Michael Weinstein Pens Self-Indicting Diatribe
Michael Weinstein recently wrote a little-noticed piece that railed against the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty. The article was clearly intended to incite a feud, with Weinstein making liberal use of shocking semantics, including calling CARL “extremist,” “fundamentalist dogs,” “putrid bigots,” and accusing them of “rape.” Such is the language of those who fight religious freedom, apparently.
The diatribe isn’t worth reading, but the self-indicting hypocrisy and lack of cognitive dissonance from the ever-bellicose Weinstein is entertaining:
- Weinstein calls CARL “Huxleyesque-named,” saying they “they can disingenuously twist, torture, and contort a phrase such as “religious liberty” into its total antithesis without batting an eyelash.”
This is the same man who founded the self-licking ice cream cone “Military Religious Freedom Foundation,” which has done more to try to restrict religious freedom in the military than any other hate group — even going so far as using videos of religious chapel services to raise money for Weinstein’s paycheck.
- Weinstein says CARL is an “activist organization of extremist former armed forces chaplains who claim to “speak on behalf [of] more than 2,000 chaplains.”
Weinstein’s MRFF is an activist organization of…well, himself, mostly. The MRFF is little more than a front that Weinstein runs out of his home computer and the local UPS store. Still, he claims to represent upward of 28,000 ill-defined “clients,” which he admitted is essentially anyone who has been in touch with him.
- Referring to CARL head retired Chaplain (Col) Ron Crews, Weinstein mentioned “Col. Crews’ preference for fantastic melodrama over reality…”
As has been noted here many times before, Weinstein has cornered the market on drama over fact. As a point of fact, there are more vitriolic adjectives in Weinstein’s piece than actual facts.
It seems possible Chaplain Crews and CARL must have scored some significant points to have earned the thousand-word vitriol from the effervescent Weinstein. Another explanation is just as likely, however: Weinstein has a penchant for latching on to whatever is in the news in the hope of being called by a news organization for his “professional” opinion. Weinstein may be trying to capitalize on the fact CARL has been frequently interviewed and cited in the news recently — while Weinstein has not. He’s essentially positioning himself as the counter-CARL, which, interestingly enough, is what he accuses CARL of doing to him:
CARL tries mightily to pose as the polar opposite of the [MRFF]…
Weinstein fails to realize Chaplain Crews and CARL have legitimacy he lacks to speak on religious freedom in the military and the chaplaincy: They were (or are) military chaplains, not failed former JAGs. They retired from the military after distinguished careers, while — according to his own words — Weinstein had to threaten the Air Force with a lawsuit so he could quit the military service.
CARL has legitimately presented itself as representing the interests of chaplains and religious liberty. Weinstein’s MRFF has been nothing more than a fundraising vehicle for Weinstein and his personal vendetta against religious freedom.