Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yet another example of the pourousness of certain borders....

 

From this mornings Glen Greenwald column - salon.com

 

 

Barack Obama: "Committed Christian -- Called to Bring Change"

(updated below)

 

Mike Huckabee has been widely criticized for his overt religious appeals to win votes. One of the most criticized aspects of his campaign was a television ad he ran in Iowa and South Carolina pointedly describing himself as a "Christian leader":

 

(there is supposed to be an image here, however, it is not displaying on my comp for whatever reason - your mileage may vary)

 

Today, Greg Sargent posted a brochure which the Obama campaign is distributing in South Carolina which seem to include religious appeals at least as overt and explicit as anything Huckabee has done. The center page of the brochure proclaims -- in the largest letters on the page -- that Obama is a "COMMITTED CHRISTIAN," and includes three pictures of Obama, all of which show him praying or preaching in a Church, and also includes a fourth picture: of the interior of a Church with a large cross lurking in the background. The page also says that Obama is "guided by his Christian faith" and quotes Obama saying: "We do what we do because God is with us."

 

That same page prints Obama's views "on the power of prayer," and -- using the same language George Bush has frequently used as a signifier to evangelical voters -- says that Obama is "Called to Christ," "Called to Bring Change" and "Called to Serve":

 

(see above regarding image)

 

Similarly, the front page of the brochure shows Obama in a chin-on-hand contemplative posture and underneath, it reads: "Answering the Call." The last page shows two more pictures of Obama in Church, proclaims him again in large letters to be a "COMMITTED CHRISTIAN," and describes how he "felt a beckoning and accepted Jesus Christ into [his] life":

 

 

(the image thing again)

 

Sargent speculates that the brochure is an attempt to counter the false whispering campaign increasingly being circulated in South Carolina (by whom, we should find out) that Obama is a Muslim. That very well may be, but the brochure seems designed with a far broader purpose: namely, to signify to South Carolina's many Christian voters that Obama is one of them and therefore should have their vote for President, much the way that Huckabee sought to court the evangelical vote that was so critical to the GOP Iowa caucus.

 

Leave aside whether what Huckabee and/or Obama are doing is inappropriate or not. Given how much religion has been infused into our politics, especially our Republican politics, I didn't really think that anything Huckabee was doing was particularly unusual. It seems more like a mild, natural extension of the direction in which we've been headed for some time. That, for the moment, is not the issue.

 

Clearly, there are major differences between Huckabee's views on the role of religion in government and Obama's, as evidenced most recently by Huckabee's call for the Constitution to be amended to comport with God's will on abortion and homosexuality. Obama has no such positions (and I agree with both Pam Spaulding and Andrew Sullivan that Obama's speech yesterday at Ebenezer Baptist Church was courageous and, in several important respects, admirable in the extreme).

 

But in terms of the propriety of their religious appeals for votes, is there really any meaningful difference between the two campaigns? Is it possible to criticize Huckabee for inappropriately exploiting his status in Iowa as a "Christian leader" -- as many, many people did -- while believing that Obama's hailing of himself in South Carolina as a "Committed Christian" is perfectly fine? What's the difference?

 

UPDATE: For all those angrily objecting to the notion that Huckabee and Obama are the same: nobody is arguing that they are. At least I'm not arguing that, as I think I made quite clear.

 

Instead, I'm focusing solely on Huckabee's explicit religious appeal for votes, which conveys this message: "Like you, I'm a Christian; my Christianity is central to who I am and how I will lead; and therefore, as a devout Christian, you should vote for me for President." Huckabee was criticized extensively for that appeal. Does anyone doubt that this same message is at least part of the brochure which the Obama campaign is circulating in South Carolina? Regardless of the numerous, significant differences between them, how can one be criticized while the other be defended for employing what seems to be the same tactic?

 

the link -

 

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/?la...08/01/21/obama/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 870
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i was watching the South Carolina debates tonight and it got pretty intense and heated for the first part of the debate. i was glad that Obama responded to everything that Clinton said and tried to set the record straight. however, i don't want all of the bickering between Obama and Clinton to turn folks towards Edwards as the other "anit-clinton" choice. I think that is what happened tonight though. i still think Obama will win South Carolina though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
i was watching the South Carolina debates tonight and it got pretty intense and heated for the first part of the debate. i was glad that Obama responded to everything that Clinton said and tried to set the record straight. however, i don't want all of the bickering between Obama and Clinton to turn folks towards Edwards as the other "anit-clinton" choice. I think that is what happened tonight though. i still think Obama will win South Carolina though.

Edwards was superb last night when they were actually letting him join in. I haven't seen him look that strong at least since '04, if ever.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeb would make a much better president than w.

 

 

I used to think the same thing. My brother in law fell in love with Bush in early 2000 and has never lost that love. At the time I told him the wrong Bush was running. Now I think Jeb would be little different than George. Jeb definitely has a less stubborn personality than George, but I now think Jeb is just as partisan and just as willing to cater to the fringe as his brother is. Case in point, look at his actions during and after the whole Terri Shiavo affair.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I used to think the same thing. My brother in law fell in love with Bush in early 2000 and has never lost that love. At the time I told him the wrong Bush was running. Now I think Jeb would be little different than George. Jeb definitely has a less stubborn personality than George, but I now think Jeb is just as partisan and just as willing to cater to the fringe as his brother is. Case in point, look at his actions during and after the whole Terri Shiavo affair.

 

Come now, everyone knows a bunch of old fashioned, stale southern cracker senators know a thing or two more about the wonderfully rich inner life of your typical, severely neurologically damaged individual, more than your average, liberal, pretty much half gay neurologist.

 

Common knowledge Smithy, common knowledge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally a bright spot for the Obama campaign. Feb. 5 was looking pretty dreary. Polls had shown Hillary with a double-digit lead in California. The latest Rasmussen poll has them within 3 points of each other (with Edwards at 9%). If this single poll turns into a trend and if he can persuade most Edwards supporters to vote for him (hardly a slam dunk), then he has a real shot in California.

 

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...dential_primary

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supposedly 500,000 people voted early in California, though. So even if the state swings heavily toward Obama on Tuesday, it may be a situation like in Florida where a ton of people voted back when Hillary was favored, and so even though more people may favor Obama now, the votes have already been casts and he's stuck in second place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's everyone's take on Rudi endorsing McCain? It's looking like the old man is turning out to be the front runner after all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
McCain isn't really liberal. He's just not so close-minded that he rejects ideas from the other side, unlike most of his colleagues on the right as well as the left.

well, he's not conservative, that's for sure. I don't know, I'm starting to think he won't have a very good chance against Obama (if that's how this plays out). The hardcore conservatives don't seem to be big fans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
well, he's not conservative, that's for sure.

The American Conservative Union, the nation's oldest conservative lobbying group, thinks he is.

 

And the Red State blog calls McCain a better conservative than most.

 

I don't know how strong of a conservative McCain is--but he's not liberal, that's for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The American Conservative Union, the nation's oldest conservative lobbying group, thinks he is.

 

And the Red State blog calls McCain a better conservative than most.

 

I don't know how strong of a conservative McCain is--but he's not liberal, that's for sure.

 

Yeah, I've seen that. I know he's not a liberal, but he definitely leans that way on a couple issues that are important to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...