Mark Driscoll cannot escape the shame of his willingness to associate with Janet Mefferd

“Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love.”

Here’s the other piece of the Mark Driscoll plagiarism saga that’s not getting nearly enough attention: This all blew up after he appeared on Janet Mefferd’s radio show.

He did that. He agreed to appear as a guest on Janet Mefferd’s radio show. He did that voluntarily.

There’s only one reason an honest Christian leader should ever agree to appear on Janet Mefferd’s radio show, and it’s not to plug their book (whether or not that book includes plagiarized passages). The only reason any decent or honest person should appear on that show would be to do there what Jon Stewart did in his final appearance on Crossfire: To plead with Mefferd and her producers to stop lying, stop hurting America and stop destroying the church with her lying gospel of hate.

Hates Muslims. Hates gays. Tells lies about them. None of that is good.

That’s not what Mark Driscoll was there to do. Driscoll was treating the Janet Mefferd show as though it were a respectable, decent, trustworthy media outlet.

It’s not that. It’s awful. Janet Mefferd lies. A lot. She tells the nastiest lies she can imagine about LGBT people, Muslims, feminists, poor people, liberals … about anyone she thinks the terrible people in her audience would enjoy hearing nasty lies told about.

Agreeing to chat with Janet Mefferd as though she were just your run-of-the-mill talk radio host is a far more serious moral failing than plagiarism. It’s like being a guest on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show, or on Bryan Fischer’s radio show and treating either of them as just a decent, respectable human being.

Mefferd is being praised for confronting Driscoll with evidence of his theft of others’ words and ideas. After she quickly folded and back-pedaled due to pressure from Driscoll’s publishers and other advertisers, one of her topic producers resigned in protest. Ingrid Schlueter is being hailed for this as though she were a principled hero.

“There is an evangelical celebrity machine that is more powerful than anyone realizes,” Schlueter wrote:

You may not go up against the machine. That is all. Mark Driscoll clearly plagiarized and those who could have underscored the seriousness of it and demanded accountability did not. That is the reality of the evangelical industrial complex.

That’s well-put. Schlueter’s got a way with words. But she’s not a principled journalist or a hero. She worked for Janet Mefferd’s radio show. That makes her a fright-peddler, a promoter of lies, and an unprincipled hack.

The only principle involved in the production of the Janet Mefferd Show is the principle of demonizing the vulnerable in order to raise money in order to be able to demonize the vulnerable on a larger scale.

This show is corrupt from top to bottom.

There’s a chance you’re reading this and you’re thinking I’m overstating the case. Maybe you’re thinking I’m being too harsh.

Um, no. The Janet Mefferd Show is a platform for hateful lies.

• Mefford regards Rep. Louis Gohmert as an insightful, wise interpreter of reality, so she invites him on as a guest and the two of them work themselves up into a credulous frenzy about what they tell listeners is Obama’s secret plan for martial law under his Obamacare shocktroops.

• Michael Coffman is a fringe nutter who hates Muslims. He says a secret cabal of “radical Islamists” will turn America into a new Caliphate, with Obama as Muslim dictator, before 2016. Mefferd had Coffman on as a guest because she agrees with him. “Oh, absolutely” she says, bemoaning that the Justice Department is acting like Muslims have a right to build mosques right here in America.

• That wasn’t a one-hit wonder, either, Mefferd spends a lot of air-time worrying about Muslims. If Muslim Americans are allowed to enjoy the same religious freedoms as people like her, with a true religion, enjoy, then today Dearborn, tomorrow the world.

• No, no, no … you’re still not appreciating the extent of Mefferd’s vile, over-the-top hatred of Muslims. She has Pam Geller on as a guest. OK? That’s the level of venom and mendacity we’re talking about here. That’s how very far this show is from decency, clarity and honesty.

• And Mefferd hates LGBT people even more than she hates Muslims. Disgraced anti-gay activist Scott Lively is charged with international human-rights violations for advocating the execution of every LGBT person in Uganda. So Janet Mefferd invited him on her show to allow him to explain that the charges were part of a “Soros”-funded international Marxist conspiracy against God. Did she hum and coo her agreement with all of this, accepting Lively’s assertion that Christians must press on for the extermination of all black gays despite opposition from the Christ-killing Marxist financiers? Of course she did.

Mefferd responded to the confirmation of the first openly gay judge on a federal appeals court with a rant that was as hateful as it was just clueless: “I mean, that was like a qualification, if you’re going to be on the appeals court you better be gay? That’s how it rolls now. … This is overrepresentation but they don’t care.” Because 7 out of 874 federal judgeships constitutes “overrepresentation” and the oppressive exclusion of Mefferd’s kind of people.

• Mefferd reads a quote from President Obama in support of ENDA in which he says, “millions of LGBT Americans go to work every day fearing that, without any warning, they could lose their jobs.” She starts snorting derisively half-way through then sneers, “First of all, I don’t believe that for a moment.” Her guest that day is infamous anti-gay liar Matt Barber. (He responds by saying Obama’s claim is hyperbole. “Hyperbole is responsible for all the world’s problems,” he says, and neither he nor Mefferd understands why that’s hilarious.)

• Liberals are theocrats, says Mefferd’s guest, The Liar Tony Perkins. “You’ve nailed it,” she gushes in response. “That’s exactly right.”

• Somebody wants to start an anti-gay alternative to the Boy Scouts? Mefferd’s gonna give that man a platform. “We are not going to tolerate someone who is ‘here and queer; loud and proud,’ all of that nonsense,” he says. “Absolutely,” Mefferd coos. It’s kind of her catchphrase whenever any of her guests says anything emphatically anti-gay.

• Does Mefferd invite anti-gay hate-group leader Peter LaBarbera on as a regular guest? Absolutely. And when he says things like “The homosexual agenda is about restricting people’s liberty and freedom,” does she murmur approvingly, as though she’d just heard a profound insight rather than a weird Mad Lib of bigotry? Absolutely.

• Mefferd says that marriage equality will mean “every Christian who supports real marriage might be made to wear a yellow patch on the sleeve, a ‘badge of shame’ to identify us as ‘anti-gay haters.’ Kind of like the Jews in Nazi Germany.”

• Here’s Mefferd’s explanation of the real motive of those seeking marriage equality: “It’s not about love, it’s not about equality, it’s not about civil rights, it’s about absolutely shaking the fist in the face of a Holy God and thinking that you’re going to get away with it.”

Luke Brinker offers a summary of Mefferd’s obsessive anti-gay focus and her relentless promotion of every anti-gay activist, no matter how disreputable:

Mefferd claims she’s giving viewers a “Christ-centered” look at issues like homosexuality, but her own words belie such assertions, revealing a woman whose distaste for LGBT people is rooted in unfamiliarity and feelings of disgust. When a group of Indiana high school students sought to organize a second prom where gay and lesbian couples wouldn’t be permitted, Mefferd took up the students’ cause. Gay rights, Mefferd said, should not “trump the rights of Christians” who do not wish to see gays. “I know this isn’t politically correct,” Mefferd said, “but not everybody wants to see that.”

After CNN host Anderson Cooper came out in 2012, Mefferd warned viewers that they might vomit listening to the story. God may have given Cooper “an ability to love,” Mefferd went on, “but not that kind of love.” “[T]hat kind of love,” she declared, is “a lie from the pit” of hell. It follows, Mefferd believes, that if the Supreme Court ever finds a constitutional right to marriage for same-sex couples, the country can expect divine wrath.

So let’s stop treating Janet Mefferd like she’s some kind of good, honest journalist for calling out Mark Driscoll’s plagiarism. She is not a journalist. She is not honest. She is not good.

Janet Mefferd hates Muslims. Janet Mefferd hates LGBT people.

Janet Mefferd hates. She does not love. Whoever does not love …

EDITED: To fix the misspelling of Janet Mefferd’s last name.

"Tiny Nate is less tiny but just as adorable!"

White evangelicalism, 1975: Before the change ..."
"https://uploads.disquscdn.c... I see your grey mouse lemur and raise you Grandson Nate."

White evangelicalism, 1975: Before the change ..."
"So far as I can tell, that's the debate that's tearing the left apart these ..."

The church of rock and roll
"latest number is 119 dead. Lots of buildings collapsed."

The church of rock and roll

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • http://mistformsquirrel.deviantart.com/ mistformsquirrel

    Fred… I did not know this person existed; sometimes I wish you wouldn’t inform me of more people who hate my guts for existing. *sigh* Oh well, I’m not surprised.

  • An aside…

    I’m sure you know this already, but it’s not you, it’s her ;)
    Haters gotta hate.

  • http://batman-news.com Jim Roberts

    Correction: Haters gonna hate. They certainly don’t gotta, and the hope is they’ll eventually learn that. I did.

  • Vermic

    Over the years, this blog has introduced me to so many terrible people — Tim LaHaye, Bryan Fischer, The Liar Tony Perkins, and now Janet Mefferd — about whom I sometimes wish I could return to the bliss of ignorance.

    “Hyperbole is responsible for all the world’s problems”

    But then there are the moments that make it all worthwhile.

  • Daniel

    Sadly they are cautiously not overstating the not inconsiderable number of problems litotes is not entirely innocent of bringing about.

  • Vermic

    “litotes”

    I didn’t entirely fail to learn a new word today.

  • Hth

    I’m sure it’s just my brain’s way of protecting itself, but this is the only piece of information I will retain from this article as I go through my day. Right-wing talk radio is terrible, blah blah, Sharia law something something, Godwin’s Law etc….

    HYPERBOLE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE WORLD’S PROBLEMS.

    That’s…glorious. That’s incandescent. I will remember this moment forever, where I was and what I was doing when I first heard it.

  • Funkula

    I’m reminded of the line from one of the new Star Wars movies, “Only a Sith deals in absolutes!” Again, uttered without a shred of self-awareness (at least on the part of Lucas; whichever actor it was may well have realized how stupid they sounded).

  • http://www.ghiapet.net/ Randy Owens

    Yeah, I hadn’t heard that line before I saw the movie in the theatre, but did an instant double-take when I heard it.

    ETA: P.S. Ewan McGregor

  • drkrick

    That happened a lot. Harrison Ford is supposed to have told him “You can type this stuff, George, but people can’t say it.”

  • Raksha38

    However, Hyperbole and a Half is something else altogether!

  • http://batman-news.com Jim Roberts

    If it helps, I love you, and God loves you, precisely because you exist. I’d say, “Ignore her,” but she clearly wishes you harm, so I’ll instead say that, to the extent I can, I’ve got your back.

  • VMink

    This, a dozen times, and fullest agreement.

    {{{mistformsquirrel}}}

  • Baby_Raptor

    It never stops hurting, does it? Gets dull after awhile, but never totally goes away.

  • http://mistformsquirrel.deviantart.com/ mistformsquirrel

    Yeah; it just confirms what that voice in the back of my head is always telling me. “Everyone hates you, you’re worthless, just go die in a pit” etc… I learn to tune it out, but it’s not easy when you get confirmation that at least some people really, really do.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Aw :( *e-hugs* if you would like them.

  • Baby_Raptor

    I totally know where you’re coming from…That voice has been hitting the “worthless” button on repeat for the past couple days.

    I don’t really know you, but I always enjoy your comments and you’ve made me laugh more than once. I definitely want you around here. Please consider this my argument against the meanhead voice.

  • http://anonsam.wordpress.com/ AnonymousSam

    It’s worse when the people who don’t seem to be the exceptions to the rule.

  • themunck

    As everyone else said: Yeah, you rock. *Hugs*

  • Fusina

    For what it is worth, I LIKE YOU!!!!! Lots. You have a very fun take on the world–and you are worth a great deal. So do not go die in a pit–I”m already mourning the loss of one friend this month, I do not want to add to my grief.

    I think I have too many people I care about who also care about me–it is the only reason I can think of that I can have so many who have died. A good thing…with a side effect.

  • http://mistformsquirrel.deviantart.com/ mistformsquirrel

    I appreciate it (~_~) It’s just been one of ‘those’ couple of weeks I guess.

  • Random_Lurker

    I can relate. As someone who is disabled due to mental health, the portion of the country that hates me for existing is roughly 50%.

    They also actively seek my death; albeit by indirect means, like cutting public healthcare, but the end result is the same.

  • http://mistformsquirrel.deviantart.com/ mistformsquirrel

    I’m right there with you in that boat too unfortunately. *offers hugs*

  • Abby Normal

    This all hinges on Driscoll’s ability to feel shame. Well, in reference to himself, anyway.

    Sadly, nothing in this post surprises me. I’ve never heard of Mefford before, but I know from what I’ve read of Driscoll that he pretty much agrees with her on all counts and, I suspect, saw nothing amiss in appearring on her show. The folks in Driscoll’s congregation that hang on his every word don’t see anything wrong with the mysogynistic/homophobic crap that he spews–I doubt they’d bat an eye at the notion of him appearing on a show run by a fellow hate-monger. These people never leave their little echo chamber.

  • tophergraceless

    Having listened to her show from time to time, (I know I’m a bit of a masochist.) I think her attack on Driscoll is just an extension of her hate of all things different from her. I believe she has talked about her dislike of swearing pastors and “rock” music in churches in the past. She might have even talked about Driscoll specifically. So, it would not surprise me that she relished the chance to take down one of those ‘post-modern’ preachers she seems to hate so much.

  • GDwarf

    Now, I’m sure she means that they embrace the philosophy of PoMo and apply it to their analysis of the Bible (which Driscoll…does not), but I can’t help but picture a PoMo sermon, in which…I guess the pastor would raise questions about who was really teaching whom, and why? Maybe with a running meta-commentary on the whole concept of preaching…

  • http://heathencritique.wordpress.com/ Ruby_Tea

    I’ve listened to her show, too, and it has always struck me that she is the kind of woman (‘scuse me, lady) that the RTCs love most–she says all the right hateful things, but also does a lot of getting MEN on the show, who talk and talk and talk and TALK about their projects, while Mefferd chimes in with hearty murmurs of “Interesting!” and “Of course!” and “So true!”

  • https://www.facebook.com/app_scoped_user_id/584156988/ E. Mathieu Sternberg

    The other day I was dialing through the radio and Mefford was playing a montage clip of what she sneered as “Young, hip, liberal so-called evangelicals.” There was a variety of uplifting quotes, such as “Jesus never said a word about homosexuality,” and “Jesus had a message of love for everyone.” It sounded like a pretty solid summary of his ministry while he was alive.

    Mefford ended the clip with a sigh and then said, “It’s such a shame that these young people are so mis-led and don’t appreciate what Christ did for us on the Cross.”

    These are people for whom Mel Gibson’s awful film is pornography.

  • Ben English

    It boggles my mind when you can say perfectly true things like “Jesus never said a word about homosexuality” and it’s evidence of… not appreciated what Christ did on the cross? Like, what? It does not follow. Or one time when I mentioned that Galatians is the earliest book of the New Testament to my brother and he got downright hostile and angry as though saying Galatians was written before Romans and the Gospels meant that Christ is not risen and we are still dead in our sins.

  • http://blog.trenchcoatsoft.com/ Ross

    “Jesus died in order that you should RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH!!!!11ELEVENTY!”

  • Hth

    Yeah, it retains its power to be funny for me, even as I know it’s also horrible. Present them with the Gospel, the life and the ministry of this God incarnate speaking directly to humankind that they supposedly set so much store by, and the response is inevitably, “Shut up with all that, can’t we talk some more about his MURDER? Because that’s the part that I really care about!”

    I mean, sure, I get that there’s such a thing as soteriology and various religious ramifications of “what Jesus did for us on the Cross.” But at the end of the day, it always strikes me as unfathomably strange that for so many self-defined Christ-followers, the only thing he apparently EVER did that piques their interest even slightly is stop breathing.

  • Persia

    He got better!

  • Daniel

    But with a body like this it’d be a sin to ignore it:

  • $7768756

    I just hummed Devo through the first half of that movie.

  • Daniel

    “I must do what I must do, even though I might regret it” would seem appropriate.

  • Alex Harman

    Are you suggesting that there are people for whom Gibson’s snuff film is not pornography? For some it’s the kind of porn that turns them on, for others it’s the kind that squicks them, but it’s porn either way.

  • Jared James

    US Representative Louis B Gohmert, Jr. used to be a state judge, which in Texas is an elected office.

    Sorry about the feedback on the mike-drop.

  • Lori

    “There is an evangelical celebrity machine that is more powerful than anyone realizes,”

    Well, not more powerful than anyone realizes. Some of us are very well aware. It would be more accurate to say something like “more powerful than the target audience for RTC culture realizes, because they don’t want to know.”

    I don’t know if this would make Ms Schlueter feel better or worse, but defending plagiarists and attacking the people who point out plagiarism is not just a problem in Evangelical culture. It’s is totally par for the course pretty much everywhere. Do not even get me started on how common it is in online reader & writer culture. Far too many people who most ought to know better seem completely unable to grasp the difference between nice and good on this issue.

    Also, someone has to say it so I’ll do it—it only takes one look at that picture of Janet Mefford to see that she’s not friendly with the gays. That hair is tragic.

  • Daniel

    It takes a lot to pull that hairstyle off though.

  • $7768756

    A lot of hairspray.

    Not much shame though. That hairstyle requires an astonishingly small amount of shame.

  • stardreamer42

    Or hair like mine and a humid climate. I have to work to keep my hair from looking like that. Given the slightest encouragement, it makes me look like Gimli’s bastard daughter.

  • $7768756

    Technical question about medieval inheritance law….

    can a daughter be a bastard? I have it in my head that it applied to men…that may be because only men could inherit.

    Is that also the term for an illegitimate daughter?

  • Abby Normal

    FWIW I’ve heard the term applied to illegitimate daughtersin old-timey movies.

  • Daniel

    Yes. Queen Elizabeth I was declared a bastard when Henry VIII had Anne Boleyn executed. It was claimed that she was illegitimate because of Henry’s divorce from Catherine of Aragon and so Mary became the heiress… which led to lots of problems later.

  • $7768756

    The things you learn on slacktivist…thanks Daniel.

  • Daniel

    One of the problems was she started to persecute white, wealthy protestants. By burning them.

    But then Elizabeth got into power and started burning Catholics. Oh, yeah, and there was Edward who declared Mary a bastard, but he was about thirteen when he died (after burning a load of Catholics) so no one tends to remember him. He was, by all accounts, a bit of a shit.
    Sorry. History geek.
    *edit- just checked- Edward VI was sixteen when he died. And as charming as you’d imagine an utterly spoilt very wealthy ultra-religious teenager to be. “Edward noted his uncle’s death in his Chronicle: “the duke of Somerset had his head cut off upon Tower Hill between eight and nine o’clock in the morning”.”*

  • JoK

    so blackadder’s queenie is pretty accurate but with more burning?

  • Daniel

    Loads more. And beheadings. And one of the first mass-market martyrbation texts that I know of came out during her reign, displaying all the willful blindness to the faults of their own side we now know and love:

    http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Martyrs_%28Foxe%29

  • Lori

    He was, by all accounts, a bit of a shit.

    When someone is given the power to burn heretics before he’s old enough to shave it would be a surprise if it turned out any other way.

  • GDwarf

    Yes. Queen Elizabeth I was declared a bastard when Henry VIII had Anne Boleyn executed.

    Alright, but would that still apply in countries which don’t use cognatic inheritance? Is there any point in declaring a daughter a bastard if the crown is male-descendants only?

    To Crusader Kings II to do some testing!

  • http://matthateseverything.blogspot.com/ Matticus

    Well it wouldn’t be limited to the throne (unless there were no male heirs, in which case the throne would be hers until she married and had a son). As a royal daughter she would still be in line for a lot of money and power, and her hand in marriage would be a valuable bargaining chip. Making her a bastard means that she can’t legitimately claim those things while also negating her dynastic value.

    You can learn a lot about medieval inheritance law from the Game of Thrones books. They also make great wedding planners :3

  • Lori

    Note to self: If Matticus sends you a wedding invitation for FSM’s sake check “Must regretfully decline” and just mail a gift off the registry.

  • http://matthateseverything.blogspot.com/ Matticus

    You could at least send your regards, like that Lannister boy down the street.

  • http://matthateseverything.blogspot.com/ Matticus

    I was thinking about the food and booze, obviously. Slaughtering your wedding guests is a pretty major party foul. That can wait until the honeymoon.

  • Lori

    Oh well, that’s different then. Although given that we’re talking GoT you really do need to specify that. :)

  • MarkTemporis

    The food and the booze is pretty awesome in that series. However, done well, slaughtering some of the guests can prove quite entertaining for the rest of them, if you couldn’t afford a singer or band.

  • Alex Harman

    Sometimes, poisoning the groom can be vastly entertaining for a certain fraction of the wedding guests (not to mention the overwhelming majority of the readers) — although the guests would do well to keep their amusement concealed.

  • GDwarf

    You can learn a lot about medieval inheritance law from the Game of Thrones books. They also make great wedding planners :3

    Fittingly, CKII has been called “The best Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones game ever made”, despite having no official connection to the series. Since the game is entirely about using politics, schemes, wars, etc. to create a powerful dynasty it’s hard to dispute the claim.

    I’ll tell you, though, inheritance laws were clearly devised by the same people who wrote 2nd edition Dungeons and Dragons. The rules are bizarre and arcane, to say the least. My dad’s opinion is that they were made up as people went along with the end result that every time there was conflict over who should inherit the precedent would be set to favour whichever side had more political power, so you end up with inheritance passing through the male line, but only relative to whoever last held the title (so if a king has a son and grandson, and then the son dies before inheriting, the grandson is out of the running in some systems) or similar.

  • Daniel

    From what I remember primogeniture came in with the Normans, and before that possessions were split evenly between children (I think it may have included women too, but I could be wrong). Mostly rules of inheritance were stuck to, sometimes so rigidly there were massive wars over it- like the Wars of the Roses or the Hundred Years War. Of course, this is all about England so it’s probably different in other countries.

  • GDwarf

    Sure, but in order to devise those rules someone either sat down and said: “Right, what if x dies childless but his sister has a son, is he in line?” for every possible permutation, or the actual issue arose and the accepted way to do things from then on depended on who managed to win that dispute. Given that most of the inheritance systems don’t just pick some simple rules and stick to them it seems likely that each and every conflict was solved on an ad-hoc basis that then became the new normal.

  • Jamoche

    It’s a plot point in one of the Brother Cadfael books that the Welsh split everything amongst all the heirs, which puts them at a disadvantage relative to the English because they can’t build up power bases over the generations.

  • guest

    Some myths and Bible stories make more sense when we learn that in the society they happened in (as opposed to the society they were written/told in) the younger son inherited–this actually makes some sense, as the younger son would have had less time to establish himself before his parents died and thus could most use the extra help of the inheritance.

  • themunck

    Why would you ever play CK II as a Chrsitian after the Old Gods came out? For the Alfather! :P

  • http://batman-news.com Jim Roberts

    Ah, Slacktivist, where a comment mocking a woman’s hairstyle turns to discussions of video game and primogeniture. Love this place.

  • Baby_Raptor

    Please, let’s not tell them. Realizing how much power they hold would only embolden them, and I really don’t want to see what they could do if most of them weren’t just arrogantly asleep.

  • http://www.nicolejleboeuf.com/index.php Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little

    Also, someone has to say it so I’ll do it—it only takes one look at
    that picture of Janet Mefford to see that she’s not friendly with the
    gays. That hair is tragic.

    Well, no. There are many places where it would be inevitable that discussing a woman’s politics would lead to discussing that woman’s appearance, given the widespread nature of misogyny in our culture. I really would not have taken this community for being one of those places, though.

    “Someone’s got to act like a sexist jerk, so it might as well be me” is not exactly convincing logic. It sounds like someone looking for an excuse to act like a sexist jerk.

    I really wouldn’t have expected it from you, since you’re usually the first to put sexist jerks in their place.

  • Lori

    She has a really terrible hairdo. I commented on that. If a man had hair of equivalent badness I would have commented on that, and have done in the past. I didn’t say that she was a horrible person because she has bad hair. I did say that she has bad hair in part because she’s a horrible person, but that’s not the same thing. I didn’t suggest that people should not take her or her ideas seriously because she has terrible hair. I didn’t comment on anything about her appearance that she can’t easily change. Also, that hairdo is sending a message. It’s as much a tribal marker as the sausage curls on Michelle Duggar. As such I think it’s fair game for a bit of mild criticism.

    In short, I don’t actually believe that all comments about appearance are sexist or off limits. I’m sorry if that’s a disappointment, but I don’t.

  • $7768756

    I was reading a fascinating book called “Republican Gommorah’ about the rise of the tea party, and the incredibly incestuous nature of the right wing machine. Basically, it all goes back to crazy ol’ rushdoony, and his line of BS.

    An excellent and frightening read, for anyone that wants to check it out.

  • Nathaniel

    I was going along, reading just fine. But then I got to this line:

    “Liberals are theocrats, says Mefford’s guest, The Liar Tony Perkins. ‘You’ve nailed it,’ she gushes in response. ‘That’s exactly right.’ ”

    Wha-. Wha what. Bu bu

    ERROR. SHUTDOWN. BEEP BEEP. EMERGENCY OVERLOAD. BRAYNNNE JAMM! SYSTIEMSSSS SCRAAAAMLBINGGGLING ASDDFERADSFAFAF

  • Jenny Islander

    I’m willing to bet that he read or heard that liberals worry that the Far Right wants a theocracy in the U.S., decided that that word must mean something bad, and fired it right back at the Libs. And she agreed because she has no idea what it means.

    Or she knows exactly what “theocrat” means and knows that her audience assumes that any sentence that begins “Liberals are —-” must mean “We rule, they drool.” And also she couldn’t possibly correct a man.

  • http://blog.trenchcoatsoft.com/ Ross

    I suspect it’s the Conservameme “Secularism is a religion, so by NOT establishing christianity, they’re still establishing a religion!”

  • Baby_Raptor

    Because Atheism is a religion, yo. And we’re going to force evil Secularism on everyone.

  • Daniel

    Personally I won’t be happy until everyone else fails to believe the same things I fail to believe. It’s going to be a lot harder trying to compel people now the religious are on to my dastardly plan, but mark my words- soon everyone won’t believe in any god at all! MWAHAHAHAHA!

  • Jared James

    “I only believe in one less god than you do” isn’t so hard a gap to leap…is it?

  • Daniel

    It requires quite a leap of non-faith though. Soren Nonkierkegaard said that.

  • Betwixt-and-Between

    I keep thinking Soren looks like a Vulcan name. So…maybe they should convert to the philosophies of Surak? Take a leap of logic instead?

  • http://anonsam.wordpress.com/ AnonymousSam

    It’s kind of like how liberals are also racists. It helps when you understand that they consider secularism in all its forms to be a religion.

  • Lorehead

    They consider it to be a religion (“Secular Humanism”) whenever they want to wriggle past the Establishment Clause, but not whenever they talk about their “religious liberty” under the Free Exercise Clause. For example, they do not believe that anyone has the same right to shun bigots that they purport to have to shun QUILTBAGs.

  • Vermic

    It’s just the Karl Rove strategy of accusing your opponent of doing all the things you do. It’s projection as a deliberate tactic.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Then again some right-wing folks are so obviously un-selfaware of the absurdities of the things they say that it’s hard to believe the projection is deliberate.

  • Eric Boersma

    Janet Mefford sounds a lot like a significant number of the Republicans that I converse with regularly.

  • LL

    Does it make you feel better that I’ve never heard of this Mefford person? So she can’t be too terribly influential. Hopefully.

    When I can no longer easily recall the names of all the other publicly hateful assholes, I’ll be really grateful.

  • crh

    Mmm, not exactly the most upsetting takeaway of this article, but did you really just misspell her name? Naming her correctly would probably be ideal. It’s Mefferd, not Mefford.

  • Guesty

    Yeah, Fred misspelled her name repeatedly. Correct spelling for the address for her photo, though. Probably not intentional.

  • Baby_Raptor

    He might have done it intentionally so as to minimize the risk of her or her followers finding the article and turning yet another thread into a troll hive. I may well be biased, but do we want another go-round with someone like Tom?

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Eh, it could be an honest mistake. I mean, people in fanfic consistently misspell “Weasley”, for example, even though the printed form of the name is right there in all seven HP books.

    The human brain can be funny like that.

  • themunck

    It took me years before I realised the Space Marine legion in Warhammer 40k was called the Word Bearers, and not the World Bearers, too.

  • dave

    Can’t believe you went out of your way to write this piece. Total hatchet job on Mefferd. What did she ever do to you?

  • Lori

    Can’t believe you went out of your way to write this piece.

    Writing is what Fred does. Writing does not involve him going out of his way.

    Total hatchet job on Mefferd.

    A. You clearly don’t know what a hatchet job is.

    B. If quoting someone’s actual words seems like a “hatchet job” the problem lies with the person, not the one who quotes her.

    What did she ever do to you?

    Lied a lot while claiming the mantle of the faith that’s very important to Fred. What did she ever do for you? Let me guess—she confirms your biases and tells you that’s it’s OK to hate the people you want to hate.

  • Emcee, cubed

    Let me guess—she confirms your biases and tells you that’s it’s OK to hate the people you want to hate.

    Actually, based on his comments on other blog posts, he may be one of those people Fred alludes to, that because she called out Driscoll, it makes everything else she does okay. He seems to spend a lot of time decrying Mars Hill and Driscoll about how they handled the whole plagiarism thing (which he may actually be right about – I haven’t followed this closely). So it may very well be “She’s on the same side of this issue as me, so I need to defend her against anyone who criticizes her.” Not any more laudable, but slightly different. Or it could be both. Not an either/or kind of thing here.

  • Lori

    Oh, OK. I guess my response to that is to point out that the enemy of my enemy is actually not necessarily my friend.

  • VMink

    “#29: The enemy of my enemy is my enemy’s enemy. No more. No less.” From The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries. … maybe not the best (fictional) work to be quoting in this context….

  • Lori

    Yup. A potentially useful ally or tool, but friendship is a totally separate issue.

  • $7768756

    “Tool” is a highly appropriate word in this context.

    I prefer, from the 36 Stratagems- “Kill With a Borrowed Knife:”

    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheThirtySixStratagems

  • MarkTemporis

    “I doubt all the men who reddened Caesar’s toga would still be seen breaking bread together in peacetime.”
    -Cornelius Slate

  • Mark Z.

    There is never a wrong context to quote that book, except possibly your parole hearing.

  • Hth

    Hi, welcome to Slacktivist! What Fred does here is provide an Evangelical perspective that condemns the use of Christianity to spread lies, distort the Bible’s teachings, and foment hostility and hatred between neighbors. So as you can see, he didn’t have to go far out of his way. This one was actually right in his wheelhouse.

    You seem successful and delightful, and we’re all so happy to have you here.

  • stardreamer42

    I saw what you did there. :-)

  • R Vogel

    You seem successful and delightful
    Greatest. Reply. Ever.

  • http://anonsam.wordpress.com/ AnonymousSam

    Did you steal that from Mario Batali? XD

  • Fusina

    As my husband says, “If you are going to steal, steal from the best.” That set of tweets was awesome. Plus he is a red headed Italian. So’s my husband–but he is a tall skinny redhead.

  • http://batman-news.com Jim Roberts

    Thanks for the laugh.

  • Baby_Raptor

    You know, advocating for the murder of thousands of people simply because they disagree with you is kind of a bad thing. Lying about millions more isn’t too sparkly either. Bigotry is fun, though, I guess?

    Try thinking about it like this: When someone says the slightest non-complimentary thing about Christians, you shit bricks. Now instead of someone simply telling you that you’re wrong, imagine having to constantly listen to that person talking about how you should die, and any effort to treat you as a human being is The Most Horrible Thing Ever.

    But you agree with her, so what does it matter that she’s lying her ass off and advocating killing people?

  • Donalbain

    You read the piece didn’t you? You SAW what she did that is so vile (none of which you refute). The fact that she did not do them directly TO Fred is not even close to being relevant.

  • (((J_Enigma32)))

    “You can’t quote what I said at me word for word! That’s not fair, you’re taking me out of context.”

  • VMink

    What did she ever do to you?

    Want many people I care about to go the hell away and die in pain. I kinda take that a little personally. Wouldn’t you?

  • Sue White

    She makes Christians look bad.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Oh and somehow your computer totally on its own impelled you to click this here blog’s URL. Uh-huh, sure, mm-hmm.

  • LoneWolf343

    You mean besides be a horrible person?

  • LorenHaas

    I am sorry, but doesn’t anyone else see this comment as intentionaly ironic?

  • LoneWolf343

    Poe’s Law.

  • http://www.nicolejleboeuf.com/index.php Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little

    I think Fred just listed about 15 examples of what she did to him, complete with citations and links. And if you’re saying, “No, she did those things to gays and Muslims, not to Fred!” you are failing to understand the ideal of Christian empathy.

    But if “she is acting mendaciously to harm people Fred cares about” isn’t direct enough for you, throw on an extra side of “she is acting mendaciously to paint Fred, by virtue of being Christian, as a lying gay-bashing Islamophobe.” Good enough?

  • Baby_Raptor

    The fact that this woman, and people like her, continue using god’s name for their rampant pain, suffering and BS and the god they’re invoking does nothing is proof that a god the New Testament describes cannot possibly exist. If god were half as loving, just and merciful as the book claims he is, he’d have smitten these people long ago.

    Edited for AnonaMiss’ appreciated word help.

  • AnonaMiss

    Smitten.

    Irregular verbs are my joy and treasure.

  • Baby_Raptor

    Thanks! I’ve fixed it.

  • Cathy W

    But given common usage, that makes it sound like he’s making them fall in love with each other.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Eh, rewording it can be “he’d have made sure to have smited them” or something.

  • $7768756

    I honestly prefer smitten. I mean, the bible would be so much more FUN that way. “And Gooflagerus was smitten by the Lord. O lord, quoth he. Whatever have I done to deserve this? and he did write sappy poetry and gaze into the distance sighing.”

  • http://www.ghiapet.net/ Randy Owens

    How is that a fix? It’s still a perfect tense/aspect, hence still “smitten”.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Eh whatever, consider it suitably modified to have the correct past tense.

  • SororAyin

    Naw. I’m pretty sure that the past tense of “smite” is “smote.” “Smitten” is the past perfect tense. At least, I think that’s how it works.

    EDIT: Nope, I’m wrong. See Randy Owens.

  • tricksterson

    I just want to tell you that if this causes an image of Janet Mefferd and Tony Perkins having sex spring into my head I’m hunting you down.

  • emjb

    I guess she’s an example of “even a stopped clock is right twice a day.” A horrible person who accidentally did something useful.

  • Persia

    ““Soros”-funded international Marxist conspiracy against God.”
    Usually translated as “International Jewish banking conspiracy.”

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    That’s always made of special, particularly as Soros got very rich during the 1990s taking advantage of deregulated financial markets and currency markets, but now he’s wriitng books saying how sorry he all is about that and he suddenly becomes the Antichrist or as near as.

  • tricksterson

    I thought Obama was the Anti-Christ? Or is it the Pope? So hard to keep track nowadays what with all those Whores of Babylon procreating all over the place.

  • (((J_Enigma32)))

    I’ve never even heard of this woman before, but then, there’s so many Christianofascists anymore I can’t keep them straight.

    Liberals are theocrats, says Mefford’s guest, The Liar Tony Perkins. “You’ve nailed it,” she gushes in response. “That’s exactly right.”

    With statements like this? There’s a very strong likelihood this woman could not pass a Turing test.

  • Baby_Raptor

    She’s just projecting. If a political party could have a Cutie Mark, projecting would be the GoTea’s special talent.

  • JoK

    my little goatie

  • tricksterson

    Votes for Goats! Now!

    Sorry, I just had to say something to release the pressure in my head from reading all the accumulated bullshit of this woman and her guests or it would have popped like a balloon.

  • AnonaMiss

    I used to think politics weren’t for me
    Until I saw Fox News on Teevee!

    Taxes are
    Unamerican!
    Sharia law’s
    Coming for my gun!
    Obamacare threatens
    Christianity –
    And everyone else is lying to me!

    Ooh My Little GoTea
    Don’t you know you are my very last friends…

    Not that Tea Partiers can’t be nice people or don’t have friends – It’s a specific picture I mean to paint, not a general one.

  • Baby_Raptor

    I love this. So very much.

  • http://matthateseverything.blogspot.com/ Matticus

    A Cutie Mark for projecting? What would that even look like?

  • Baby_Raptor

    Could go the lazy route and just use a picture of a projector. =D

  • MarkTemporis
  • BeastyJ

    I confess that I kind of like the yellow patch idea, though.

  • Vermic

    The irony is that they worry about patches while broadcasting themselves as anti-gay haters, loudly and proudly, to everyone who will listen and plenty who won’t. No shade of yellow could mark the Janet Mefferds of the world more conspicuously than the words they willingly and constantly spew from their own mouths, whether on the radio, in Congress or at the dinner table. Their own lives are their badge of shame.

    Which is convenient, because it helps keep the patch budget down.

  • Baby_Raptor

    If only they were actually capable of shame.

  • http://heathencritique.wordpress.com/ Ruby_Tea

    And she figures atheists might as well just kill ourselves…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOqOIrQvls8

  • (((J_Enigma32)))

    If nothing else, knowing that staying alive spites her is enough for me to keep going.

    Fortunately, my life has a lot more meaning than that. Like, for instance, I was able to teach myself something about Alcubierre metrics and Krasnikov tubes today; my math skills terminate at around 3rd grade but that doesn’t mean I still can’t understand what you’re saying in the formulas, just don’t expect me to be able to solve them. And I’ve spent the last few days wondering if unparticle physics connects to the trans-Planckian problem in any way, shape or form and playing with all sorts of really fun ideas that come from that (based off what’s likely a gross misunderstanding; the hypothetical physics equivalent of the linguistic “my hovercraft is full of eels.”)

    Hypothetical and fictional FTL methods mean more to me than she or her god, leave off her own nasty little opinions.I just wish everyone could have the joy of experiencing it, and that her obscene words didn’t affect so many people.

  • MarkTemporis

    I read the old Monty Python line as “my Lovecraft is full of eels” which may or may not be more appropriate when dealing with non-standard physics.

  • Vermic

    If you should ever meet Janet Mefferd in person and she asks you why you don’t kill yourself, you should stand one inch from her face, never break eye contact, and emit a thin trail of drool from the corner of your mouth while you intone the words: “To drive you crazy.”

    I think you will look back on the moment as a social opportunity well spent.

  • ReverendRef

    Mefferd says that marriage equality will mean “every Christian who
    supports real marriage might be made to wear a yellow patch on the
    sleeve, a ‘badge of shame’ to identify us as ‘anti-gay haters.’

    Maybe I’m missing something here . . . but does being an ‘anti-gay hater’ mean that you are a hater of people like Driscoll, Limbaugh, Beck, Perkins, LaJenkins, Fischer, et al?

    Because otherwise it seems to be just a bunch of dog whistle words designed to get people riled up.

  • Sue White

    Nah, you’re thinking “anti gay-hater”.

  • Ursula L

    You aren’t missing the message, you have it exactly!

  • Carstonio

    I had never heard of Mefferd. Does she really have a large audience?

  • Raksha38

    Mefferd also has a lot of hatred for Pagans. There’s this article at the Wild Hunt about one particular instance of her spewing bile at us. There are also a couple other instances mentioned in various news roundups on WH, too.

    The continuing popularity of people like her makes me not only feel like an unwelcome stranger in my own country, but actually fear for my physical safety.

  • http://repost-this-image.tumblr.com The_L1985

    She reminds me of Betty Bowers, only not a parody. I feel now like we should spam her with Betty Bowers videos.

  • http://abipwu.blogspot.com Melissia

    As a corollary, whomever fears god cannot feel perfect love for God, because perfect love drives out all fear.

    John 4:18
    “There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.”