Another Defining Moment for Gary Randall--Plagiarism

Andy this is not Red Baiting . This guy is using your , mine , and other tax payer dollars as a platform to spew his support for religious propaganda to defend people who use terror, intimidation ,in the name of God against United States interests and citizens . Gary Randall himself often talks against government policies , as you do , I do , and most patriotic Americans do . Its our responsibility , is it not ? Supporting terrorism is ano brainer , I would expect Muslims ho are American Citizens to be upset about the image this guy portrays also .

From reading you web iand your views on Conservatives , if it was a college professor spewing his support for pro life issues and promoting webs defending clinic bombings and such , well I just don't see you using the red baiting techique to anyone who spoke out about the professor not being allowed to using a tax payer platform .

In fact just people speaking from a religious view point appears to be a threat to the republic in your opinions . I find that a form of red baiting . Using a different group of people , if I happen to agree with Gary Randall on an issue , I am thrown into the theocratic camp. If I disagree with him , I am thrown into your camp . Baloney , I am in my own camp . You say you use facts to dispute , well I do the same quite often . And you know you can take the same facts , rearrange or even keep them the same and because of different perspectives have different opiionions about what to do . You accuse the other side in abstinence , hate crimes , etc of false information , as if the left does not use misleading propaganga .

The Union I belong to has ten times the power Gary has In Olympia , more like 100 times . As if our government has any threat from Evangelicals of being theocratically taken over . ... ?? That is just nonsense . It ruins your poiints when you put them in your debates.

That balck and white defintion on your web is quite articulate , iif you wrote well done . But I would put that philosophical question to your self here ,if that professor needs to be fired . . The odds no one would hire him in the private sector . .

Littleroundtop,

I think I made it clear in y post that I find Professor Pino's views reprehensible, and inexcusable. I wouldn't put-up a moments protest over his removal from his tenure at Kent State. What I was criticizing was how Randall took this extreme case of one guy saying some awful stuff, and used it to say that there is something wrong with a society that promotes multi-culturalism, tolerance, and even free speech itself. That was the Red-Baiting.

Second conservative Christians do have a tremendous influence over politics in this country. A cursory glance at how the Bush administration has pandered to them, hired lawyers who are graduates from Pat Robertson's Regent University, and how the current crop of GOP candidates are rushing to change their positions on gay rights, abortion, and sex-ed to fit within their ideological spectrum provides us with more than enough evidence at their power in the American political process.

Third, I find it strange that you will continue to trust how Randall characterizes anything, given the fact that I caught him blatantly plagiarizing a writer he was foolish enough to link to. If he is willing to steal someone's words and take credit for them as his own, how can we be sure that any information that he presents as fact, and isn't verifiable, is true?

Andrew ,

Littleroundtop is Mick .

First Littleroundtop is the name I used to sign in with . I am a Civil War Buff of sorts .

Well I guess I should pay attention more to what Randall in saying , I usually only glean his talking points .

The continous challenge to his integrity and honesty has always been used before , just recently about NARAL using some pretty inappropriate comments and selling them On T shirts and such . That was disputed and with the same method of how can you believe this guy . Stating NARAL had nothing to do with selling these Bumperstickers , shirts and such . I did a Google search , and found the NARAL WASHINTON state web page sellling the stuff . The fact is not why I would believe Randall , its why after reading so many character and false attacks , why would anyone even really listen .Its like the story of the boy who cried wolf , and we have all been so desentized because of the nasty rhetoric , the srereotypes of theocrats , etc . Hence my failure to be overly concerned about Gary in mainly because of the outragesous and erroneous claims of the fact based talking points the bloggers on the left make on FNN .. After a while iyou become immune to it , so whan you really have a valid point , it loooses its punch because there has been so many INVALID character attacks . Just like you can't take Randall seriosly because of all his accusations on the left .

Second,

I am a conservative Christian, but fact that the Conservaive Christian population has such high numbers I find it strange if in a democracy they did not have an impact on politics.

Why would they not ? Or should not !

• ..

• Conservative Christians are suppose to have an Impact Andy , their numbers are so high .

In fact just promoting a fear from that is immensly strange in regards to Conservative Christians, I was speaking to the complaint you have of a Theocracy having an impact .

Third ,

• I do not believe Gary promotes falsehoods , In fact from the information I have read , and studied ,

Also

I just read George Will who wrote an excellent editorial in regards to the Hate Crime Bill , much more articulate then Gary Randall or using religious reasons I have seen from the right . ,

• I would also state you have no idea if Gary Randall is a theocrat , as I do if you are a Stalincrat . From the one radio show I heard him speak on , I would say he was not . Just like many people with a traditional view and has seen the way our culture was , and how it is now , he is concerned .

. I know many left leaning people who share my values , many slefties also tell me they do , The continued abuse of drugs hurting lives of our young people , abortions , single parent homes , and a strong change in the basic overall values of our nation while at the same time some negative social issues are arrising .

• Just a coincidence that the more secular we become , the worse the negatives appear .. Not to me ,

Teachers could have 35 kids in their classroom and even folks with dylexia still got a better educaton then many kids of today do . Teachers need 25 kids in a class or less to even get close to achieving success in a classroom . .

• The only thing FNN does it appear is to tweak people like you Andrew , I would prefer to debate the issues , and cause some Bible believers to send in donations because of the hot button issues Gary speaks on . People are just throwing their money away if you ask me .

Littleroundtop,

People are right to challenge Randall's honesty repeatedly. He often plays fast and loose with the facts, and rarely backs-up his assertions with much documentation. I have followed Randall long enough to know that. This however is the first time that I have found him engaging in outright falsification, most of the time he just makes baseless assertions, which he uses to not so subtly imply things about his opponents, or engages in "weasels" (meaning the stating of a fact in a way meant to mislead). My numerous other posts on Randall documents this stuff repeatedly

That being said, your point about the fact that Gary was right about NARAL and the T-shirts was completely valid. WA NARAL does link to (and most likely makes money from) the CafePress t-shirts. Personally I thought it was pretty stupid for a big time organization like NARAL, even a local chapter, to associate itself with merchandise that could so easily be offensive to many people. It is incredibly stupid for a political organization like that to engage in such juvenile humor. That is neither here nor there.

As far as my comments about the power of conservative Christians in government. I never said that they weren't supposed to have such influence, I was merely countering your assertion that they did not. There is no law barring religious people from any political office or appointment, nor should there be. However, it is perfectly acceptable to be opposed to them politically, and to point out dangers that one might see in their gaining power in the political process.

My assertions that Randall and other conservative Christians are theocrats is based on 1) that they use the Bible as their sole base for what they think should be enacted into law, 2) they see themselves as having the 100% correct interpretation of it that Bible, and 3) that if they were to gain political power, those first two points would set them up as a "priest class" that governs. That is a the very definition of a theocracy. It is a debatable point, but I think that there is a lot to support it.

That being said, not all conservative Christians are theocrats. But Randall definitely fits the argument I have laid out

Andrew where I disagree with your method is not that that some conservative Christians use the Bible , its that you see that as something wrong . Whats wrong with that ? Now If I was forcing you to use the Bible , that is something else , and that is where we agree .

You have folks like Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn promoting their idealogogy at college campuses all over the country , because there is not a deity behind it does not give it more value or acceptance in my opinion . But their kind iof government policies concern me more athen the Christian thocracy you seem to think has a chance of gaining control .

But when I view something , I don't say , Mick view this secularly this time . . I think you are on thin ice in the way you view this . I happen to believe Government and religion should be separate , that is where you and i agree , but I use my conscience and what I think is best for the community and country in the way I vote .

• Then factor in tax dollars , if the Federal or state government is supporting something with tax dollars , its debate time as far as I am concerned .

The best Randall does is get people riled up who are concerned about the negaitve aspects of our culture , and feel giving his organization money is making some kind of a difference . My idea is maybe going to a school board meeting or helping out some homeless people getting a job if they want to . That does more in my opinion . Most FNN contributors are the farthest thing from political or theocrats Andrew . Most likely they are very uninvolved people who have lives centered arounf their Faith and their jobs , families . Randal makes them think they are helping solve some of the social ills that we have .. He is not ..

I would agree with your position in the late 80s of a theocracy scare , I was not political then , but just started going to church and watched Christian Tv . Pat Robertson was running for Prersident .. In this state their was a Christian right take over of sorts , but that is in the political party mainly , and it was because a few number of people took control of caucusses from grassroots activitism . That died out from what I see , but even that was far from a theocracy in reality . But I could see where you are coming from if you were on the outside looking in . I got involved about 5 years after that , butfor different reasons . I still meet soneone from time to time that might fit your definition , but it is the exception , not the norm . I have met more homosexual activists politically who almost have their whole political being wrapped up in homosexual issues . The viciousness of the politics is what bothers me more about the homosexual politics , , Martin Luther King always appealed to our better parts , not what so called Civil Rights of today do . Homosexual marriage marriage and rights will eventually occur , but the proce and sterotyping of people has been expanded to other groups in the meantime . Things have not become more tolerant from where I sit .

OK Andy , you got me a little , I will try to pay more attention to this and the deception you are talking about . I see it more as opinions using the facts they want to promote your side , then you proving anything to me yet . MAYBE IF i LOOK AT THE NEXT FEW BLOFS WITH THAT IN MIND i WILL SEE IT what you are talking about .

But if I turn out to be supporting the ACLU because of you I am going t o send you spam . o;)

My assertions that Randall and other conservative Christians are theocrats is based on 1) that they use the Bible as their sole base for what they think should be enacted into law, 2) they see themselves as having the 100% correct interpretation of it that Bible, and 3) that if they were to gain political power, those first two points would set them up as a "priest class" that governs. That is a the very definition of a theocracy. It is a debatable point, but I think that there is a lot to support it.

That being said, not all conservative Christians are theocrats. But Randall definitely fits the argument I have laid out

Littleroundtop,

Thanks for listening to what I had to say. I truly do appreciate debating someone who is at least on the same page as myself, even if we have fundamental disagreements about the meaning of that page. That is a hard thing to find in these very polarized days where an ideological position quickly elicits stereotypes and knee jerk reactions.

Let me just respond to a couple of your points quickly.

I have no problem with Christians using the Bible and their religion to formulate their stand on issues. MLK did so, the Brothers Beragain, the Central American solidarity and sanctuary movements, and many others that I could name. The difference between them, and say James Dobson on Pat Robertson is that they used the spirit of their religion and scripture to motivate their actions and positions. But they did not say that the Bible is the absolute last word on the matter, and instead made a compelling case for position that was not dependent on how the interpreted scripture. In general they were also pushing an agenda of inclusion rather than exclusion, which is what I think theocrats like Randall are after.

The leadership of the fundamentalist Christian political movement says it is written in the Bible, therefore it is 100% true, all while they ignore the Bible's numerous contradictions, differing accounts, and ancient laws that are no longer practiced. Check out the book by a biblical scholar called "Misquoting Jesus." It is the very real and very human history of the Bible. It does not seek to disprove the Bible, but to rather show history shaped it. While I count myself as a Christian, and I personally have felt what I believe to be God working in my life, I do not accept that the Bible is an infallible text. One of the big miracles of the Bible is how the message of God's love and forgiveness shines through the flawed translations, the political forces, and cultural differences that altered it.

As for the ACLU, while I support many of their positions, I don't like the history on dealing with the civil rights of the mentally ill. Their work, coupled with society ignoring this serious problem, has created a system where many sick people never get the treatment they need, and often end-up crushed within the wheels of the justice system.