uncle wilco

While McCain's embrace of the unitary executive theory and necon foreign policy principles is definately pathetic, I don't think it's really very moderate.

it's all relative.

clear and 82.

no complaints from me.

Yeah, Newman's Own's Balsamic Vinaigrette is by far the best dressing in the world.

that's my favorite too.

wow, all this makes me want to watch a paul newman flick after work.

and i'm a big fan of his salad dressing too.

glad he's still with us.

Please drive 20 miles in either direction of downtown KC, hang somewhere that people freely discuss politics and see how many people will not vote for a 'nigger'. Racism is in the midwest, maybe not as prevalent as Arkansas, Kentucky, etc. but it is here. I can't give you stats and I realize the delegate proportion for the Democratic primary is influenced by education, but I still have to think racism is correlated with nonmetro, non higher ed areas. I have lived in rural Missouri and Illinois for much of my life and racism is here. Simply having a multiracial presidential candidate will be a painful, yet much needed, time for America to bring racism to the front of our consciousness.

 

On another note, can you explain why tax exempt churches have become lobbyists? I guess huge corparations that are subsidized do the same thing. I am aware that other special interest groups are involved in politics, but they maintain a sense ambiguity.

you don't have tell me racism still exists, but i will tell you that in downtown k.c. and it's suburbs in kansas or missouri, it doesn't seem to factor into politics. i can only speak to what i know. i've never lived in arkansas, kentucky, etc.

i don't think churches should have any function in politics except to serve the needs of people regardless of political affiliation. those who choose to dabble in influencing policy give the rest of us a bad name.

So, you don

i saw this in the paper the other day. i grew out of my rush phase a long time ago, but still have a soft spot for moving pictures. the negro leagues museum is a great place to check out if you are ever in k.c.

And, Uncle Wilco, I'm having a damned hard time trying to find anything that you've posted in this thread that can show me how Barack's policies aren't in line with those of the bible. They might not be in line with the evangelical community as a whole, but I'm of the opinion that a lot of those people lost sight of the bible somewhere along the way.

 

Care to explain exactly why Obama's views are so far out of line with Evangelicals? And please don't say gay marriage.

choosing a candidate is a personal decision. therefore, it's not my place to tell you what i've based my decision on. if you read his website and see where he stands and then read the bible and can reconcile the two, obama is your man. i've done both and couldn't go there. sadly, mccain is plan b and i really can't stand the man (mccain). i will be an extremely unenthusiastic voter this november.

i really have no desire to have an open discussion on the evangelical majority's problems with obama's agenda. there's really no point to it here. i have neither the interest, nor the time.

You may not know any racist evangelicals but I don't know what you mean about way to slip that in there. I wasn't tying racism to evangelicalism. But there is a history in the South of the problem of reconciling a history of racist attitudes and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Plus this is America. I was just pointing it out as one reason I've heard for people not voting for Barack Obama. I've been astonished by the things I've heard over the past few months when it became increasingly likely that Barack would be the Democratic nominee. I realize that I was naive about where our country is at on the issue of race.

 

Maybe I was also naive in thinking that Obama could get a respectable evangelical vote. I just assumed that evangelicals who can think straight would see health care, fair economic practices, and ending an unjust war more important than stopping gays from getting married and banning abortions.

i'm all about issues, not ethnicity. if barack espoused the same values as me, i'd be all about getting him into office. i'm jealous that i have no candidate to support that has the personality he has. i just wish i agreed enough with his politics. this whole race issue is hard for me to understand. where i live (midwest) it's certainly not an issue at all and neither is gender, for that matter.

i love how you put the jabs in there. (in bold)

This strikes me as the kind of political fascism that I often face within Christian circles, where political divergence is too often considered a form of heresy. The problem with calling Obama and his evangelical supporters "untrue" Christians is that it requires us to assume, wrongly, that all "real" Christians must share an identical political and social agenda.

 

wait a minute, i never said they were "untrue" christians. evangelicals by definition are: Of, relating to, or being a Christian church believing in the sole authority and inerrancy of the Bible, in salvation only through regeneration, and in a spiritually transformed personal life. (from Dictionary.com). there are many ways to worship and interpret scripture. it is not for me to judge who is and who is not a christian and that is not what i intended to imply.

 

It is true that Obama subscribes to a more progressive political system than the version espoused by most members of the Religious Right. Obama's views on, say, homosexuality and abortion, may not be majority Christian opinion, but they are indeed shared by many people who self-identify as Christian and even evangelical. (And it's clear that Obama shares with typical evangelicals a belief in the sanctity of life; the difference isn't one of values, it's merely a disagreement about how to most pragmatically address the topic of abortion.) Such variance of political opinion does not automatically disqualify an individual as a believer, and does not free others to judge the quality of his or her faith. That judgment belongs to God alone.

 

again, it's not a judgement of obama's own principles, but rather the ability to reconcile my own interpretation of scripture with his politics. i cannot do it with a clear conscience. and i happen to side with the majority of evangelicals in that regard. i refuse to just fall in line with any group. to support a particular candidate is a personal decision. if the evangelical majority ran counter to what i believe to be true, then i wouldn't call myself an evangelical. but, for now, that's not the case.

 

One of the enormous failings of the Christian Right is how they assume that their vision of Christianity is the only possible Christian vision--and how they assume that Christians who happen to disagree on certain points must have somehow lost their moral compass. That's hubris, not religion.

 

true evangelicals are but one division in the christian church and do not claim superiority over any other. i certainly don't. we are all equal in the eyes of God and He alone is the judge. that does not mean that we shouldn't seek a community of believers, who's interpretation is similar to our own.

 

I grew up in a home where it was taken as fact that Republicans represented moral values and Democrats represented the corruption of America. But I had the good fortune of always being an inquisitive thinker, and eventually my questioning allowed me to see that the truth is rather more complex. While I have rarely doubted the theology of evangelical Christianity, I have had many questions and turnabouts regarding how that faith ought to manifest itself in politics.

 

religion shouldn't be involved at all imo. i don't see how endorsements should be sought or given. it is easy enough to find where a candidate stands on issues. there really shouldn't be a need to give voice to it or grandstand. it sends the wrong message. falwell and robertson are perfect examples of that.

 

What I know is that all of my political positions are rooted in my faith, Christian compassion, and a search for truth. At this point in my life, I've stopped trying to align that mission with the usual right-wing assumptions. Like Emily Dickinson, I've become comfortable in my own spiritual skin. I'm no longer afraid to say that I think much of the conservative agenda directly violates human rights interests and Christian principles. I'm a practicing Christian who sometimes leans progressive, and it's my faith that ultimately steered me down that path; it requires no reconciliation.

 

we all have our own spiritual path to travel.

 

I guess what I'm saying is, I fail to see why all that right-wing baggage must be an inevitable, intertwined part of my Christianity.

 

forget the right-wing crap and focus on what you believe. that's all that matters.

 

Obviously our next president ought to be governed by a strong moral compass, and, as someone who veered progressive as a direct result of his faith, I

I worked for years with UMVIM, the Methodist missions organization, so there are pockets of stuff done. Working from inside I can tell you they butt heads with church politics and starve from inaction, with rare handouts of $ with strings attached. Churches love to have pics taken of them holding the donation check, but they won't get their hands dirty.

i happen to attend a church that is self-sufficient and isn't subject to oversight by a huge denomination. they deal directly with the missionaries in the field (because they are actual church members). it's a very hands on deal because they are the ones doing the work. it is certainly rewarding to know that your contribution is not being run through a huge organization, but rather going directly to the source.

Anyone who believes in the inerrancy of a piece of writing first written in ancient Hebrew, translated into Greek about a half a dozen times, then translated into English about 30 zillion more times is disrespecting the reason that God gifted them with. The Bible has some of the best moral guidance and wisdom ever collected, but fundamentalists are wrong, in my humble opinion, to think they can correctly divine what that book means at all times and without error.

i'd rather not turn this into a debate on theology. i believe that everything that the biblical apolstles dealt with in regards to the church is valid to this very day and very plainly worded. but, that is my belief.

your point of view is duly noted.

Evangelical holds a connotation not just to belief, but to spreading the gospel.

 

I have never quite understood that, what should be a bedrock value among the Christian church -- helping the poor, widows and orphans, the oppressed -- probably ranks the least in priorities. Cut social programs, but legislate morals.

 

They will call themselves what they will, but isn't it a scripture not to say "Lord, Lord" with your lips if you don't mean it in your heart?

 

Not that I'm casting judgment mind you ...

if you look into it, you will see that the evangelical churches are making huge strides worldwide to combat human trafficking, AIDS in Africa, bringing clean water wells to India, etc. It's not just about spreading the Word, it's about doing something to help our fellow man. My church in particular is hands on doing these very things. It's sad that blowhards like Falwell and Robertson have sullied the reputation of the Church. Evangelicals are aware of this perception and are trying to do something about it. Churches have gotten a bad rap over the years because of these egomaniacs. It shouldn't be the goal to influence politics, but rather to take care of the needs of those less fortunate locally and abroad and live by example.

11 a.m. Sundays is the most segregated hour in America.

i'm really sorry you feel that way. that's certainly not what i see every Sunday.

I agree. That's why I'm strictly anti-war, etc. It's not as if either political party has very biblical values. You're not going to find a candidate who bases his or her policies on the sermon on the mount.

exactly right.

however, with politics you have to sift through all the crap and come out with something that at least resembles something you can live with. barack is way out there in that regard imo. mccain still makes me nauseous, but what choice is there?

You might not call them evangelicals, but they still may consider themselves to be. It's really irrelevant though -- Obama is going to "market" towards them with messages that his campaign feels will resonate to them.

salesmen/politicians, it's all the same. i don't care how great the advertising, i ain't buying it.

Young, self-identified evangelicals today are in some ways more liberal than their predecessors. This has something to do with a loose movement often described as the emergent church. While emergents may still be socially conservative, they generally place less emphasis on social conservatism vis a vis other issues than more traditional evangelicals do.

well, if that is the case, then they aren't really evangelicals.

Evangelical: Of, relating to, or being a Christian church believing in the sole authority and inerrancy of the Bible, in salvation only through regeneration, and in a spiritually transformed personal life. (from Dictionary.com)

The Bible never changes. People do. You can't claim to live by the sole authority of the Word and endorse a set of values that runs counter to it.

I think he'll fare well with young evangelicals and ones with decent minds/non-racist.

actually i don't think that those "evangelicals" with "decent minds" would actually consider voting for Obama. if so, i don't think they take their evangelical status that seriously. evangelicals are largely social conservatives, something barack definately is not.

since i guess i would be considered an evangelical myself (although i don't use that label) i think that those votes would either go to mccain or else stay at home on election day. barack thinking he can sway many of those votes is laughable.

and i don't personally know any racist evangelicals. way to slip that in there.

"The Joshua Generation project will be the Obama campaign's outreach to young people of faith. There's unprecedented energy and excitement for Obama among young evangelicals and Catholics. The Joshua Generation project will tap into that excitement and provide young people of faith opportunities to stand up for their values and move the campaign forward."

whenever i think of jakob dylan, all i hear is "one headlight." maybe his solo stuff might change my perception. or maybe not. it must suck to be bob's son sometimes.

i can't believe you are 21 already.

time flies. hope it's a great one!

Dear Uncle Wilco:

 

So what happened?

in january of this year i fully intended to find reasons to support obama. i spent a lot of time blogging and researching as much as i could and determined that as likeable a guy he most likely is, i just couldn't accept his stances on the issues. i also have serious reservations about those who he has sought counsel with. i'm just not comfortable throwing aside what i believe for a personality. and barack has got personality moreso than any politician i've seen in decades. i'm not completely surprised he defeated hillary, but i think i'm even more surprised that the republicans couldn't come up with someone better than a 72 year-old dinosaur.

maybe this (a barack victory) is what is needed to wake conservatism from it's coma. because the republicans just don't get it. i'd just rather that it wouldn't have to come to that. i'd prefer 4 years of mccain until someone gets the cojones to run a successful conservative campaign (whether it's a repub or a 3rd party....i don't care).

Unfortunately, this is a 100% true statement. No matter how badly McCain wants to pretend to be.

mccain almost bolted the republican party (twice). he's consistently undermined conservative principles and has generally been a malcontent among his party. and yet, there he is...their nominee.

i'm sure he's loving this.

Hey resident conservatives,

 

How do you define "conservative" anymore? I would probably most closely align myself with Lincoln's brand of republicanism, but most would call me "liberal" as a result.... although I don't really know what "liberal" means anymore either.

con

Hey resident conservatives,

 

Just curious what you all think of Bob Barr's candidacy.

not much really.

sorry i don't have more of an in depth answer on that. he's just serving as this years potential perot or nader. someone other than the "big two" to vote for that happens to have a face with a name, but not much else. i don't expect him to have much of an impact.

You're conservative?

guilty

just don't call me a republican.

UW is like the obi-wan of passive/agressive posting. nice to see you again, unc!

what up EL?

i try to keep an even keel, but i'm human dammit!

i'd hate to think i need meds, but sometimes i wonder.

i think i'll take more of a consulting role in the VC election fray this year. no more arguing over stuff (at least that's my intention). we all know where we stand and i know where this ship (VC) is going come election day and i'm fine with that. i'll just hang out and observe the fireworks. i can keep people updated on what the right is up to, since i have a tendency to frequent a variety of the conservative pundit outlets.

i must say that my personal political views have become less rigid over the years by conversing with those of a more liberal point of view here. it's actually been elightening to hear the other side and try and balance things out. but i'm still rooted in conservativism.

Uncle Wilco, I will be in Kansas City sat pm seeing a movie and eating din din.If I see your car I'm gonna slap an Obama 2008 sticker on it.Fancy it up a bit.

 

I'm a sweetie like that.

bring it on.