We’ve all heard the stories about “shadow governments” and “puppet masters” pulling the strings from behind the curtain of Washington. Most of us have been conditioned to believe these stories come from conspiracy theorists who wear armadillo hats, line both dwellings and vehicles with aluminum foil to prevent eavesdropping, and have their fillings removed all to stop “the infamous they” from spying on them. Of course, recent verified revelations about massive identity thefts the Snowden Leak revelations about Google data collection not to mention Facebook and pretty much every other business with a Web site has changed the cultural view of such people. You don’t hear many slurs about armadillo hats and aluminum foil. Now there are huge movements to either completely stop or drastically reign in such data collection. We have all learned the truth of the old saying “Just because a person is paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t right.”
People are once again looking into “the shadow government” mindset and finding solid items in the mist and fog. I stumbled into an article written by Janet Phelan which makes a rather compelling case. This lead me to a rather shocking Wikipedia entry which mentions Ted Cruz. This is not to say I take anything at face value found on Wikipedia, but, if the mention wasn’t true I find it difficult to believe the Cruz campaign workers could not get it nuked.
A good many people started to openly speak of “the shadow government” in various forms after the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC. Oh, they don’t always use “shadow government” because there is still a stigma to that phrase. They say things “government by highest bidder” or “politicians are now bought and sold” or any of the other hundreds of other sayings you have heard along the lines of politicians now being placed on an open market and sold to the highest bidder. Now when we vote we don’t get someone looking out for their constituents, we get someone looking out for their SuperPAC contributors which tends to be very bad for both the nation and the constituents.
Others held out hope of sanity somehow returning until the Supreme Court threw out the Establishment clause. We are now starting to see a good number of articles trying to identify the number of Supreme Court justices who are Dominionists as well as identify current elected officials and candidates. Here is one but you can search for Dominionism yourself. While some of the articles you find will be in the far flung corners of the Internet, others will be from trusted news organizations. There is a great quote in the October 25, 2015 issue of Time magazine from former Senator John Danforth. It comes from an article on time.com titled “The Relevance of Religion.”
Today’s Republican hard-liners are angry, loud and insistent on getting their way. They are not conservatives — they are revolutionaries who all but say as much while they rail against what they call the Establishment.
Some weight has been given to the discussion of current Supreme Court Justices being Dominionists by the appearance of former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens before a Senate panel.
“While money is used to finance speech, money is not speech. Speech is only one of the activities that are financed by campaign contributions and expenditures. Those financial activities should not receive precisely the same constitutional protections as speech itself,” Stevens said. “After all, campaign funds were used to finance the Watergate burglary, actions that clearly were not protected by the First Amendment.”
A good many members of this religious extremist organization try to both remain hidden and to spew mass quantities of denial that it exists. Most of that denial is starting to sound like an old tin drum to a voting public which has seen the rise of the Tea Party and the cancer it has become. We are starting to see quite a few articles labeling the Tea Party as “the American Taliban” and that label is starting to sound less and less extreme given the government shutdown and blockage of pretty much everything until the American people submit to the Tea Party (Dominionist?) definition of biblical law.
We as a nation, indeed, as a species need to ensure that no country is governed by religion. We have ample historical evidence of what happens once a religion begins to govern. Go all the way back to when the Catholic church pulled the strings. That gave us the less than Great Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, slaughter of the Incas, Joan of Arc burned at the stake and on and on.
You can move forward to Iran, the Taliban (when they ran a country), and now ISIS trying to create their own Caliphate governed by their own twisted interpretation of religious doctorine. What we have to ensure is that the United States does not appear on the list of countries governed by some form of religious law.
Philosophy wise, there is no difference between the Catholic church of the dark ages, ISIS and the Dominoinists. At the end of the day they all believed it was “God’s work” to force a particular religion (or bastardization thereof) on the world. Any other difference one tries to point out is simply spin. This one crime binds them all. Infiltrating a government and bastardizing existing laws so the existing penal system can be used to force your religion on those who choose not to follow is no less a violation of the Constitution or the people.
Keep in mind this has already happened once in America.
No. That statement is not a stretch. Not long ago in our history a group of religious extremists infiltrated the American government and forced a Constitutional Amendment onto a public which did not want it. This was the first attempt at perverting the Constitution into some form of Biblical Law. The passage of this Amendment ultimately gave us names like Al Capone, Murder Incorporated and so many other notorious crime bosses and organizations. It left in its wake, even after its repeal fully funded nationwide crime syndicates which still exist today.
Do you remember what that group of religious extremists forced on the nation now?
It appears the Dominionists are following the same path and using the Tea Party to get there.
The fact there is a presidential candidate, no matter how poorly he is polling, associated with them in any way should scare each and every citizen.
No matter what one thinks about the Iran nuclear deal, it was an attempt to stop a government run by religion from getting a nuclear weapon. Do you _really_ believe it is okay to let people who believe their form of religious law should rule the world anywhere near weapons of mass destruction? Unlike the G.W. claims to justify a war we should have never fought, everyone knows we have nukes and other terrible things. Just imagine someone fully baptized in the belief their form of religious law should rule the world getting into an elected office anywhere near that stuff.