We have all heard by now that Senator Obama has officially .
When I posed this question to an Obama supporter and campaign insider, their response was: “he has been looking to switch churches for a few weeks now”. Looking to switch churches for weeks?? Maybe ol’ crazy uncle, Rev. Wright, was right when refering to Obama: “Politicians say what they say and do what they do based on electability, based on sound bites, based on polls, Huffington, whoever’s doing the polls,”
According to a Newsweek poll this weekend, when asked to identify Obama’s religion:
58 percent of respondents correctly said Obama was a Christian. But a surprising 11 percent said he was a Muslim. And 22 percent said they did not know what his religion was.
When have Americans ever elected a President who was without a church? Never.
Comments on this Entry:
(RuralDem on
Jun 1, 2008 5:41 PM)
One of the rare times I agree with at least part of something you’ve said.
Obama’s decision to leave his church now should be a problem. Honestly, he should have done it at the very beginning, or stayed through it all.
I know I’d never leave my church.
While I disagreed with many of the things said by Wright and that other guy who made the anti-Hillary sermon, I did respect Obama’s decision to stay loyal to the place he’s sat in for almost two decades. He’s now shown that he’s willing to sell out whoever he can in order to win the Presidency.
I’ll repeat what I’ve said for months, Obama will ruin our party. Hillary isn’t a great candidate by any means, but Obama has done something special now, he’s not only beating her in the delegate race, he’s also beating her on the opportunistic scale.
(Drew on
Jun 1, 2008 6:21 PM)
Read the first two sentences, scrolled to the bottom, unsurprisingly found Bernita’s name.
As for this:
“When have Americans ever elected a President who was without a church?”
As often as they’ve elected a woman president.
But by all means, let the concern trolling continue.
(Smitty on
Jun 1, 2008 6:37 PM)
Drew,
is this the time when we open the discussion to talking how Al Gore, John Kerry, or John Edwards candidacies worked out for us because we sure were surprised when the Republicans fluanted their negatives into their victory.
(Drew on
Jun 1, 2008 8:46 PM)
Actually, I was hoping this was the time when we recognized that no Democratic candidate is without a “flaw” that the Republican Party can exploit, and thus dispense with the “OH NOES HEZ TEH MUZLIM!!1!” idiocy.
But the advantage of Hillary is, what, we *won’t* be surprised when the Republicans ride her negatives, real or perceived, to victory?
I doubt that, mostly because it seems to have come as a bit of a surprised that Obama did.
(odinseye2k on
Jun 1, 2008 9:02 PM)
This narrow-minded “politicians need a moral grounding” shit really gets my goat. Full-on rant mode is just nearby for me on this position, when I agree with Dawkins, Sam Harris, and many other members of the scientific and intellectual elite. Yes, not every genius is an atheist, but you do see a negative correlation between intellectual accomplishment and religiosity.
Now, I must admit that I gave Obama a pass a long time ago on the whole “I think faith has a place in politics” garbage because in the real world, he has agreed with me more on the issues and view of the world that he espouses than the other standing candidate. I gave him a pass, because like it or not, I must realize that the high-flying mental acrobats comprise a rather small part of the voting populous. And honestly, if we really wanted to run the show, we should simply unite within the corporations and other elite power structures (which, almost by definition, do not allow you to enter unless you are grandfathered in or elite by ability).
With all that aside, I don’t have any particular belief in the amazing abilities of democracy to make good decisions or that the populous could really run things as well as the elite with the appropriate data.
*However* - the beauty of democracy is that elites are also almost always corrupted to become self-serving and often lack the inclination to come to understand the real problems of the populous. To be quite frank, we need to be held hard to task and make sure never to ignore people’s basic requirements.
So, that background in there … I figured if these people really needed the good word translated through gospel to understand it - so be it. I’ll leave my pride aside and back the guy that can actually touch people’s hearts and listen to the guys and gals with the brains that tell him how to make things actually work.
So, that kind of saying of “faith and politics are okay together” has always left me a little squishy, but I figured the ends justified the means.
Now, if we really want to play a comparison game … let’s compare Obama’s work with a church that was an anchor of the local community in which he got his political start to HRC’s participating in an extreme right-wing sect in Washington, DC. The Family seems to have no goal other than to aggrandize itself and those politicians that align themselves with it in order to promote a Dominionist culture within Washington DC.
In the end, I’m almost hoping that Wright, Hagee and the rest bring an important political lesson. Just as explicit racism or sexism is no longer acceptable in mainstream discourse, reaching out to mega-churches with crank pastors (and I definitely include Bush’s LaHaye in this category) is equally poisonous in courting middle-of-the-road voters.
Maybe if I become well-off, I’ll give to the Brights campaign …
(JerryT on
Jun 2, 2008 8:08 AM)
Dear Senator Obama,
Recently having heard that you may be in need of a spiritual house of worship, please take a moment to consider my church, a fine example of open-mindedness and welcoming to all spiritual brethren on the path.
Our church embodies the basic principles of faiths worldwide, and we claim some scientific underpinning to our creed as well. Beer is OK, September 19 is a holiday, and you membership in our church, I believe, would serve to bring us all together and unite us on a path of camaraderie and spiritual fulfillment that everyone can enjoy.
Sincerely,
Old Jeezy
http://www.venganza.org/
(Mouth of the South on
Jun 2, 2008 11:04 AM)
I don’t think Hillary has a specific church. When the “former Clinton pastor” thing was going around the internet her campaign released a statement saying she doesn’t go to any one church, but stops by at different congregations as she travels.
Regardless, the fact he doesn’t “have” a church does not really matter. Might even help.
That said, political reality seems to have infected the Obama campaign over the last few months. I liked it a lot better when he would put up a defense of not wearing the flag pin or the faith speech in Philly than this.
It’s fine, he used to church’s connections to elevate himself in Chicago politics, now what was once support is now a hindrance. Attention those on his coattails, if those coattails become too heavy and inconvenient, Obama may just shrug them off as fashions of yesterday. Difficult to rise above it all when positions and people are holding you back. You have been warned.
(plange on
Jun 2, 2008 2:43 PM)
Odinseye, I have to admit I’m a bit surprised that you’re espousing this tin-foil hat thing about the “Family”
(odinseye2k on
Jun 2, 2008 2:50 PM)
I doubt the Family connection is really much worse than the other leanings to the right Hillary has had.
She’s worked with Gingrich, gotten connections with Fox News, was once upon a time a Goldwater girl and did have conservative Christian leanings before she arrived at Wellesley.
Still, I’m pretty anxious about any organization that brings together people like Brownback, Inholfe, and Santorum. It’s not good for the country.
(RuralDem on
Jun 2, 2008 3:32 PM)
odinseye2k,
I take it you have an issue with those who have “conservative Christian leanings”?
(innerredneckexposed on
Jun 2, 2008 3:55 PM)
i think i speak for Odin when I say no.
(odinseye2k on
Jun 2, 2008 4:02 PM)
If by “conservative Christian leanings,” you mean the separation of citizens into different levels of participation and antagonism to science, then yes.
If by that, you mean slightly square older people, not really.
(odinseye2k on
Jun 2, 2008 4:05 PM)
Or slightly square younger people, as well.
(Mouth of the South on
Jun 2, 2008 4:10 PM)
I am against conservative Christian hair cuts. They are terrible.
(innerredneckexposed on
Jun 2, 2008 4:18 PM)
Funny story: Saturday I got to hear Gov. Phil Bredesen speak (and give a BS response when I asked if he would be VP) and he was talking about Republicans and what they believe and when he was done I leaned over to one of my tablemates and said “f*ck, he just described me”. It was an exaggeration but still kind of funny.
(innerredneckexposed on
Jun 2, 2008 4:22 PM)
Funny story: Saturday I got to hear Gov. Phil Bredesen speak (and give a BS response when I asked if he would be VP) and he was talking about Republicans and what they believe and when he was done I leaned over to one of my tablemates and said “f*ck, he just described me”. It was an exaggeration but still kind of funny.
(Jen B. on
Jun 2, 2008 11:12 PM)
Oh yeah! At least Obama’s pastor wasn’t a child molester, like Clinton’s!
I love Snopes.
(odinseye2k on
Jun 3, 2008 10:49 AM)
If I may further bash my head against the wall, take it Mr. Brooks:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/opinion/03brooks.html?hp
Two choice bits:
“Though voters now prefer Democratic policy positions on most major issues by between 11 and 25 points, Obama has only a 0.7 percent lead over McCain in the RealClearPolitics average of polls.”
“I’ve spent the past few years trying to find conservative experts to provide remedies for middle-class economic anxiety. Let me tell you, the state of free-market thinking on this subject is pathetic. There are a few creative thinkers (most of them under 30), but for the most part, McCain is forced to run in an intellectual void.”
And after that, it’s still close!
The Republicans have nothing to offer, but because of this intellectually bankrupt “character-driven” politics, people may continue to back the weakest link.
The irony of this is that Obama has a world-traveling story that would make Horatio Alger buy it in paperback (disclaimer: I haven’t actually read it).
Although, maybe Brooks doesn’t really know what he’s talking about after all:
“We haven’t had two presidential candidates as far removed from the mainstream suburban lifestyle. McCain’s family has been military for generations. But Obama’s path through the university towns is particularly elusive.”
Really? Funny, I thought most suburbanites were office workers that had at least some college.
(JerryT on
Jun 3, 2008 12:30 PM)
Assuming Obama wins, I’m mostly concerned at this point with him not living up to the superhuman expectations many of his supporters seem to have for him. I’ve been (hopefully gently) trying to get expectations lowered a little bit whenever I have the chance.
Mitch McConnell ain’t gonna get on no “come together” bandwagon.
We’re probably not going to be able to ban lobbying.
Probably not going to repeal NAFTA.
It’s even iffy that he will be able to get the troops out in 16 months.
BUT, we should be able to make progress on global warming, signing some treaties, healthcare, alternative energy, scientific research, and hopefully some fiscal responsibility. That should be enough.
I am just concerned that if he doesn’t end up arresting Dick Cheney and having every last soldier out of Iraq within 90 days, we’re going to end up with a whole new generation of disillusioned voters we have to try to win back.
(Mouth of the South on
Jun 3, 2008 3:35 PM)
You really think Obama thinks we should repeal NAFTA?
I agree with all of your above sentiments though. Or most of them.
(JerryT on
Jun 3, 2008 3:46 PM)
I don’t think Obama believes it, but I think a lot of his supporters do. Which defines the problem in a nutshell.
Share This
Random Posts
