A "Demon-Buster" Who Thinks She's A Democrat: Kimberly Daniels Runs For Jacksonville Seat

Not satisfied with the Republican Party, it seems the Christian Right is trying to infiltrate the enemy!

Kimberly Daniels, the "Ghost Behind Pat Robertson's Rant About Demonic Halloween Candy" (OpEdNews, Oct. 31, 2009) is running for Jacksonville, FL City Council - AS A DEMOCRAT! This was reported by Wayne Besen (Truth Wins Out):

For the unacquainted, Daniels is a former drug dealer, prostitute and military veteran turned preacher who is now running for Jacksonville City Council as a Democrat. (Yeah, that’s not a typo – she plays on the Donkey team).

For all intents and purposes, however, Daniels looks more like a far right Republican ala Michele Bachmann:

From her campaign website

The people of Jacksonville need a fresh breath. They need to know who they are voting for. I am not going to play the political games of pretending to be someone or something else to get elected and then having to spend four years living a lie. 

Very interesting, indeed. Yes, lying is a sin, but so is the sin of omission: the website fluffs over Daniels' "ministry" (for the record: she did not receive a "Doctor of Divinity, her "Doctorate" was in "Christian Counseling" from an as-yet-unknown school) and avoids her anti-Semitic statements ("You can talk about the Holocaust, but Jews own everything.") and her statements about liberals:

Just as antichrist spirits rule in their arenas with programs such as the View and CNN News, we will rule in the dominion Christ has called us to reign in.People calls these news liberal"we call them antichrist.

It might behoove the Democratic Party to look into this, unless they need the votes so badly that they are willing to run a "demon-buster" for the City Council. Then there was, of course, her famous statement about demonic Halloween candy which Pat Robertson so dutifully recounted on the 700 Club: "Most of the candy sold during this season has been dedicated and prayed over by witches." 

The most frightening thing about Daniels, however, is her militaristic, promotional rhetoric which was even pointed at President Obama immediately after his occupation of the Oval Office. She chides him about his scriptural reference concerning homosexuality:

He claims to be a Christian, but in his book The Audacity of Hope he calls the first chapter of Romans an "obscure" passage of Scripture. God's admonition about the sin of homosexuality is hardly obscure. It is very clear! 

So the question remains: how could someone like that run under the Democratic banner?


It's just possible that Democrats themselves don't know: go to Democratic candidate for Jacksonville Mayor Alvin Brown's campaign website. There is no mention of Kimberly Daniels. Then go to Duval County's Democratic website: same thing. Huh? Yet she has gone on record as a running Democratic candidate for Jacksonville City Council. A little digging in local print coverage of Daniels clearly points out her past and even some chicanery going on within her own "ministry.":

Daniels and her 400-member church are deeply intertwined, so much so that Spoken Word provides her with a 4,800-square-foot house where she lives free of property taxes. "We have a small church and most of my income goes to the church," she said.

Building up a public persona is a difficult thing to do: you have to make sure that ALL of your past statements must be clarified, and not swept under the rug. The video below, put together by Bruce Wilson for TWO, shows how Daniels is lionized by Rightwingers like Cindy Jacobs and "Bishop" Harry Jackson while at the same time, professes how she hates homosexuals, is thankful for slavery ("If it weren't for slavery, I'd be back in Africa somewhere worshippin' a tree!") and shows her anti-semitic bent (to an almost empty audience).


Oh, and one more thing: her church paid for her swimming pool. 

Sounds Republican to me!

GOOD Brain? BAD Brain?: Scientific Study Shows Gray Matter Differences In Political Views

The Only Thing We Have To Fear Is Fear Itself

- Unless You're Republican

My parents were Republicans. They worried ...a lot. I often wondered what they worried about, but when I asked, the usual response was "Ya never know." They were children of the Depression and as such thought that another one was right around the corner. They also saved ...a lot. But a national catastrophe changed their party affiliation. It was called Vietnam. That and having a son on a fragile teacher's deferment. I never wound up going to Nam, and my parents never went back to being Republican, such was the legacy of Richard Nixon.

A new scientific study out of London has created a bit of a stir: for the first time, conservative and liberal brains were compared in physical terms with the emphasis on political thinking (not as much of an oxymoron as one would think). 

"Previously, some psychological traits were known to be predictive of an individual's political orientation," lead author Ryota Kanai from University College London's Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience said in a statement. "Our study now links such personality traits with specific brain structure."

"Individuals with a large amygdala are more sensitive to fear," and might therefore be "more inclined to integrate conservative views into their belief system," Kanai and colleagues wrote. "On the other hand, our finding of an association between anterior cingulate cortex volume and political attitudes may be linked with tolerance to uncertainty" -- which may allow people to "accept more liberal views."

Sensitivity To Fear vs. Tolerance To Uncertainty.

We can certainly see these hypotheses played out in today's Christian Right and it's relation to the Republican Party. The Party's raison d'etre is playing to financial fears: "Social Security will be broke," "Big Government is using YOUR money to finance abortions," or "Democrats always raise taxes to pay for someone else's problems." To some, playing on people's fears is what religion is all about. Together, religion and conservatism are a powerful proponent of the worst fear: fear of the unknown. 

Liberal minds, on the other hand, can process conflicting information easily and possess a more rational outlook: how can you fear something when you don't know what it is? Find out the details, work out the conflicts, leave an open mind and don't be so afraid of people or you pre-judge them without knowing them. 

And who gets the sobriquet of "fearmonger" the most? Sean Hannity or Alan Colmes? Michele Bachmann or Barney Frank? Ann Coulter(geist) or Bill Maher? Progressives are more open to the future so that they can concentrate more on the present.

One of the biggest fear mongers today is Tony Perkins of Family Research Council: gay activists are going to "control the government," Obamacare is full of "death panels" and Planned Parenthood is out to "destroy the American Family." In fact, if you peruse Perkins' writings, you will be hard pressed to see any positive or mitigating factors to today's morals/"homosexual agenda"/pro-choice/feminist-ridden society. Nearly every daily email from the FRC or FRC Action!, besides headlined with the most awful of puns (he thinks he's being witty), is an alert to something dastardly happening on Capitol Hill or in the White House. Even his "Christmas Card" was a political warning of doom and gloom.

Of course, the study doesn't exactly let liberals get off the hook, either, at least not emotionally speaking: liberals tend to be more conflicted about problems and an inability to take definitive steps can result: e.g. the Democratic Party's reluctance to capitalize on certain aspects and the shortcomings of the Republican Party. Also: President Obama's eagerness to compromise has been seen as a sign of weakness by Democrats.

I can't help but think, however, that being a conflicted liberal is much better (for the sake of humanity) than being a fearful conservative. Fear can result in bigotry and, on the part of the Christian Right, a strong tendency towards a reactionary righteous arrogance.  

And righteous arrogance kills.

A wish for simpler conclusions

The study is already being debated: the fact that one of the authors was Colin Firth (yes, THAT Colin Firth) has raised some eyebrows. To set matters straight, the Oscar-winning actor, commissioned the study but did not actually do the research or come up with the findings: an intellectual curiosity about political leanings and the brain simply morphed into a serious study. And while the correlation of political leanings to physical brain matter may exist, whether or not there is any causality is still open to question: does the brain develop according to political preferences or do the political preferences depend solely upon the brain's makeup? 

Ah, my liberal brain is certainly in conflict with the issue! After all, I just want it to be a matter of polar opposites: liberal brain intelligent, conservative brain, dumb, or liberal brain open, conservative brain locked up air-tight. Would that scientists could delve into Michele Bachmann's brain (or what passes for it!).

While I'm musing on that last, see what happens when brains get physically mixed up. Until then, don't be too afraid of anything, that's waaaay too Republican!

Ciavarella Is Convicted, But The" Kids For Cash Scandal" Does NOT Come To An End

Progressives aren't perfect, but this situation sounded like something the oh-so-righteous side would do: sending kids to detention centers for profit. But I delved into the situation of former juvenile court judge Mark Ciavarella, who was convicted today of racketeering and extortion charges and received a shock when I read TWO searing accounts:

SCRANTON, Pa. — A former juvenile court judge was convicted yesterday of racketeering in a case that accused him of sending youth offenders to for-profit detention centers in exchange for millions of dollars in illicit payments from the builder and owner of the lockups.

And this:

Maybe the Luzerne County Democratic Committee can explain these donations from former Judge Mark Ciavarella to their party during his retention campaign. Sitting judges should not be making political donations according to the judicial cannons.

LUZERNE COUNTY DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE 10/31/2005 $500.00
LUZERNE COUNTY DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE 4/19/2005 $6,000.00
LUZERNE COUNTY DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE 9/30/2005 $6,000.00

And some of the donations were under the auspice of HIS OWN "retention committee"! 

Now back to the real cause celebre:

Ciavarella insists that he is innocent of the "kids for cash" scheme, but has pleaded guilty to charges of racketeering. Over $2 million in bribes and extortion were culled by the former judge who sentenced kids to the juvenile detention centers built by his cronies. 

Amidst all of the pleas of innocence in the "kids for cash" scheme, Ciavarella only admitted that he "neglected to report the payments on his tax returns and hid them from the public, but he denied any plot to take kickbacks or extort money." And while the trial wa strictly to concern itself solely with the aspect of bribes and extortion, the prosecutor did state that the kids were "pawns in a scheme to enrich himself."

Over 4000 convictions of young adults were dismissed when the state's Supreme Court ruled that Ciavarella had "complete disregard" of their constitutional rights. 

You can listen to some of the testimonies of the young victims HERE.

The irony that the verdict was mixed and at Ciavarello was not immediately incarcerated and let go on his own recognisance was not lost on Sandy Fonzo, the mother of one of Ciavarello's victims:

"My kid's not here anymore!" yelled Sandy Fonzo, whose son committed suicide last year at age 23. "He's dead! Because of him! He ruined my ... life! I'd like him to go to hell and rot there forever!" Ciavarella glanced at Fonzo, then turned his back.

Fonzo's son, Edward Kenzakowski, was a 17-year-old all-star wrestler with no prior record when he landed in Ciavarella's courtroom for possession of drug paraphernalia. She said her son never recovered from the months he served at the detention centers and a wilderness camp.

The court also noted the amount of donations Ciavarella gave to the Democratic National Committe - presumably helping him to keep his elected position on the bench. Sentencing will be next month, and although Ciavarella could receive a sentence amounting to the rest of his life, sources say that he will receive the minimum: 12 1/2 years. 

Ms. Fonzo would obviously like it to be a lot longer.

Two years ago, one comment about Ciavarello's donations to the Democratic Committee:

So there are corrupt Democrats? I suppose that means that the financial debacle the Republicans just brought us to means nothing, because there are are dishonest and greedy Democrats as well. That is a classic Republican response. Face it, Republicans have brought us to financial ruin, NOT Democrats.

I give up.