BaptistLife.Com Forums.

back in late 80's that Moore slanted his writing toward the takeover cause Pressler was big chunk of money in scholarship for Moore's higher ed pursuits; and didn't Pressler scholarship Richard land as well, or am I creating historical fiction here??

Yes, Louis Moore has been a longtime supporter of Patterson/Pressler. He wrote the preface to one or more (no pun intended) volumes from James Hefley's Truth in Crisis series about the SBC controversy.

Hefley published this new book by Moore.

Notice Hannibal Books is the publisher. (The Truth In Crisis, Witness to the Truth, notice the theme...)

Bloggers out there are claiming that Moore is Independent.

With Hefley doing the publishing, I have a hard time believing that claim to be true.

William; Here is another review of the book
http://sbctoday.com/2008/06/05/witness- ... ok-review/

Hefley and Robert Tenery wrote everything in "National Enquirer" style with about the same support. I read most of it when it came out.

I got along with Hefley the couple times I was in Press Room with him. He gave me the whole set up till that time in New Orleans, but I lost them on the way home.
For better or worse Hefley was the only person to report best I can remember on the volatile Council for National Policy meetings of Pressler and Patterson that Neal Rodgers reported in Baugh's (Laity Journal); lot of intrigue with James Dunn and Pressler and Patterson in San Antone the Weds Morning of the Convention about 11Am

Dunn and Neal Rodgers were holding a press conference as several were interviewing Patterson in the corner.
Babs Baugh and her then husband Bob Morrison, former prez of the Baylor Alum Association were there in the audience of a hundred or so.

In some ways that press conference in 88 was precursor to everything sinister to come with Bush 43, Rove and Land; and you can now read all that in Weisberg's chapter on rel right in The Tragedy of George Bush, or Chris Hedges great lecture at Furman May 28; or Brandt Ayers in the Anniston Star I link in the Hedges/John Dean thread.

Hefley is biased because he interviews fundamentalist leaders ad nauseam but RARELY IF EVER gives moderate leaders the chance to give their side of the story. That's the most glaring example of bias.

I don't have a few hours to flip through to find specific examples. But to speak from my specific area of expertise, you'll notice that in 5 volumes, Hefley carries just one interview with James Dunn and that interview was conducted by another reporter. Instead of interviewing Dunn, he frequently went to Paige Patterson, Paul Pressler and Jerry Vines for their thoughts and comments about Dunn and the BJC. Dunn is not afforded the opportunity to folks like Paige Patterson who compare Dunn & the BJC to "Sodom and Gomorah." When Dunn is accused of befriending pornographic smut peddlers, he gets no chance to respond again.

I think anyone who knows James Dunn also knows that he is not a man of few words and he's not one to turn down an interview request.

If it was the "least biased" - why is it that fundamentalists love it and moderates hate it?

It seems the "least biased" take on the Controversy would probably tick off both sides to an extent. I haven't heard any "conservatives" complain about Hefley...

I'm on your side with James Dunn against Jesse Helms, Pressler and the SBC takeover.
However, I doubt Dunn was "available" to talk to Hefley in those days.
Dunn helped deliver Texas to Jimmy Carter in 76, as one biographer has noted. That for sure got under Pressler's skin.
Dunn can politic with the best of them and for the most part, with you BDid, I thank God he did.
Henlee Barnette stood up to Duke McCall and the Southern Board when the matter of King came up in the early 60's. I doubt Baptist Press had much of a prophetic voice about it at the time.
For sure folks like Hefley had lot of room to be "confused".
My friend Ellen Rosenberg did a great job explaining a good bit of this in 88. I'm sure you and Ben Cole went through it thoroughly in Hankins class.
Right now I'm a little confused with Fisher Humpheys book being editted by Tim George and Eric Mason, though I think Mason is a good fellow.
Would love for you and Hankins to explore Fisher thoroughly on the matter of George's ERLC pamphlet being a building block for the dismissal of Paul Simmons at Southern.
If Hankins couldn't come to a stronger weighing of deceit and mediocrity in his assessment of Land and Mohler and George convictions in Uneasy in Babylon; then as a friend I don't see a lot of room for your heavy handed dismissal of a struggler like Hefley just because he didn't have the "Baylor" brand or imprimatur on his work.
As my friend (almost gore's speechwriter, Richard Marius) said in the 81 Esquire mag article, lot of the Babdiss mess came down to class resentments as one moderate pastor disdainfully said, these fundy boys aren't even considered for the Rotary Club in their local hamlets.
And if the SBC in a sense was just one big Rotary Club wannabee in the 60's and early 70's; then just where do folks like you and me get off the bus???????