I think he was a man of the cloth who was at the center of a controversy a few years ago, which made not one whit of difference in Pres Obama being elected President twice, both times with majorities.
Do you mean the prayer breakfast speech? Are you surprised that one would applaud a speaker as he is introduced, even if no warmth is felt toward the speaker?
If a real hatemonger was at the Prayer Breakfast, they wouldn’t have attended. I was mainly being snarky towards the SPLC, which is part of a rather pathetic attempt to label the mainstream right that at least 100 million Americans support as a hate group.
If the SPLC was criticizing someone with a prayer of the Republican nomination (say, Ted Cruz or Rand Paul), then this might be credible. But labeling a crazy person who has said crazy things as a possible extremist? That’s reasonable. Carson has said some truly crazy stuff.
They attended in spite of the hatemonger Ben Carson. 100 million Americans do not support the hatemonger Ben Carson.
They have labelled the Tea Party itself an extremist group, and that’s supported by 45 million people. They have also attacked many groups in good standing with the evangelical Christian movement.
SPLC is now a left-wing group dedicated to the marginalization of its political opponents.
45 million people support the Tea Party? I’d like to see a cite for that one. From my perspective, the Tea Party is an extremist group, and an insidious one at that. When the evangelical Christian movement demonizes gays, Muslims, and Democrats they deserve to be attacked.
The SPLC merely returns fire from hate groups and haters such as Carson.
Wrong wrong wrong. Why do you post such wrongness? Do you have any desire at all to be accurate? Aren’t you tired of being called out for your constant inaccuracy?
The SPLC labeled one particular group that calls itself “Tea Party Nation” (not the entire Tea Party, and not even close to “45 million people”) as a hate group due to statements by its founder such as “Islam is not ‘religion’ recognizable under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution”, and that Muslims are unfit to serve in Congress.
That’s hate.
If groups that say hateful stuff about homosexuals (and others) are in “good standing” in any movement, then that reflects rather poorly on the movement. I challenge you to find a group called a hate-group by the SPLC that has not made hateful statements.
Bullshit. Your facts are wrong. Your statements are inaccurate.
Adaher? Never!
adaher, you must realize by now that I or someone else will investigate every single claim you make. Why do you continue to make such easily refutable assertions?
Because he believes them.
Maybe LSU should have been spending its funds on education and not a new stadium?
You take that back! Geaux Tigers!
SPLC has also labelled the National Organization for Marriage a hate group, as well as Focus on the Family.
Those are pretty mainstream parts of the Religious Right.
These might be of interest:
The religious right IS a hate group. Thus the mainstream parts of a hate group would also be hate groups.
These despicable organizations may choose wholesome names evoking mom and apple pie, but they are hate groups. They exist to deny equal rights to others based on sexual preference. I see no difference between these groups and groups dedicated to keep blacks out of schools 50 years ago.
It’s fine for you to have that opinion, even fine for SPLC to have that opinion. But they are actually trying to label their political opponents as hate groups and have experiencing significant mission creep given that they were founded to go after groups like the Klan. A group that values being taken seriously won’t label mainstream groups that work peacefully through the political and legal system as hate groups. That is actually an attempt to expand the definition to include more and more of the mainstream right, most likely with the goal to eventually label anyone not liberal as part of a “hate group” if they can get away with it.
If a journalist asked the President if he thought the National Organization for Marriage was a hate group, do you think he’d say it was?
BTW, my cite for the TEa Party being supported by 45 million people is that 15% of Americans support the Tea Party in most polls. Sometimes it’s as high as 20%, but I erred on the low side.
Do you have anything to say on your recurring failures of accuracy? Does it mean nothing to you?
The National Organization for Marriage has repeatedly (and falsely) slandered homosexuals as more likely to molest children. That’s hateful stuff. I’ll again ask you to provide a single group that the SPLC labels as a hate group that has not made hateful statements.
As for Focus on the Family, the SPLC has noted that they significantly moderated their position on gay issues when James Dobson retired. So this is just another factual error by you.
Why don’t you provide cites? Why do you post stuff that is so easily refutable? Doesn’t this criticism bother you? Don’t you want to be considered a truthful person?
So what? What you said was false. The SPLC has labeled a specific and small group called “Tea Party Nation” as a hate group due to hateful stuff they said.
Why are you repeating stuff that has been factually refuted? Do you have any interest in the truth?