Good Reads
by digby
It’s very uncivil to bring this up, but what the heck. To those who say that talk of “theocracy” in our nation is silly and hyperbolic, it’s probably at least a fairly good idea to acknowledge the fact that there is some very big money behind it:
In its discussion of the now well-known ties between the Ahmansons and Christian Reconstructionist founder Rousas John Rushdoony, the article provides yet another example of the inability of the media to take seriously Rushdoony’s impact and legacy. While most mentions of Rushdoony are followed by the simplistic and inflammatory tagline “who advocated stoning of homosexuals,” in this case the Christianity Today article allows Roberta Ahmanson to paint Rushdoony as an man who spent his life struggling with his family history and whose ideas aren’t really all “that bad” but are misunderstood in contemporary culture.
[…]
The Ahmansons supplied crucial early support to Rushdoony’s writing, his early efforts in the creationist movement, and to the establishment of his Chalcedon Foundation (which Rushdoony’s son Mark now runs). In 2004 Max Blumenthal traced the Ahmansons’ contributions and argued that they were key financial backers in the effort to bring about theocracy as envisioned by Rushdoony. In the Christianity Today piece, though, Roberta Ahmanson is quoted as saying “I never was (a theocrat), and I don’t know if Howard ever was either. I’m afraid to say this, but also, what would be so bad about it?” read on
Yeah, what would be so bad about it?
And here’s a long letter to John Boehner about what’s wrong with conservatism from a man who’s been around a while. Boehner probably won’t read it but you should.
Also:
The Nation on Beck vs Frances Fox Piven
What’s behind the bizarre right wing obsession with the Gold Standard?
Niewert: violent rhetoric and the mentally ill
.