While on the campaign trail in North Carolina, Mitt Romney stopped to kiss the ring of nearly-dead bigot Billy Graham. And he knew all the right words to say. When Graham said he’d help him win the presidential election in any way he can, Romney went straight for the trite and obvious:
Photographers and a television crew were allowed in during the final minutes of the meeting, where Graham was overheard asking Romney, “What can I do for you?”
“Prayer is the most helpful thing you can do for me,” Romney replied.
According to Mark DeMoss, a senior Romney adviser who was at the meeting, Graham then led a prayer for Romney after the cameras left the room. Graham also told the former Massachusetts governor, “I’ll do all I can to help you. And you can quote me on that.”
Really, Mitt? What is prayer going to do for you? Be specific. Is it going to change someone’s vote from Obama to you? What about that free will thing Christians always use to get out of the problem of evil? I guess that only exists when it’s convenient.
51 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
Modusoperandi
October 14, 2012 at 10:53 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
“Oh, Lord, why must you test us so? A Mormon and a Catholic or two Democrats..this is even worse than last time, when you made us choose between an adulterer and a woman or two Democrats…Woe!”
Ace of Sevens
October 14, 2012 at 10:56 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The best part, as JT just reported, is that Graham apparently decided Mormoms aren’t a cult around the same time.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2012/10/its-gods-word-until-its-convenient-for-them-to-change-it/
democommie
October 14, 2012 at 11:01 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Who did Bigot Ghraham pray to? Was it to the GOD in heaven or the one on Kolob?
Michael Heath
October 14, 2012 at 11:16 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
There is of course convincing evidence that Billy Graham is a bigot. However I think we should also consider that he was very effective at promoting racial integration at a time when it wasn’t all that popular amongst his fellow southern conservative Christians. He was a big influence at easing evangelical Christians into a place where their racism became more covert rather than overt, which is a moral progression albeit one fused in determined ignorance and hatred.
I’ve long had a mixed opinion of Mr. Graham. I try and analyze people relative to what they knew and the opportunity to know what they didn’t. From this perspective it’s easy to conclude that Mr. Graham was wrong about a lot of things but his being wrong wasn’t all in bad faith, but instead that he was a creature of time and circumstance. That’s similar to how I can argue that Thomas Jefferson was a great man in spite of also being a life-long slave-holder and theist. From this perspective however I give Billy’s son Franklin no quarter, he’s a spectacularly vile bigot who had every opportunity to know better.
And while I applaud Mr. Graham’s contributions to reducing racism in this country, his frame of reference for making that case guaranteed he’d be a bigot on other items. That was his argument that integration should occur because the Bible didn’t prohibit it, therefore how to treat your fellow man edicts kicked-in.
The fatal defect in that approach is that it justifies bigotry and avoids the immorality and evil of bigotry against others where biblical passages do exist justifying that bigotry, e.g., bigotry against adult females, GBLTs and their families, and arguably though not convincingly, Jews (which we found was a form of bigotry Graham held). So Mr. Graham didn’t supplant a defective moral standard with an improved one when he promoted racial integration, but instead merely found an “out” in his defective standard which allows him to continue to justify his applying a demonstrably immoral standard in other areas, even those which has him and nearly all conservative Christians continuing to act as bigots.
So while he confronted this racist defect in his character and laudably overcame it, he was too cowardly to confront the systemic root cause which resulted in him and tens of millions of other conservative Christians who claim to be filled with the Holy Spirit being so objectively wrong and demonstrably hateful about so many other things.
pramod
October 14, 2012 at 11:48 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Duh. Don’t you know god can’t tell you what to do, but he sure can threaten to smite your ass if you don’t listen to his “recommendation”?
slc1
October 14, 2012 at 12:09 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Michael Heath @ #4
Although Graham was clearly bigoted against Jews as evidenced by his conservations with Richard Nixon, he later modified those views, becoming a strong supporter of the State of Israel, which I’m sure does not endear him to Heath and the other Israel bashers who comment on this blog.
jakc
October 14, 2012 at 12:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I hope Billy lives long enough to see how God answers his prayers this November.
david
October 14, 2012 at 12:23 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
“Prayer is the most helpful thing you can do for me,” Romney replied.
Mitt was right – it keeps him off the streets.
snoeman
October 14, 2012 at 12:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Given Graham’s age and poor health, that statement may actually be true. Of course, he could achieve the same effect by doing nothing at all, and save the effort of talking to himself.
Michael Heath
October 14, 2012 at 12:33 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 writes:
slc1, I don’t understand your motivation to lie about others. It doesn’t help your argument and only makes reasonable people more skeptical of arguments you have which might be meritorious. Simply because they can’t trust you given your repeated dishonesty on other matters.
I don’t bash any country because they are a particular country as you dishonestly claim, I bash countries, including the U.S., when they fail to live up to a credible ‘just governance’ standard, like we see argued in the DofI and the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Rights.
Lastly if I were you I wouldn’t be crowing about Billy Graham’s support of Zionism and Israeli policy regardless of the ramifications of that policy to the world, U.S. interests, or even Israeli long-term interests. Mr. Graham’s defense seems to come from the perspective of Sarah Palin and John Hagee, where the defense of his position is very bit as lucid and compelling as both of theirs.
lofgren
October 14, 2012 at 12:56 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Zionism and antisemitism go hand-in-hand in much of the Christian conservative US. One does not preclude the other, in fact in many cases Christians support Zionism only because they are certain that all of the Jews in Israel will eventually convert or be killed, and Israel will become a Christian theocracy. Saying that these people are strong supporters of the state of Israel is like saying Jerry Sandusky is a strong supporter of underprivileged children.
weaver
October 14, 2012 at 12:56 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Well, maybe he was saying that “praying is the most helpful thing you can do for me” because he recognizes the damage that can be done by other options – like Graham talking to the press and associating his bigotry with Romney, thus turning away people.
Knowing that prayer is useless, as I hope he does, he may have been telling Graham that useless was better than harmful.
Randomfactor
October 14, 2012 at 1:02 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
See, Romney CAN tell the truth on the rare occasion when it benefits him.
Graham’s prayers–or more accurately the public announcement of those prayers in violation of Matthew 6:6–will cause the rubes to set aside their deeply-held bigotry against anyone who isn’t Christian.
Like Romney, who’s seeking the presidency as practice for later when he gets to be a god of his own planet.
Graham will probably direct those prayers at Jesus’ brother, Satan. Won’t make any difference in the outcome, of course.
Modusoperandi
October 14, 2012 at 1:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
“Pray that our Tribe hates the other Tribe more than it distrusts me.”
“Oh, that’s a given.”
“Whew, that’s a load off.”
And then they had nachos and watched the game.
slc1
October 14, 2012 at 1:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Michael Heath @ #10 and lofgren @ #11
Old Arab saying, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
Modusoperandi
October 14, 2012 at 2:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 “Old Arab saying, ‘The enemy of my enemy is my friend.’”
I prefer, “When you sleep with dogs, you wake up with fleas.”
democommie
October 14, 2012 at 2:15 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Michael Heath:
I see Billy Ghraham as a huckster, nothing more or less. He’s become very wealthy running his con. Fuck him and his son.
Reginald Selkirk
October 14, 2012 at 2:19 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Ed, I think you missed the punch line on this story. It’s the reason given by Graham for throwing his support to Romney: “He also said he’s followed Romney’s career, but has been most impressed by his “values and strong moral convictions.”
.
Randomfactor
October 14, 2012 at 2:45 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The enemy of my enemy is my enemy’s enemy and probably my next target. Old Vulture Capitalist saying.
Marcus Ranum
October 14, 2012 at 4:28 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I think that by induction and interpolation that leaves us with:
“When I sleep with the enemy of my enemy, I wake up with fleas.”
jba55
October 14, 2012 at 4:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
“Old Arab saying, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.””
While that is an old saying, it simply isn’t true. For example, I can’t stand white supremacists but that doesn’t make black supremacists my ally or even people that I would associate with.
Michael Heath
October 14, 2012 at 4:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
democommie writes:
I’m not sure how somebody can make that conclusion, he distinguished himself with how little he got paid through-out his career. I recall doing some research in high school (mid-70s) where I wanted to prove that (hucksterism) about nationally-known evangelists in general. I found Mr. Graham was getting paid a salary of $25K/yr. at that time. That was a pittance relative to all the other cohorts.
Michael Heath
October 14, 2012 at 4:43 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 writes:
jba55 responds:
slc1′s response is even more incoherent than that. That’s because slc1 failed to find any enemies of Israel here. Only people who demand the U.S., Israel, and all countries govern to a high standard which protects human rights and are willing to criticize accordingly when they don’t or when certain people support policies which violate these standards. On the latter that would be people like slc1, Sarah Palin, and John Hagee. That’s some fine company there slc1.
Markita Lynda—damn misogyny!
October 14, 2012 at 5:26 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Graham wants another chance to start a war: “The Prince of War“.
Markita Lynda—damn misogyny!
October 14, 2012 at 5:30 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
And, of course he probably prefers a full-out god-botherer to a mild Christian.
Markita Lynda—damn misogyny!
October 14, 2012 at 5:43 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Billy Graham was no friend to integration or civil rights and did not lend them his support. He didn’t even go to M.L. King’s funeral. From the reviews:
“Cecil Bothwell portrays Graham as the political opposite of Martin Luther King and says the historical record does not support Graham’s recent insistence that he was a friend of King’s and of integration, pointing out that Graham “was absent from every civil rights march, rally or celebration over the years.”
Sample paragraph: “Graham’s frequent claims about King’s approval are at odds with King’s widely circulated exhortation from the Birmingham jail, in which he categorically condemned the position of clergymen who opposed civil disobedience, took them to task for obeying unjust laws, and spoke at eloquent length about the necessity for those of faith to demand change. He could have been directly rebutting Graham when he wrote, `You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations.’ “
Markita Lynda—damn misogyny!
October 14, 2012 at 5:51 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
AAANNDDD here’s the snapshot of Billy Graham’s page, taken 21 Nov. 2010, describing Mormons as a cult group.
slc1
October 14, 2012 at 6:05 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Michael Heath @ #23
Hey, ole Heath forgot to mention Michele Bachmann, who actually spent several months on a Kibbutz as a young woman.
That’s because slc1 failed to find any enemies of Israel here.
ROTFLMAO. I can name several off the top of my head, Michael Heath, Marcus Ranum, and Raging Bee. Also included is Mano Singham, who has a blog on this network, and who hates Israel with a passion.
Michael Heath
October 14, 2012 at 8:09 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Markita Lynda writes:
Do you have cites which are accepted by experts? Cecil Bothwell is neither a historian or a credible journalist.
Modusoperandi
October 14, 2012 at 8:18 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 “Hey, ole Heath forgot to mention Michele Bachmann, who actually spent several months on a Kibbutz as a young woman.”
As a scarecrow. Her dead eyes didn’t much keep the crows away, but instead left them disquieted enough that they lost their appetite. She left after she found out that Kibbutzes are socialism*.
* SOCIALISM!!!
Michael Heath
October 14, 2012 at 8:20 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
jba55 responds:
To which I previously responded:
slc1 writes:
Why the continual lying (about at least me)? Don’t you have any confidence your arguments will hold up unless you lie? And by “here”, I meant those who’d posted comments in this blog post thread prior to your falsely claiming enemies existed.
Perhaps because I don’t use a pseudonym I’m more sensitive about people libeling me as you repeatedly do. As demonstrated for the last several years, I’m more than happy to debate people who disagree with me, but here I’m going to ask you not refer to me in your posts if you continue to lie about what I’ve previously written. I do not appreciate it and it’s not like this is comment post is a one-off, but instead close to near-constant with you. Poor form slc1, a real failure in character on your part.
Dan J
October 14, 2012 at 8:29 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
It seems that by slc1′s definition, any person disagreeing with some vague number of or specific unnamed policies of a given government automatically qualifies them as an enemy of the state. I guess that means I’m an enemy of every nation on our planet. Great thinking there, slc1. At least it puts me in good company.
enki23
October 14, 2012 at 9:34 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
democommie
October 14, 2012 at 11:17 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Michael Heath:
This link (http://www.therichest.org/celebnetworth/celeb/televangelists/billy-graham-net-worth/) is the first one I found about Reverend Bigot’s take from the collection plate. I’ll look for others.
dingojack
October 15, 2012 at 12:15 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Michael Heath, EotSoI* -
I’m sure Billy musta had a tough life, flying on his private jet to pick up his check for his meagre salary – from the Seychelles or some other tax haven.
(Salaries are only part of ‘payment’ – what other ‘perks’ did he award himself? A mansion, private jets, chauffeured cars and etc. ?)
Dingo
—–
* Enemy of the state of Israel. This from the casually genocidal SLC – priceless.
OBTW SLC – the Chinese have an identical proverb to the Arabs. Guess all them furriners look alike. (Nothing a dozen or so 15Mt bombs couldn’t fix, right?). @@
Michael Heath
October 15, 2012 at 5:56 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
democommie,
I assume his net worth comes from his book sales and other like-endeavors, e.g., he produced some movies which also did well. I was referring to his salary with Billy Graham Ministries.
democommie
October 15, 2012 at 7:31 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Michael Heath:
Whatever his “salary” might have been, his compensation, whether above board or under the table was considerably more. He was not in it just for the JESUS. Franklin’s not in it for any of the JESUS, just the moolah/power.
I never liked Ghraham, he always seemed a bit too Billy Sunday for my taste. Like Mr. Sunday he happened to find work that made him happy and filled his pockets (it seems to have taken somewhat longer in Mr. Sunday’s case).
He was famously friendly with U.S. PotUS, except maybe this one:
“Graham has had a personal audience with many sitting US presidents from Harry S. Truman to Barack Obama. Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton sought his counsel, as did the Bush family.[19] After meeting with Truman in 1950, Graham told the press he had urged the president to counter communism in North Korea. Later he always treated his conversations with presidents as confidential.[17] Truman disliked him and did not speak with him for years after that meeting.[7] Graham was criticized by some for being too attracted to the seat of political power.
Merle Miller quotes Truman on Graham in his oral biography Plain Speaking:
But now we’ve got just this one evangelist, this Billy Graham, and he’s gone off the beam. He’s…well, I hadn’t ought to say this, but he’s one of those counterfeits I was telling you about. He claims he’s a friend of all the Presidents, but he was never a friend of mine when I was President. I just don’t go for people like that. All he’s interested in is getting his name in the paper.[39]
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/billy-graham#ixzz29Mf5UvXC”
from here (http://www.answers.com/topic/billy-graham#Hearst_support).
Billy Ghraham was a godbotherer who made a very comfortable living for himself and others by preaching about his version of christianity. He was not a monster, although he did create one.
slc1
October 15, 2012 at 7:50 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re democommie @ #37
I would be careful in citing Merle Miller as a reliable source on Truman. A number of the quotes that he has attributed to Truman have been severely questioned.
For instance, he quoted Truman on the subject of the alleged dalliance of then General Eisenhower and Kay Summersby as claiming that Eisenhower sent a letter to then Chief of Staff of the Army, George Marshall, asking to be relieved of his command so he could return home, divorce Mamie, and marry Ms. Summersby. Miller quotes Truman as stating that he found such a letter in the archives and destroyed it. There is no evidence that Marshall ever received such a letter or that Eisenhower ever wrote such a letter or ever contemplated divorcing Mamie and marrying Kay Summersby.
slc1
October 15, 2012 at 8:11 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Michael Heath @ #31
I distinctly recall that Heath took exception to Israel identifying itself as a Jewish State and suggesting that US aid to such a nation was less then appropriate. He has also suggested that Israel be forced to resettle Palestinian refugees in Israel. I don’t have the time or the patience to search through the archives on this blog to find the comments in question, although I recall there was some back and forth between Heath and myself on the subject, so I will leave it like this. I will henceforth not accuse Heath of being an Israel basher or an enemy of Israel; however, I will be watching his comments closely for any sign of backsliding on his part.
I did find a thread back in 2011 in which I quoted Heath as advocating that the US force The Government of Israel to resettle Palestinian refugees in Israel. In subsequent comments, he did not deny that he had advocated it in a previous thread.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2011/12/21/klayman-lies-about-obama/
Michael Heath
October 15, 2012 at 9:19 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 writes:I did find a thread back in 2011 in which I quoted Heath as advocating that the US force The Government of Israel to resettle Palestinian refugees in Israel.
I can’t find myself even commenting on this topic in the thread you link to and I repeat here. So please, quote where I made such a statement in that thread and then we’ll deal with it accordingly (i.e., stating such is no way equivalent to your accusations against me). scl1′s link to a blog post, not a comment post by me: http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2011/12/21/klayman-lies-about-obama/
dingojack
October 15, 2012 at 9:21 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – Having re-read the the thread, I don’t think it supports your argument at all, you did read it right?
Dingo
Michael Heath
October 15, 2012 at 9:24 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
democommie,
I was previously aware Billy Graham is well off. My rebuttal to you was you describing him solely as a huckster. That label fits nicely with someone like Jim Bakker, but I find Mr. Graham to be a ‘true believer’ who also earned his wealth.
He’s still a bigot, he’s still harming humanity given the ideas he promotes which made him wealthy. But I didn’t find him to be in it to rip people off as you originally described him and I originally rebutted. Instead I think he’s convinced of what he promotes and not just because it made him money, but because he really believes what he sells where I find him equating his success with the number of conversions he brokered, not the dollars he earned.
dingojack
October 15, 2012 at 9:26 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – in fact that was what you wrote, not what Michael Heath did.
Please, I encourage others to read the exchange – I could be missing some hidden acrostic, anagram, classical allusion or transposition code (or something).
Dingo
democommie
October 15, 2012 at 9:41 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Michael Heath:
I’m not trying to pick a fight (slc1 is doing a fine job in that area{;>)) but Ghraham is portrayed as a “true christian” by LOTS of people and a biblical fundamentalist by many, yet he cherry picks what he wants to believe from the OT/NT. If he was not in it for the money, he wouldn’t have any.
slc1:
Your comment about my comment is noted. I will look further into it.
dingojack
October 15, 2012 at 9:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
How hard should Billy-boy
prey– pardon I meant – pray?It’s that time again….
Intrade today
Winner of the 2012 Presidential election
(Figures in parentheses show movement over the last week in percent).
Winner by party
Democratic: 62.525% (down by 0.0873) [lead by 25.249]
Republican: 37.276% (up by 0.0879)
other: 0.199% (down by 0.0006)
Head to head match-up
Obama: 61.762% (down by 2.88) [lead by 25.524]
Romney: 38.238% (up by 2.88)
Three weeks to go.
To draw even with Obama, Romney would need a 8.508% swing every week.
To draw even with the Democratic Party, the Republicans would need a 8.41633% swing every week.
Better get going Billy.
Dingo
slc1
October 15, 2012 at 9:49 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re dingojack @ #43 and Michael Heath @ #40
Obviously, Heath and Dingojack have a reading comprehension problem. I did not say that Heath advocated forcing Israel to resettle Palestinian refugees in that thread. I said that I quoted him as advocating such a policy on a previous thread and he did not deny it in subsequent comments on that thread.
However, to make it perfectly clear so that there be no misunderstanding, is it Heath’s current position as we sit here today that the Government of Israel be forced to resettle Palestinian refugees in Israel? That’s a yes or a no.
Michael Heath
October 15, 2012 at 12:02 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1,
Your lies here about me are enough. I will no longer be responding to you and would respectfully ask that you do not refer to me by my name. Of course you have every right to do so though by the grace of Ed, I’m instead requesting you not do so.
I have no desire to have my name sullied as you continually do. So from now on, the only time I’ll be responding to your comment posts is to point out to others you are not a trustworthy source.
For the record to others, slc1 in no way accurately describes my positions; where this thread serves as a perfect illustration of his dishonesty.
dingojack
October 15, 2012 at 12:19 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – and you can blockquote the part where he actually said that can you? You know: “quot[ing] him as advocating such a policy on [the] other thread”. [Editing and emphasis mine].
Dingo
slc1
October 15, 2012 at 12:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Michael Heath @ #47
I must say that I am quite disappointed in MH, who, IMHO, is one of the most insightful commentors on this blog and one of the reasons why I read this blog every day. Well, c’est la via.
Modusoperandi
October 15, 2012 at 1:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 “…MH…is one of the most insightful commentors on this blog and one of the reasons why I read this blog every day.”
And also he has dreamy eyes. *swoon*
caseloweraz
October 15, 2012 at 6:57 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Here’s Part 1 of a three-part guide to what it calls “ReBiblicans” — Republican candidates for Congress (new or sitting) who toe the fundamentalist Christian line.
http://godsownparty.com/blog/2012/10/2012-voter-guide-of-extreme-rebiblican-candidates-part-i/
It’s organized alphabetically by state.