Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

Sharron Angle: Entitlements Turn Government into God, Violate 1st Commandment

4 years ago
  0 Comments Say Something  »
Text Size
A couple of days after Senate candidate Sharron Angle said the media should ask only friendly questions and "report the news the way we want it to be reported," more unusual quotes from the Nevada Republican are coming to light. In the latest, Angle said the country is "entrenched in idolatry" and entitlement programs are a violation of the 1st Commandment ("Thou shalt have no other gods before me").

Angle is challenging Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in perhaps the most closely watched Senate contest in the nation. In her April interview with Rick Wiles of TruNews Christian Radio, she framed their competition as "a war of ideology, a war of thoughts and of faith. And we need people to really stand for faith and trust, not hope and change."

Las Vegas Sun columnist Jon Ralston unearthed the interview. He provides two audio segments and a partial transcript of what he calls her "startling rhetoric."

Among other things, Angle told Wiles that "these programs that you mentioned -- that [President] Obama has going with Reid and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi pushing them forward -- are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that's really, what's happening in this country is a violation of the 1st Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We're supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not . . . our government."

She also repeated her view that in running, she is following God's plan for her. "I think it is a calling that God has on my life," she said. "I have watched Him walk with me through politics and help me to see the pitfalls of the political machinery, the seduction of the party, and even those outside the party, the lobbyists -- all of that to say that the Lord shows me daily where He wants me to walk."

Angle added that appropriately enough, she was just endorsed by a political action committee called Government Is Not God. The group describes itself as "a real religious-right" PAC for social conservatives.

Angle has said repeatedly that she does not consider it a senator's job to create jobs. She wants to phase out Medicare and Social Security as government programs. She also wants to eliminate the departments of Energy and Education and the Environmental Protection Agency.

The entitlements discussion was prefaced by Wiles saying 47 percent of Americans don't pay income taxes. "Half of the country is working to produce and pay the taxes and pay the bills, the other half is living off the taxpayers -- they're living off the other 51 percent," he said.

"We know that once we have a majority that are dependent upon the government, we will lose our freedom; it says we go into bondage. That's the next stage," Angle replied. "Our Founders warned against this. They said . . . that your liberty is only as secure as the people are. Because once they get the ability to vote themselves entitlements from the largess of the government, liberty is done; freedom is over with."

She added that "we have to take up our cry for freedom. And we can do it right now at the battle box, I mean at the ballot box. I'm not sure what continues on after 2010. I know people are very frightened about what's going on in this country."

For the record, the Tax Policy Center says it's correct that 47 percent of Americans didn't pay income taxes in 2009 -- but then shows that it's completely wrong to say half the country is living off the other half. Some 86 percent of Americans paid income taxes, payroll taxes or both, the group said, and almost all the remaining 14 percent likely paid sales taxes, property taxes or both. Most of those paying no income taxes were low-income seniors or working parents who make less than $20,000. The center said the 47 percent was unusually high because of the recession and the number should fall to 40 percent in 2012.

Update #1: Reid's campaign called the new interview a blockbuster that suggests, "alarmingly," that Angle is engaged in "a holy war of sorts."

Angle's new communications director, Jarrod Agen, responded with this e-mailed statement (characterized by Ralston as "Reid thinks he's God"): "Only the supreme arrogance of Senator Reid would believe that he has a divine right to rule over mere mortals by ramming through Obamacare, billions in reckless spending, and yes, buying cocaine for monkeys. The fact is, Reid has acted like he's all-powerful and accountable to no one. People are frustrated because, like Sharron, they understand Washington has become a giant, unseen, omnipotent force whose presence is felt in all our lives whether we like it or not."

Update #2: The complete Angle interview is now available. Move the little ball 1.5 inches along the audio line to get to the starting point.

Follow Jill Lawrence on Facebook and Twitter

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

34 Comments

Filter by:
revblueroof

If the candidate insists on violating the first amendment of the constitution by attempting to establish a ntational religioun, she ehould remember the words of Paul. First women should be suject to the man, and not attempt to take on leadership roles in either church or society. Second, from the letter to the Romans, christians be subject to the civil government, for it has been placed over you by God. Given these two statements, she, as the "good Christian" she claims to be should pull out of the election and be subject to the words of Paul, and the government.

August 11 2010 at 5:58 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
cmsspace

First off, the amendments to the constitution were allowed to be created and then created because the founding fathers new that future generations would need to grow, ie nixing slavery, right to vote, etc. Alright, I'll have a say about separation of church and state. Religion is the belief and worship of a supreme being or the philosophy of some supernatural existence (and then it has to be recognized by the government as a religion - kind of odd) . Any being that is supreme would have the ultimate say on how we should live our lives and give judgement on those who do not live as the supreme being believes. Those who have been documented, assigned, declared, or credited as understanding the wishes of said supreme being are those would be given the greatest degree of credibility. Therefore, the greater the religious leader the more power. If the government were to create laws that respected the establishment of a religion (a religion of the state) , they would hand the keys over to the leaders of that religion. Hey, does this sound familiar. Anybody here heard of any countries that established laws respecting certain religions. How about the entire mideast. It is only because of religious zealots in the US that we have "In God We Trust" on money or "Under God" in the Pledge. I don't want the government in any religion because the religion they favor may not ultimately be the one I would choose to believe. Stay out of my religion and I'll keep my religion out of the government. Otherwise, I might someday be bowing down to Zeus. (How very Greek of me)

August 05 2010 at 5:22 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
billlesd

She is not a zealot. She's being interviewed on a religious oriented show and is making comparisons the viewers can relate to. Yes, if you depend on the government for EVERYTHING, are you not making government the God in your life? Evidently the govt dependent folks in New orleans did not have enough sense to just get out of the city on their own before Katrina hit them. They kept waiting for govt run buses to take them away. They lost the ability to think and act for themselves. At least a religious person believes they are accountable for their actions to someone. Ditch Harry Reid.

August 05 2010 at 1:53 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
vonpappenheim

Angle has been grossly misquoted about Social Security. Anyone who thinks she wants to leave seniors high and dry with no SS benefits is very much mistaken. What Angle is proposing is that the government will no longer be able to raid the SS trust fund. The government has been taking money from the SS trust fund for years and this means that all the money you and I have put into it is long gone to pay for their pet projects. Angle wants to end that, not the entire Social Security program. Reid and the rest of the Demorats have been lying and AOL and Lawrence are backing them up.

August 05 2010 at 1:16 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to vonpappenheim's comment
Richard Havron

Mrs. Angle may have had a legitimate point about Social Security but she's not given the benefit of the doubt because of all her other fringe statements. Her inability to even explain, much less defend those positions make her clearly unqualified for elected office. She has to run from the press. Actually.....run away. Yeah, the Founding Fathers would really be impressed. This is the best the Nevada GOP has to offer. Unbelieveable.

August 07 2010 at 3:34 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
philogical

Numbers, concepts and ideas can be made to look anyway you wish if you work at it long enough. The truth is unimportant. Let us just look at two areas and see where this story might be a little tilted to the left. 50% of all American wage earners pay 97% of all Federal Income Tax. The lower 50% pay the rest. The top 10% of wage earners pay 71% of those taxes, so what, some pay a lot and some pay a little or nothing. Are her numbers off that much, no not really. Now about praying to G*D and asking for help, who she look to? Should we chastise all Americans who do this on a daily basis? If we did there would be a whole of chastisen goin on around here don’t you think?

August 05 2010 at 1:07 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
Bruce & Claudia

C'mon Sharron. Get off the "God" thing. We all respect your right to worship whomever you please but please keep it out of politics. Some of us were really excited about you bumping that fossil Reid, but now it's coming down to "the lesser of the evils". Please show some individuality and "Jan Brewer gumption".
We already have a religious zealot in the white house.

August 05 2010 at 12:39 PM Report abuse -13 rate up rate down Reply
sandeejones7

Why does Sharron want to become a part of something (government) that she believes should not exist? It's so easy to throw around rhetoric with a slant towards some group or faith (Christianity in this case). It's mumbo jumbo because it confuses the issue at hand. Unfortunately, many Christians will probably buy into the rhetoric simply because it's slanted towards their beliefs - even if there is no logical basis to it! Do you depend upon your car to get you to work? Oh no, that's idolatry! We are supposed to depend upon God to supply our needs, not a machine! I'm not saying who should or shouldn't win the election. I'm just tired of hearing all this rhetoric from politicians who want to get into government - a government they want to see shrink. HELLO?

August 05 2010 at 12:39 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
ziggy

Does Sharon Angle undestand the seperation of church and state? I don't care about the 10 commandments, I do care about the constitution.

August 05 2010 at 12:34 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
2 replies to ziggy's comment
afbpcam

The term "separation of church and state" has been so bastardized that I don't expect many Americans to know its true meaning. Its true meaning is that the government will not have or endorse a specific religion. The Founders were trying to get away from the endorsement of religion that Great Britan had, the Church of England/Anglican. The Progressives have so indoctrinated the twisted meaning that I am certain that only a few of you agree. I would encourage you to go back and read the Founders original letters and documents and not recent history books.

August 05 2010 at 1:17 PM Report abuse +3 rate up rate down Reply
vonpappenheim

The entire idea of separation of church and state IS NOT in the Constitution. What the First Amendment does say is: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" This in no way says that government and religion must be totally separated. It states that the government cannot force a religion on you or prevent you from practicing the religion of your chioce.

August 05 2010 at 1:23 PM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply
eareadjr

I suppose I don't understand the meaning of a 'secular government'. Is that a government which gives the church (god) a tax free status on church business and operations, puts god on the money, places god in the pledge of allegiance, places god in the public oaths of office, and prays to god during government functions such as congressional assemblies?

August 05 2010 at 10:25 AM Report abuse +15 rate up rate down Reply
cmsspace

What would Jesus do?
Jesus supported those in need. He would give away all his possessions. He would shelter those in need, feed the hungry, comfort those in need. Jesus was much more "liberal" in his deeds and speech. He would want people educated. He would want us to protect the natural world which he would consider as a gift from his father. Stewardship, love, giving, understanding....
What Jesus would not do?
Jesus would not carry a gun but want us to lay them down. He would not turn his head from others but offer his love and guidance. Jesus would not start wars but try to find the best way to live with others. Jesus would not have hatred in his language but want all to love each other as they are. He would not want us to spoil the land but conserve it for the generations to come.
So what sounds more like Jesus, the Religious right wing or the liberal conscious? The answer is pretty obvious. The religious right are religiously wrong in most of their agenda while the liberal conscious abide by more of the sayings of Jesus without having to worry about quoting the commandments. Think about that when you want to vote for the "more" religious people on the ballot. Jesus would have been a liberal democrat. In reality, Judas was really more of the right wing mentality. He was constantly critical of Jesus' giving and of who he associated himself with. Maybe the religious right should change their saying to, "What would Judas do?".

August 05 2010 at 10:12 AM Report abuse +20 rate up rate down Reply
4 replies to cmsspace's comment

Follow Politics Daily

  • Comics
robert-and-donna-trussell
CHAOS THEORY
Featuring political comics by Robert and Donna TrussellMore>>
  • Woman UP Video
politics daily videos
Weekly Videos
Woman Up, Politics Daily's Online Sunday ShowMore»
politics daily videos
TV Appearances
Showcasing appearances by Politics Daily staff and contributors.More>>