Moderator: Bruce Gourley
Stephen Fox wrote:So lets be honest about the motivations and communities of recent Baptist History.
Stephen Fox wrote:The Takeover was energized by Right wing extremism and Adrian Rogers was complicitous if not active at almost every stage of the game.
There is a small avalanche of material in the last couple months from Molly Worth, to the Balmer Bio of President Carter to the Steven Miller new work on Evangelical Right and the rise of Ronald Reagan--see links in Balmer/Marsh thread at Faith and Practice at this site.
Haruo wrote:How many of the leaders of the Conservative Takeover slash Fundamentalist Resurgence in the SBC were not ordained clergy? Sandy's latest post here seems to me to make it sound like they were laymen, not laypersons of course but laymen, but I'm not sure this is a valid notion. And how customary is it for an SBC church to cast split votes at the Convention?
Stephen Fox wrote:http://www.cjr.org/fiftieth_anniversary/caros_way.php?page=all
Pressler's ancestry in the Oil Industry and the right wing Birch Society politics of Harris County Texas, shaped him to oppose Bill Moyers, James Dunn and their progressive evolution on race matters that almost certainly at one point was in the shadowy influence that forced Carlyle Marney to leave FBC Dallas in 56
Sandy wrote:Stephen Fox wrote:http://www.cjr.org/fiftieth_anniversary/caros_way.php?page=all
Pressler's ancestry in the Oil Industry and the right wing Birch Society politics of Harris County Texas, shaped him to oppose Bill Moyers, James Dunn and their progressive evolution on race matters that almost certainly at one point was in the shadowy influence that forced Carlyle Marney to leave FBC Dallas in 56
None of that is mentioned in the citation. For someone who claims to abhor demagoguery, Stephen, you're certainly a master of it here.
This thread is full of libel and slander, and it needs to disappear.
Sandy wrote:Stephen is placing names of individuals into entries with titles that have nothing to do with them in order to create the impression that there is some sort of association with them. The citations have nothing to do with the individuals who are named, either, but his intent is to create one. That's demagoguery.
It would be sort of like putting your name in a thread and posting an article about the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan that doesn't ever mention you.
Ed Pettibone wrote:Ed: Sandy where is the libel and slander you claim? When you say none of that is mentioned in the citation, note Steve has not claimed to quote the cited story he has reacted with his opinion. You are reacting with your opinion, how ever in my opinion you display far more demagoguery.
And Steve, while I am no fan of Pressler, I am interested in how you get to the conclusion that his ancestry in the oil industry had any thing to do with shaping him "to oppose Bill Moyers, James Dunn and their progressive evolution on race matters ".
Ed Pettibone wrote:Ed: Sandy where is the libel and slander you claim? When you say none of that is mentioned in the citation, note Steve has not claimed to quote the cited story he has reacted with his opinion. You are reacting with your opinion, how ever in my opinion you display far more demagoguery.
And Steve, while I am no fan of Pressler, I am interested in how you get to the conclusion that his ancestry in the oil industry had any thing to do with shaping him "to oppose Bill Moyers, James Dunn and their progressive evolution on race matters ".
Sandy wrote:Well, first of all, Marney was pastor of FBC Austin in 1956, not Dallas. I don't even know what that reference is about and he doesn't bother to explain. And Ed, you pointed out the hit and run accusation related to the oil industry. It's just Stephen wanting to blacken Pressler, and none of it is anything more than his imagination.Whatever else you want to say about Fox's interpretation of the Takeover, he couldn't further "blacken" Pressler's reputation even if he wanted to. Pressler blackened himself by his own conniving, deceptive actions. Ed is correct. Sandy is reacting with his opinion and display of demagoguery.
David Flick wrote: Whatever else you want to say about Fox's interpretation of the Takeover, he couldn't further "blacken" Pressler's reputation even if he wanted to. Pressler blackened himself by his own conniving, deceptive actions. Ed is correct. Sandy is reacting with his opinion and display of demagoguery.
Sandy wrote:David Flick wrote: Whatever else you want to say about Fox's interpretation of the Takeover, he couldn't further "blacken" Pressler's reputation even if he wanted to. Pressler blackened himself by his own conniving, deceptive actions. Ed is correct. Sandy is reacting with his opinion and display of demagoguery.
Baloney cheese on the accusation of demagoguery.
Pressler made his own record, and you can express an opinion of it in any way you please. But inventing things that he did, and blaming him for things that he didn't do is demagoguery, and it only sucks the credibility out of the rest of everything he posts here. The longer this thread is allowed to stand, the more it testifies to the fact that inaccuracy and invention are OK in attacks on the SBC's conservative resurgence.
Return to Baptist History and Heritage
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest