[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase

Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past?

Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Cult Watch
See other Cult Watch Articles

Title: Sharron Angle Says Democrats' Agenda Violates 'The First Commandment,' Frames Reid As Dark Overlord
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/ ... ngle-says-democr_n_670833.html
Published: Aug 4, 2010
Author: Sam Stein
Post Date: 2010-08-04 19:44:43 by Skip Intro
Keywords: None
Views: 47220
Comments: 67

Sharron Angle Says Democrats' Agenda Violates 'The First Commandment,' Frames Reid As Dark Overlord

Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle has long seen religious meaning behind her candidacy, going so far as to tell supporters that God was behind her rise from political obscurity, guiding her path to Congress.

On Wednesday, the celestial threads took another turn towards the bizarre, as Nevada political reporter Jon Ralston uncovered an interview in which the Tea Party favorite said that actions of the federal government were a "violation of the First Commandment" -- not amendment, commandment.

"I know people are very frightened about what's going on in this country," Angle said in an interview that originally aired on April 21 with TruNews Christian Radio's Rick Wile. "And these programs that you mentioned -- that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward -- are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that's really what's happening in this country is a violation of the First Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We're supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government. And you've just identified the real crux of the problem."

This statement alone was a rather glaring reflection of just how infused religion is in Angle's political mindset. The Nevada Republican has already made major waves arguing in opposition to abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

But once Ralston published the exchange, things grew even more bizarre. Angle's communications director, Jarrod Agen -- who was hired, it should be noted, less than 24 hours ago -- sent a clarifying statement to the reporter that was dipped even deeper in religious tones, framing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) as a sort of dark overlord.

"Only the supreme arrogance of Senator Reid would believe that he has a divine right to rule over mere mortals by ramming through Obamacare, billions in reckless spending, and yes, buying cocaine for monkeys," Agen said. "The fact is, Reid has acted like he's all-powerful and accountable to no one. People are frustrated because, like Sharron, they understand Washington has become a giant, unseen, omnipotent force whose presence is felt in all our lives whether we like it or not."

The statement provoked a slew of seemingly shocked tweets from Ralston who took the response as sincere. Only after the fact did the campaign get in touch with him to insist the statement was facetious. Story continues below

Asked to clarify whether, in fact, he was being sincere or sarcastic, Agen said there was "a little of both in there."

In all, the entire episode seems likely to end up being just another footnote in a Senate candidacy that has been filled with incredible oddities and dramatics. But context remains important. It's not unusual for a candidate to invoke his or her religion in the course of an election. Harry Reid himself has said it's difficult to "separate your religion from your politics, its part of your personality. It is part of who you are."

It's rare, however, for a candidate to insist that their candidacy is imbued with religion itself.

Angle has certainly raised the bar for envelop-pushing statements. Whether those following the campaign will adjust their expectations and coverage as a result (or continue to call a spade a spade) will matter as Election Day approaches.


Poster Comment:

Sounds like her wing has lost it's nut.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 55.

#23. To: Skip intelligence, all (#0)

Sharron Angle

I'm going out on a limb here, but IMO Sharron Angle's worldview does not conflict with most who consider themselves evangelical Christians. The problem is - when evangelical Christians seek elective office in our SECULAR society - they must to a certain extent hide who they are.

(I am saying this as someone who considers myself an evangelical Christian)

She is obviously a neophyte in the national political realm - and is likely getting bad advice.

It will be a shame if she loses. Reid has been handed a break - one he truly DOES NOT deserve.

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-05   11:23:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Ignore Amos (#23)

I'm going out on a limb here, but IMO Sharron Angle's worldview does not conflict with most who consider themselves evangelical Christians. The problem is - when evangelical Christians seek elective office in our SECULAR society - they must to a certain extent hide who they are.

“If Christians would really live according to the teachings of Christ, as found in the Bible, all of India would be Christian today.” Gandhi

Perhaps if Christians stopped complaining about being misunderstood by secular society and actually LIVED who they claim to be, they wouldn't have to waste so many words trying to convince secular society that they have a worthy message. Its that splinter and log thing.

lucysmom  posted on  2010-08-06   7:51:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: lucysmom (#35)

“If Christians would really live according to the teachings of Christ, as found in the Bible, all of India would be Christian today.” Gandhi
Far be it from me to disagree with Gandhi, but . . .

There was only One in history who really lived according to the teachings of Christ (the rest of us STRIVE to - big difference).

And one of the disciples who lived with Him 24/7 betrayed Him.

So - was the problem with Christ and/or His message? Or was the problem with Judas - the fallible human follower?

Perhaps if Christians stopped complaining about being misunderstood by secular society and actually LIVED who they claim to be, they wouldn't have to waste so many words trying to convince secular society that they have a worthy message. Its that splinter and log thing.
You've completely missed my point.

As far as I'm aware, no one is questioning Ms. Angle's Christianity.

What I AM observing is heaps of ridicule hurled her way - much of it by statists and leftists who wouldn't consider voting for her anyway.

My question is: can someone who is an evangelical Christian (which I understand Ms. Angle is) run for public office AND NOT compromise who they are?

In other words - if a candidate who is an evangelical Christian is asked certain questions pertaining to their faith AND THEY ANSWER HONESTLY, does that dis-qualify them?

Given today's polarized political climate, I think it does.

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-06   10:06:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Ignore Amos (#38)

In other words - if a candidate who is an evangelical Christian is asked certain questions pertaining to their faith AND THEY ANSWER HONESTLY, does that dis-qualify them?

Sharron Angle: “And these programs that you mentioned — that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward — are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that’s really what’s happening in this country is a violation of the First Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We’re supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government.”

She has not been disqualified as a candidate.

It is up to the voters to decide if she represents their interests. What may disqualify her in the eyes of many voters is her willingness to impose her version of Christianity on the rest of us.

Beyond that, I find her analysis of the first commandment as it pertains to the role of government garbled. To idolize is to worship, dependence is to rely on; they are not the same. One may worship what one depends on or resent it.

She wants us to rely on God for our protection, but I don't hear her object to the government's role in our protection, or taxes collected for military spending.

It is entitlement spending she objects to, specifically those programs designed to help people through rough patches - she wants them to depend on God.

lucysmom  posted on  2010-08-06   11:07:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: lucysmom (#39)

It is up to the voters to decide if she represents their interests.

I suspect that I am more inclined than you to cut Sharron Angle some slack. :-)

What may disqualify her in the eyes of many voters is her willingness to impose her version of Christianity on the rest of us.
I'm old enough to remember the presidential election of 1960 (JFK vs. Nixon). I was only a kid, but it was a VERY hot topic in my household. My parents were very anti-JFK because he was a Roman Catholic. (up to that point, we'd never had a Catholic POTUS).

There was concern that - if JFK were to be elected - we as a nation would be beholden to the Pope, etc. We know how it turned out, of course, and these arguments today sound bigoted and dated.

I mention this because I think it somehow relates to your argument. If we as people of faith (whatever that faith happens to be) are asked to vote for someone who is of a different faith, we may have a concern as to how much that candidate will "impose" their faith.

I'll make this more personal. We may be faced with Mitt Romney as a candidate in '12 (if we still HAVE elections).

While I don't happen to believe in Mormonism, nor would I attend a Mormon temple, I believe I COULD vote for a Mormon if I happened to agree with his/her political views. (I don't think I'll be voting for Romney BTW, but it's not because he's a Mormon.)

I'm just not concerned that they would want to impose Mormonism on the rest of us.

I do have a concern with how the Angle/Reid race is playing out. As I see it, one of the chief problems with the Fedgov (among the many) is the onset of the professional politician. The Reids, Grahams, Bushes, Clintons and Kennedys have done nothing else with their lives except run for or hold office. As a result, they are nothing more than elitists who never have to live under the laws they make.

This is not what the founders intended. They wanted "citizen" legislators - who would go to DC and serve no more than 2 or 3 terms, and then return to private life.

I see the much maligned "tea party" as a way to achieve that. Hopefully they can resist the temptation to join the GOP.

But the tea party poses a potential threat to the existing power structure and, as such, must be destroyed. Why else do you think you have such "divergent" (yeah, sure) people like Trent Lott and Nancy Pelosi opposing it.

Much of the vitriol directed against Angle is that she is a product of the "tea party". Since it is imperative the tea party be destroyed, it follows that any candidate they support be destroyed.

Angle's defeat (if it happens) will be a setback for the concept of the "citizen legislator and a win for the elite class.

When the elite class wins, the rest of us lose.

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-06   12:49:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: Ignore Amos (#40)

I'm old enough to remember the presidential election of 1960 (JFK vs. Nixon). I was only a kid, but it was a VERY hot topic in my household. My parents were very anti-JFK because he was a Roman Catholic. (up to that point, we'd never had a Catholic POTUS).

I'm older than you and remember that race very well. I can guarantee that had Kennedy campaigned framing his policy in Catholic centric terms, he never would have been elected.

I mention this because I think it somehow relates to your argument. If we as people of faith (whatever that faith happens to be) are asked to vote for someone who is of a different faith, we may have a concern as to how much that candidate will "impose" their faith.

She's running against Harry Reid - he's Mormon.

Would your religious tolerance extend to a Hindu or Muslim using either of their religions in a political campaign the way Angle does hers?

Angle is not a political neophyte. She does have a track record in Nevada having been elected to the state legislature and run for Congress (lost).

Bottom line - unlike Kennedy or Reid, Angle has made her faith a political issue.

lucysmom  posted on  2010-08-06   14:12:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: lucysmom (#41)

She's running against Harry Reid - he's Mormon.
It's probably a net plus for him. Doesn't Nevada have the second highest per-capita Mormon population (after Utah)?

If Mormons are voting strictly their faith, I suppose they'll vote for Reid. If they're voting their political views, Angle's is probably closer to theirs.

So who knows?

Would your religious tolerance extend to a Hindu or Muslim using either of their religions in a political campaign the way Angle does hers?
I'm not sure how you perceive Angle is "using her religion" in a political campaign or if I would perceive it the same way. I'm not asking you to provide examples - I'll take your word that - from your standpoint - she is.

In the end, in politics, it's only perception that matters, anyway.

To the other question, from what I know about Hinduism I don't believe I would have a problem voting for a Hindu. A Muslim is another matter. Islam is a political movement as much as a religious one. And, it's a political movement that conflicts with American ideals.

So no - I don't believe I could vote for a Muslim under any circumstances.

Angle is not a political neophyte. She does have a track record in Nevada having been elected to the state legislature and run for Congress (lost).
She may not be a neophyte in the strictest terms, but she is given the high-profile race she finds herself in. When one runs against the US Senate Majority Leader (esp one as unpopular and vulnerable as Reid), one has to expect the knives to come out.

I just do not believe she was as prepared as she needed to be. Especially given the hatred toward the tea party (for the reasons I cited before)

Bottom line - unlike Kennedy or Reid, Angle has made her faith a political issue.
Again, that is your perception.

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-06   14:49:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: Ignore Amos (#42)

It's probably a net plus for him. Doesn't Nevada have the second highest per-capita Mormon population (after Utah)?

Idaho and Wyoming have a higher percentage. Mormons make up 7.4% of the population in Nevada.

I'm not sure how you perceive Angle is "using her religion" in a political campaign or if I would perceive it the same way. I'm not asking you to provide examples - I'll take your word that - from your standpoint - she is.

Go back and re-read the quote.

A Muslim is another matter. Islam is a political movement as much as a religious one. And, it's a political movement that conflicts with American ideals.

The radical Christian right is also a political movement at odds with American ideals.

lucysmom  posted on  2010-08-06   16:38:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: lucysmom (#44)

Islam is a political movement as much as a religious one.

The radical Christian right is also a political movement

Until you can show me where a large group of Christians is strapping bombs on their children or flying planes into buildings, I'm going to reject your comparison.

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-06   17:10:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Ignore Amos (#47)

Until you can show me where a large group of Christians is strapping bombs on their children or flying planes into buildings, I'm going to reject your comparison.

There is like 1.57 billion Muslims in the world, how many of them have committed terrorist acts?

For an example of Christian terrorists, Northern Ireland.

lucysmom  posted on  2010-08-06   17:39:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: lucysmom (#48)

There is like 1.57 billion Muslims in the world, how many of them have committed terrorist acts?
Too many, I would guess. Whatever the ratio is, I doubt it gives much comfort to victims of violent acts.

For an example of Christian terrorists, Northern Ireland.
Very good. How about the Crusades? The Salem Witch Trials?

It boils down to this. Mainstream Islam is religious and politcal at its core. Its founder was a religious AND political figure. Your question to me was would I ever vote for a Muslim for political office? My answer was no - because I do not believe he/she could seperate political goals from religious ones.

Do you not want a secular society - or just a specifically non-Christian one? Because it seems to me that your problem is with Christianity specifically - not religion in general.

You can hate the "Christian right" all you want - but to make the case that they are as violent as Muslim terrorists is insane. Making that argument puts you in Rosie O'Donnel territory.

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-06   21:31:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: Ignore Amos (#49)

Do you not want a secular society - or just a specifically non-Christian one? Because it seems to me that your problem is with Christianity specifically - not religion in general.

My problem is with radical religious fundamentalism of any stripe, including Christian.

lucysmom  posted on  2010-08-07   11:07:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: lucysmom (#51)

My problem is with radical religious fundamentalism of any stripe, including Christian.

That's fine, on the surface.

But let's dig deeper. What specific acts of "Christian fundamentalism" and "Islamic fundamentalism" do you have a problem with?

How about the street preacher shouting loudly, waving his Bible and proclaiming the end of the world is near? How about the people marching in front of abortion clinics carrying signs and offering counseling? How about those that resort to violence and actually blow up the clinics?

And then there are the Mulims "fundamentalists. Do you have a problem with people praying 5 times a day? Forcing women to wear burkas? Sharia law? Honor killings? Suicide bombers?

I have this feeling (correct me if I'm wrong) that you want to equate the extremists who exist in ALL faiths - their acts, and the way their acts affect larger society.

That is just not honest or accurate.

I am a "fundamentalist" Christian. By that, I mean I believe the Bible means "fundamentally" what it says. I try (and fail daily) to live accoding to its precepts.

Politically, I tend to be Libertarian. On another thread about homosexual marriage, I took the libertarian view.

One final thought re: Sharon Angle. She may be a kook, a loon, a radical right winger - whatever pejorative you wish to hurl her way. But you know what? She's not Harry Reid. If I resided in Nevada, I would vote for her.

Because - if elected - she would be one of 100. Her looniness or kookiness would be tempered by the other 99.

And did I mention - she's not Harry Reid.

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-07   21:28:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Ignore Amos (#52)

Do you have a problem with people praying 5 times a day?

Why would I have a problem with people praying 5 times a day?

I would have a problem with some one insisting I pray 5 times a day.

Because - if elected - she would be one of 100. Her looniness or kookiness would be tempered by the other 99.

So then you would vote for Angle not because she's even the lessor of two evils, but because you figure she'd be ineffective.

lucysmom  posted on  2010-08-07   23:54:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: lucysmom (#53) (Edited)

Why would I have a problem with people praying 5 times a day?

Nice dodge to my question.

So then you would vote for Angle not because she's even the lessor of two evils, but because you figure she'd be ineffective.
Nope. I've vowed - in future lesser of two evils" situations - to leave the ballot blank.

Reid is only "effective" because his party controls DC, and he's SML. On top of that, he's "effective" in everything I oppose.

Angle would be no more or no less effective than any other junior Senator.

And I do not believe she is evil. Can't say the same for Reid.

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-08   1:50:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: Ignore Amos (#54)

Nice dodge to my question.

How is that a dodge? Really, if some one wants to pray 5 times a day, what has that got to do with me?

lucysmom  posted on  2010-08-08   11:01:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 55.

#56. To: lucysmom (#55)

What specific acts of "Christian fundamentalism" and "Islamic fundamentalism" do you have a problem with?

Ignore Amos  posted on  2010-08-08 14:17:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 55.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com