Do you think Bobby Kennedy, Jr , George McGovern, the people

run Emily's List, Wes Clark and numerous other liberals and liberal organizations are stupid? Or that they've all been bought off or are being blackmailed by the Clinton campaign?

Because none of those people would support a Christian Dominionist for president. period. And in order to believe that Clinton is a fundy wingnut, you have to believe that all those people are either tools or succumbing to bribery or blackmail.

There are lots of substantive reasons to oppose Clinton; her votes on war and peace issues, her cautious approach, her fundraising, her positions on trade, etc. The bogus claim that she's a Dominionist is not a substantive reason. It is, in fact, ludicrous.

And how did we get the conclusion that Senator Clinton was one?

Dominionism describes, in several distinct ways, a tendency among some conservative politically-active Christians to seek influence or control over secular civil government through political action — aiming either at a nation governed by Christians or a nation governed by a Christian understanding of biblical law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/7235393/the_crusaders

"And how did we get the conclusion that Senator Clinton was one?"
"We" haven't: It seems to be the pipedream of one single DU member.

so much of what is going on here is completely out of character for this place. THey're working hand-in-glove with the right wing. They know exactly what they're doing.

Are there really folks here who believe HRC wants to make America a Christian nation?

I don't buy that they believe it. There just are no depths that some people won't sink to.

The theocrats are mostly all over on the other side of the Corporate Kleptocracy and War Party Duopoly. Clinton is in the secular wing of the Duopoly.

There's no telling what's going to happen next.

wants a Dominionist form of gov't ranks right up there with the freaks who defend Ron Paul

It's going to be interesting to see what percentage of regular church goers support which of our Democratic candidates in Iowa.

..the idea of secular "liberal activism."

I would suggest you read the article mentioned in another post (which I assume you're refuting) and then say something besides how stupid it is. Please explain why you think it is stupid to delve into this subject:


http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/09/hillarys-prayer.html

The points there is NOT that she is a Phyllis Schaffley in disguise. Rather it points out that her brand of faith shares the Christian Conservative view that secular social and economic justice issues are less important then "personal salvation."

As an extension of that, her own comments quoted there do a lot to explain her disdain for "leftist activists" who actually believe in social justice for its own sake.

The end result is NOT necessarily that she wants to ban abortion or engage in the otehr goals of the Christian Right.

The point is that her beliefs inherently marginalize the secular aspects of liberalism and progressive politics. It's the spiritual equivalent of the do-nothing "centrist DLC" strategy of triangulation, in which the corporate status quo is never really challenged.

The others, though, I would not characterize as stupid.

Because 'nobody' supports Clinton.

:sarcasm: