bangladesh, the Kingdom of Lesotho, and other nations. He is the author of two books: “Four Souls,” exploring faith, community, and purpose during his journey around the globe, and “The Revolutionary Communicator,” which explores Jesus’ approach to communication and leadership.

In a short bio, Medefind states that “As much as I enjoy learning and study, the cutting edge for me right now isn’t building or refining my knowledge, but translating the things I believe into life on a daily basis. That’s especially true, and difficult, in regards to Jesus’ instruction that greatness is found only in servanthood — seeking the good of others above my own.”

On September 15, the Los Angeles Times reported that while “working for Leslie, [Medefind] … wrote numerous speeches and op-ed contributions outlining a particularly conservative bent. He accused liberals of operating with ‘a profound moral blindness that somehow morphs and distorts all lines between good and evil, ultimately embracing a radical relativism incapable of distinguishing between lawmen and criminals, heroes and villains.’”

Medefind criticized cities “that promote one sort of morality by closing public roads for transvestite marches, hanging gay pride flags, and funding homosexual art displays” but “deny funds for Boy Scout public service campaigns.”

One essay dated September 2003 and titled “The ‘Sleeping’ Giant Must Awake” — written for Assemblyman Tim Leslie — urges the “Latino electorate” to reconsider its ties to California’s Democrats:

The pro-abortion lobby fights to ensure that children can get abortions without their parent’s knowledge. The homosexual lobby advocates for public schools to teach that homosexuality is healthy and good, and just the same as traditional marriage. Radical environmentalists hinder the building of the new UC Merced with frivolous lawsuits, and add building restrictions that make it almost impossible for a family to afford to own a home in California. These groups have also tripled the Car Tax, costing the average family more than $300 in extra taxes per year. The Latino community as a whole, I believe, would not support any such actions. However, these are the values driving the Democratic Party, and Democrat Latino legislators rarely, if ever, disagree.

Those writings appear to have been scrubbed from Medefind’s Web site.

However, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which has opposed Bush’s faith-based initiative since its inception in 2001, retrieved some of Medefind’s postings through an archival search.

White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore told the Los Angeles Times that “Earlier in his career, this Web site was used to promote some of Jedd’s work. It’s my understanding that most of his work was taken off this Web site over two years ago.”

That would have been about the time he came to work for the Bush administration.

The last conference

Since 2002, the White House Office has held 39 conferences in 20 states, the District of Columbia and two African countries — the latter held this past spring.

According to the Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy, Medefind allowed that he didn’t “know the cost of each conference, because it varie[d] city by city, and the total is shared by his office and the various agencies that participate, such as the departments of Labor, Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and Education, among others.”

The Roundtable pointed out that David Kuo, a former deputy director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, who has been critical of the cronyism and politicization of the White House Office, “had previously estimated that it cost taxpayers about $350,000 for each conference held. Medefind said that figure seemed high.”

The Roundtable, based at the Rockefeller Institute of Government at the State University of New York and which provides “Impartial News and Analysis of Faith-Based Social Services” reported that “The White House office participated in conferences held by other agencies …. And Centers for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives within a dozen federal agencies have separately held their own conferences and grant-writing workshops around the country and, in the case of the faith-based center at the U.S. Agency for International Development, abroad. HUD alone has hosted more than 400 two-day trainings on “The Art and Science of Grant Writing” and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration has held about 250 similar trainings, according to Medefind.”

While the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s Annie Laurie Gaylor was happy the conferences had come to an end, Jedd Medefind pointed out that they “have been a very important part of building bridges between the armies of compassion and the capabilities of government,” and that he hope that “whoever comes next would have strong reasons to continue them.”