Mikey Weinstein Teams Up with Casey on ACLJ Radio Show
Weinstein Wants Christian Cadets Punished, but Not Atheists
Michael “Mikey” Weinstein appeared on the ACLJ radio program Jay Sekulow Live with attorneys Jay Sekulow, Jordan Sekulow, and retired US Army LtCol Skip Ash to respectfully “debate” again — as Weinstein and Jay Sekulow did in 2007 at USAFA. The topic was, once again, the Bible verse stricken from a cadet’s whiteboard. During the conversation, Weinstein reiterated his position that the cadet who posted a Bible verse on his dry erase board should be punished:
We want to have visible punishment for the cadet…
He also said he would “not oppose” courts-martial for the cadet’s active duty chain of command.
As before, he declined to call for the same punishments regarding the atheist cadets he claims to have “complained” about a few days later, instead, again, focusing on the staff, rather than the cadets, when it came to atheism.
Weinstein is still trying (unsuccessfully) to present the atheist situation as a foil to his attacks on Christianity, and he tried to do the same on the radio program. Unfortunately, the topic couldn’t be addressed for very long as it occurred so late in the radio program, as asked by caller Casey from Ohio:
First, I gotta make a quick point. I’m an Air Force Academy graduate [crosstalk] messages on the board, its important to note that those cadet rooms are offices. Every cadet, once you become a third classman — a sophomore — or higher is a leader, as a mentor, or as a supervisor of a younger cadet. So, for me as a fourth class or freshman cadet, I wouldn’t want to go into a room and be open as you’re supposed to be with your supervisor or mentor about the challenges you’re facing when I see quotes like that, so I think there is a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction placed on those messages.
But my question for Mikey is about these athei…– now he’s taking on atheists at the Academy. I’m curious as to why — this is just coming out today — so I’d like to hear more about that.
The caller did a pretty good job of repeating Weinstein’s position and segueing the radio show into Weinstein’s own talking points, so he probably…
Wait a minute. A male US Air Force Academy graduate named “Casey from Ohio” just happened to be listening to the ACLJ while Weinstein was on, though he appeared to agree with Weinstein’s position?
You mean Casey Weinstein? Mikey’s son, a USAFA grad, and current resident of Ohio? (Does Casey call his own father by his first name?)
Go on a radio show for a “debate” and have your kids call in questions.
Nice.
Also at the Christian Post.
ADVERTISEMENT
I’m not sure that it’s fair or accurate to suggest some subterfuge on the part of the Weinsteins, if that is your intent (if not, sorry for my confusion). I’m sure Jay’s radio show has lots of listeners who both agree and disagree with him, and who agree and disagree with Mr. Weinstein. So for calls to come from either camp is unsurprising. As well, I assume that someone on Jay’s staff is selecting which of the many callers gets on the air, so I’d expect that the decision to air Casey Weinstein was based on an expectation that it would make good radio. Unless all callers are required to be vetted for their political, ideological or familial connections, then this seems like ‘no harm, no foul’ to me.
The facts are plainly stated here; those facts were not entirely evident on the radio (nor were they likely disclosed to the ACLJ). It is left to the reader to determine the value of such conduct.
Disclosure — or the lack thereof — is often noteworthy. For example, a USAFA 85 grad named Mike Challman works for the MRFF, which puts your response in perspective.