Two Atlanta Preachers Snub Senate Probe

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that metro Atlanta-based mega churches of Rev. Creflo Dollar, of World Changers Church in College Park and Bishop Eddie Long, of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Lithonia, have denied Sen. Charles Grassley's (R-Iowa) request for documents sought in a probe of nonprofits. A total of six mega churches, most of whom preach a version of Prosperity Gospel, were included in the probe.



The AJC quotes the church's reply to the senator's request:

The attorney for Dollar sent a letter that read in part, "...'Prosperity Gospel,' a deeply held religious belief that God's devout followers and earthly leaders will prosper and be successful in all they do, including in financial matters, as the outward expression of his favor."

... we believe that the religious doctrine and practices of a church should not be held out for the world to evaluate as a result of responding to Congressional inquiries."

The attorney for Long sent a letter that read in part, "[it] clearly disregards the privacy protections of the Church under law and appears to cross the line of Constitutional guarantees for churches."

Of the six requests, only Rev. Joyce Meyer, of Missouri, has complied with her church's financial records. In a written statement, Meyers says, "... this latest opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to transparency with our supporters and our dedication to the continual improvement of our own systems of accountability."


Read the entire AJC article here.


plez sez: let me state for the record, i wholeheartedly support the separation of church and state.

with that said, i find it unfathomable how one can ask for tax exempt or tax free status from the government, yet thwart the government to examine one's fitness for that status! it is obvious to me that these "prosperity preachers" are in IT for the money and cannot stand the glaring light of scrutiny into their ministries. i've visited one of the Atlanta-based mega churches and the ministry there is nothing like the religion i was raised with as a child... it is more commercial, more sanitized, more packaged... and frankly, far less inspirational. there is a profound emphasis on money and contributing money and counting your blessings of money and grandstanding about - you got it - money.

both churches do wonderful work in their respective communities, but i am concerned with the armored-car amounts of money that these preachers generate AND how this money is used to provide them with lavish lifestyles (large homes, expensive cars, jets, helicopters, and all the trappings of success). and if they happen to accidentally blurt out the name, Jesus... oh, never mind!

i do not work for the IRS, but i would think that if these "ministries" would like to maintain their tax exempt status, that they would have to submit financial records that support that status. and as Rev. Meyer wrote, shouldn't these churches want to be transparent with their constituents and the federal government which provides this tax exempt status? their fierce money grab and the attempt at obfuscation around the need to submit financial records makes me wonder if those "love offerings" and massive salaries are justified by our current tax code.

and since GOD made it possible for them to reap such huge rewards from their people, i'm sure this same GOD will watch over them during this government probe: if they have nothing to hide, i feel they should turn over their financial records.

The Clinton-Obama Dilemma

Hillary Clinton gathered about 60 Black ministers together for a rally in Spartanburg, SC a few days ago. She has garnered big support and a double digit lead in the polls over Barack Obama in a state where over half of the Democratic voters are Black. It appears that she is running on Bill Clinton's strength in the Black community and gaining strength in the South where the Black vote can make a difference in the primaries and most certainly in the general election next November.

Excerpts from the CBS News story follow:

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton picked up endorsements from dozens of black ministers Tuesday in South Carolina, an early voting state where she and rival Barack Obama have been courting the critical black vote.

The clergy were drawn to the New York senator for her views on health care, jobs and other issues, said a state representative who helped organize the endorsements. "They felt this was the best candidate addressing their concerns," said state Rep. Harold Mitchell, a Democrat from this northern part of the state.

Nearly half of South Carolina's Democratic primary voters are black, and ministers can play a huge role in shaping the political direction of their congregations. More than 60 ministers gathered with Clinton on a stage at a hotel and her campaign said 88 were in the room where the endorsements were announced.

Clinton, in a wide-ranging speech to a crowd of more than 450, touched on her plans to expand health care, better public education and improve the image of the U.S. She said she would send emissaries around the globe - and mentioned former Secretary of State Colin Powell as "someone I know very well" - to send a message the era of "cowboy diplomacy is over."

Read the entire CBS News story here.

View the CBS News video here.

Read an update how Obama is closing the gap with Clinton in SC here.


plez sez: are we finally realizing the onset of a colorblind society, where a white woman candidate can be more popular than her Black male counterpart in the Black community? does hillary's eight years of being the first lady provide her with the experience and cache in foreign affairs that Barack Obama lacks? does her flubbing the health care issue during the first Clinton Administration now make clinton an expert on domestic affairs?

or are we going to watch the slow motion unraveling of another in a long string of incidents where Black people get bamboozled out of their vote by a wily (and slick) Democrat?

this is truly a dilemma.

i am part of a listserve that is composed of almost all Black participants. in addition to my discomfort over this issue, plezWorld has found other Black voters who have expressed similar concerns about this Clinton-Obama Dilemma that we face in the Black community:

Voter 1
Those who see the success of the African-American's based on their own achievements and skills and see themselves as intimate cogs in the society on a whole lean toward Obama .... while those who see black success based on impediments government needs to destroy and see themselves isolated from the greater society because of those impediments lean toward Hillary. Is there a disconnect in the black community as to who is supporting which candidate?

Voter 2
I must admit my first instinct is not so much to endorse Hillary but to question why should I vote for a guy that so many white people call a "rock star?" Do they think I am stupid enough just to vote for him because we are both Black? As I write this stream of consciousness, I recall being in a nearly all White School for High School. There were two Black girls in my class. One was "dark and the other was a duck", I was not too enlightened back then... Rather than even entertain that I would have something in common with the sisters I went with a White girl, Mexican, and Asian girl before I had my first Black girlfriend in high school. My unconscious fear was that I would be pigeonholed by those White folk.

Voter 3
The "pulpit pimps" have once again shown how pathetic they are. True, endorsements mean nothing, but the fact that blacks continue to support this lady boggles my mind. I am not saying that we have to support Senator Obama, but damn, what has she truly done to deserve so much support from black people? There is a reason why she is losing ground as of late in the polls and the sooner that black people come to grips that Bill is not a part of some package deal, the better we'll all be at finding the right candidate to support. Being an independent voter, this is one election where I won't have any problem at all supporting a Republican if she is the alternate choice.

Voter 4
Barak is an African American elitist period. Unfortunately the African American community has had a disdain for African American elitists. This is especially true amongst older blacks (thus the pulpit pimps)?who lived or heard the stories of their parents when Elitist Blacks of the late 1800's and early 1900's turned their backs on the "darker skinned" fellows and blatantly accepted Euro Centric ways of living.

Voter 5
I think some African-Americans like her because they see her as having the same values as her husband who black people adored. A vote for her is like a vote for Bill.

Voter 6
Would she be better than Bush? Sure, but so would Terry Schiavo (and she's dead)! But would she steer the country in a new direction? Would she heal the growing rift between left and right? I don't think so. She [was] a tremendously polarizing candidate BEFORE she even became a candidate. She's the ULTIMATE triangulating, poll-watching, word-parsing politician with NONE of Bill's charm. Not for nothing, there's something to be said for having someone in office who is neither a Bush nor a Clinton. Political dynasties haven't been so good for our country.

Voter 7
We tend to feel more comfortable with leaders who claim to be grassroots, Like Jesse Jackson for example, [who] hide their highbrow status... something that Barack Obama does not do.

Voter 8
The fact that we romanticize about the Clinton years and the progress of the middle-class in this country seems to be what attaches many to Hillary -- it is my opinion that if she was Senator Hillary Rodham, two term senator from NY you would not see this broad support of her -- it is merely because she brings Bill along for the ride that she is not, Diane Finestein or Elizabeth Dole.

note: the views of the previous eight Black voters do not necessarily reflect the views of plezWorld

i've slept in the bed with an IRS tax specialist for the past 17 years, but i can't claim to be able to do much more than a 1040-EZ! to paraphrase malcolm x, "just because a cat has kittens in the oven doesn't make them biscuits."

it seems (at least in south carolina) that Black voters are putting their hopes on getting 8 more years of bill clinton, rather than casting their lot with an "upstart elitist prettyboy" who wasn't even raised in the Black community... the contention being that bill clinton (and by extension, hillary) is "blacker" (whatever in the HELL that means) than Barack Obama, thereby making hillary clinton more deserving of their votes. to my way of thinking, those Black ministers' (or pulpit pimps') assessment and analysis of hillary's qualifications and abilities to make change are sadly mistaken!

i've said it before and i'll say it again: i don't trust hillary clinton. she will say ANYTHING to get elected. despite her smooth and practiced delivery, she comes off as shrill and calculating, a poll watching charlatan without scruple nor conviction... but not nearly as slick as bill! she's been taking notes, but she hasn't mastered his delivery and his ability to weasel out of a tight fix (i.e. never quite explaining her flip-flop on the war in iraq to my satisfaction). i sense that another clinton in the white house will be more of the same and business as usual (something that those jock-sniffin' preachers never stopped to realize in their zeal to share the stage with some bill clinton coochie).

i feel that this country is due a shot in the arm, some fresh blood, and a new direction that hillary will not provide. and from what i've heard, the only candidate who offers HOPE for a better tomorrow and CHANGE from business as usual in Washington, DC is barack obama.