onegoodmove

Norm, are you aware that your google ad right now (6:19 AM cst) is a big ole ad for John McCain?

Maybe we should listen to baracks answers to his Pastor Problem (ugh, did i repeat that?)

Obviously, I disagree with that. Here is what happens when you just cherry-pick statements from a guy who had a 40-year career as a pastor. There are times when people say things that are just wrong. But I think it's important to judge me on what I've said in the past and what I believe.

The pastor of my church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who recently preached his last sermon and is in the process of retiring, has touched off a firestorm over the last few days. He's drawn attention as the result of some inflammatory and appalling remarks he made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents. Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue. * Email * Print * Comments Because these particular statements by Rev. Wright are so contrary to my own life and beliefs, a number of people have legitimately raised questions about the nature of my relationship with Rev. Wright and my membership in the church. Let me therefore provide some context. As I have written about in my books, I first joined Trinity United Church of Christ nearly twenty years ago. I knew Rev. Wright as someone who served this nation with honor as a United States Marine, as a respected biblical scholar, and as someone who taught or lectured at seminaries across the country, from Union Theological Seminary to the University of Chicago. He also led a diverse congregation that was and still is a pillar of the South Side and the entire city of Chicago. It's a congregation that does not merely preach social justice but acts it out each day, through ministries ranging from housing the homeless to reaching out to those with HIV/AIDS. Most importantly, Rev. Wright preached the gospel of Jesus, a gospel on which I base my life. In other words, he has never been my political advisor; he's been my pastor. And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn. The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church. Let me repeat what I've said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country. With Rev. Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good. And while Rev. Wright's statements have pained and angered me, I believe that Americans will judge me not on the basis of what someone else said, but on the basis of who I am and what I believe in; on my values, judgment and experience to be President of the United States.

If you expect HIllary to be held only to her words, not Ferraro's, same should go for Obama's pastor.

Unfortunately Obama had to try wear his faith on his sleeve because of all the Clinton campaign's shameful behind-the-scenes attempts to paint him as a Muslim because of his name. She is the one who has dragged this campaign down where it didn't need to go when it's clear she has no chance to win unless she cheats and changes the rules that were agreed upon from the outset.

Her reckless attempt to win by destroying her opponent will come back to haunt the party in November. We'll have President McCain thanks to Hillary.

I love that West Wing clip. I wish real-life politicians had balls like that.

well, this will be interesting

hopefully what it will do is open up the discussion about patriotism and dissent (notice I didn't say patriotism VERSES dissent)

the Rev said a lot of true things, especially the Sunday after 9/11, just using words that were way off the PC chart

JoAnne may be right

we'll see

Again, the media bites on something they think will inflame ignorant people and get ratings. More news porn.

Porn: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography

Pornography or porn is the explicit depiction of sexual subject matter, especially with the sole intention of sexually exciting the viewer.

News Porn:

News Porn or corporate news, is the explicit depiction of inflammatory political subject matter, especially with the sole intention of politically inflaming the viewer.

"A candidate's preschool doctor doesn't like puppies! How will the voters react if we show pictures of the doctor kicking puppies then flash back to the candidates picture? News at 11."

Just added the link to this to yesterday's post about McCain-Parsley. Norm, I don't know how in the name of (oops!) you find this stuff -- it's as mysterious as the triune divinity (oops redux!) -- just keep doing it.

The Constitution guarantees no religious test. It however, does not say, and cannot, that voters cannot use whatever the heck they decide is needed to be "qualified" to get their vote. Just as they are free to be sexist, racist, homophobic, and/or simply moronic, as witnessed in the past two national elections, they can decide that only a candidate who believes in the same mystical father-figure gets their vote.

It's not about the constitution. It's about the people and their level of ignorance and xenophobia as developed and reinforced by a capitalist, sensationalist mass media and an education system deliberately gutted and neglected.

As much as I agree with the desire for a candidate to be able to make such a statement as Alda's character does here, if any of them did, especially Obama, who has been the target of "he's a scary, unpatriotic, cult-leading, black Muslim" smears, that candidate would lose her/his national viability. Oh, some people would love it and vote for such a courageous candidate, but we know s/he'd be done nationally.

Besides, Obama IS a Christian. I may think that belief is delusional, but it is part of who he is. Is he at times playing it up where it will be to hos apparent advantage? Yes. Welcome to American politics. We don't live in the world of the West Wing. It's a television show.

are you aware that your google ad

I am and I'm trying to get it in my blocked ad filter but having trouble finding the right url.

I don't know how I did it, but somehow I had this feeling that the newest post would be one attacking Obama :)

ho-hum... Norm, you aware that this post sounds lot like Sean Hannity of Hannity & Colmes... they've been trying to exploit this angle ever since they found that couldn't smear Obama as a Muslim or an Athiest.

Oh, and I don't know if your previous posts could have been considered as "warnings" or "helpful." But the new tone is much more appreciated!

Obmabot xs23940 signing out....

Norm, As much as I hate repeating the same argument over and over never to responded to, but... You of course realize that as a candidate he has been pegged as both an atheist and a Muslim and the closeness of his pastor is likely just a defense against such criticisms?

Although any attempts to pin the Muslim smear on Clinton would be mere conjecture. It seems clear that these videos were release to defend Hillary Clinton from the growing scandal around Ferraro.

So who is raising religion in this election?

As for the Statements of Wright, many minorities actually feel very much the same way as he did. It's a secret side of America that many whites are never forced to look at. Is it fair to expect Obama to heal the entire racial divide in the course of his presidential election?

If he doesn't hold up the false patriotism of national politics he would see his political doom.

criticisms would more accurately be called discrimination

It is crappy that religion is such a pervasive issue, and that yellow journalism makes it so much a part of political reporting that we end up in this conundrum. I don't know how far our country needs to go down before we push back to the surface of a more secular society
and allow those who wish to participate in religion do it on a more private, communal basis. I want to say that there needs to be an uprising of sinners and heathens tongue in cheek, but even using that terminology shows how much influence religion has in our environment.

Since I am not a worshipper in any sense, my feeling is, well anyone who is religious is somewhere I don't want to be. I've worked in churches enough to know that there are some sincere and wonderful human beings participating in various religions, but I can't relate to the way they are steeped in their faiths. In that sense, I perceive little difference in someone who is Mormon, Baptist, Catholic, Methodist, Jewish, Muslim, and so on. I've mentioned the community aspect before when describing why many participate in a religious institution. This has kept my concerns at bay when I see the pastor or other leader go off on some wack-o tangent.

As for the chosen sermons of pastor Wright, I've heard this for years, especially when I lived in the southeast. Dick Gregory has been saying similar things for years, although with more humor. He also has made more palatable wisened quips; my guess is that Wright has done the same, but that kind of thing doesn't make great news. Red Seven's right, many whites either don't know or don't want to know about these thoughts.

Obama may as well get used to all of this. If he's the Democratic nominee, it will continue to hit him in the face. My Mom reading an email about all this back in January; we have 7 months to go.

ooops, still figuring out markdown. Sorry about the constant italics; it was only supposed to be for "society."

Obama's church is so... boring

ha! gypsy broke italics for everyone!

Well... here we go again.

When Republicans and Democrats BOTH cease going to churches of all varieties trying to court the religious vote, stop having their OWN religious cronies saying off the hook things in the names of their parties ( Pat Robertson, Jesse Jackson, et al.--even that one dOOd that died last year how they all kissed his behind), then this "story" will have some creedence (and i'm not talking about CCR either). I'm so sick of the double standards. "So and so said this and that and he was Catholic, Baptist, Farrakhan, or MORMON (for goodness sake)" I mean damn! Politicians do backflips because the Pope shows up.. and we havent had a Catholic President since JFK! WTDeuce

Damn people get over yourselves, cant you see we're all the same?

Norm, As much as I hate repeating the same argument over and over never to responded to, but... You of course realize that as a candidate he has been pegged as both an atheist and a Muslim and the closeness of his pastor is likely just a defense against such criticisms?

Barack is an intelligent fellow, it's hard to believe that he really believes in his religion. If I had to guess I'd say he's an atheist who took on Christianity so that he could run for political office. There is really no way to know is there? All the possibilities though understandable reflect badly on him. 1. He's an atheist pretending to be a Christian cynically using the language of faith to attract voters. 2. He's a Christian who believes the Christian message and so not as bright as he seems. 3. He's a muslim masquerading as a Christian. I'm willing to take him at his word. It really doesn't matter to me personally. He's no different from other politicians in that respect except that he uses the religiosity more than most and that is what I personally find offensive. He should not be held responsible for the statements of his Pastor. We should take him at his word as to his beliefs. We can say that since he wanted a life as a politician he used poor judgment in choosing the particular Church he did. I'm just making an empirical observation here that his religiosity came back to bite him in the ass. I'd even find it amusing, but I hope he finds an effective way to deal with the shitstorm because the psycho-trigger McCain is a real danger.

exploit this angle

I'm not trying to exploit any angle I'm simply making an observation. If you use religion to further your political career then religion can be used to smear you.

Barack is an intelligent fellow, it's hard to believe that he really believes in his religion. If I had to guess I'd say he's an atheist who took on Christianity so that he could run for political office.

He joined Trinity (and converted) in 1988--when he was 26 or 27--just before entering Harvard Law School, and after many years as a community organizer. If he converted for political reasons, I'd say that's some pretty impressive long term planning. As an aside--surely there must be some empirical studies on this--in my own experience, I've found it much more common among the well-educated religious people I know, who have been raise either atheist or agnostic, to convert later in life.

At any rate, I am doubtful Obama finds much in Christian metaphysics. One of the things that seems to have attracted him to Trinity were the centrality of social justice issues to their (and by extention, Wright's) conception of the Christian life.

1. He's a Christian who believes the Christian message and so not as bright as he seems.

I do not understand the inference, "Someone is intelligent, therefore they must find religion implausible." (which is tacit in your 2. above) There are far too many intelligible people of faith for that to be even remotely plausible.

1. He's a muslim masquerading as a Christian. I'm willing to take him at his word.

Perhaps this is another joke? Do you seriously consider that a possibility?

. 1. He's an atheist pretending to be a Christian cynically using the language of faith to attract voters.

Find an appeal of Obama's to Christianity that did not, in context, also involve an evaluative claim which could be stated equally well in secular terms and with which most (secular) leftists would also probably agree--such as that we have a social responsibility to the less fortunate, and that it is wrong to discriminate against homosexuals. Failure to meet that standard would, by my lights, be pandering. Otherwise, I find nothing wrong with appeals to social justice using the language of Christian morality.

Finally, what do you make of R7's claim, that, being attacked from both ends as a both an atheist and a muslim, he was under some need to define his actual beliefs (or, should you not take those to be genuine, at least those beliefs that he has publicly affliated with himself for around 20 years).

"Barack is an intelligent fellow, it's hard to believe that he really believes in his religion. If I had to guess I'd say he's an atheist who took on Christianity so that he could run for political office. There is really no way to know is there?"

I'm pretty suprised to read this. Despite all the evidence you have of people who are clearly intelligent and seem to sincerely believe in God, you continue to hold to the conviction that they must either not be intelligent or not believe in God.

It's incomprehensible to you that an intelligent person could be a sincere Christian, but not that an intelligent person who has never professed Islamic views could be a Muslim masquerading as a Christian?

It's very hard to find people who will still publicly wonder whether Obama is a Muslim.

Obama's church is so... boring

Thanks for the link, Mag. I needed a nice sedative for the evening.

It's very hard to find people who will still publicly wonder whether Obama is a Muslim.

Sadly, the number of people who purport to identify Obama as a Muslim is, in fact, increasing, as NPR and the new poll they were using, to my horror, reported that 13% of American's believe that Barack is a Muslim (PDF required for the link, see page 26, bottom, although many of the other polling questions are worth a look).

Look, i have been reading this blog for a while, and i assume that Norm is an atheist living in the land of just too many religious nuts, Utah. I do take exception to the idea that anyone who believes is well stupid. My parents are christians, and they are both brilliant. They are good people, who are more tolerant, kind, generous, and well progressive than most of your readers, so are all of their religious friends. The fundamentals of Christianity, when not distorted by psychopaths are values that most of you would admire.

Christians were the earliest abolitionists, and several died for their beliefs. Quakers have been more antiwar, antinuke than anyone and helped form Greenpeace. Black pastors were the biggest leaders of the civil rights movements, and white liberal churches followed and supported them. Several churches have advocated for Gay marriage, and non discrimination to gays prior to any country doing so. So be careful in your generalizations.

Finallly re Obama, read his book, it is interesting on why he joined the church. He does not sound like a blind believer, but certainly saw how the black church was a huge factor in social support and change in the black community. I know you want him to be an atheist who joined to a succesfull politician, but i think you are wrong, i think he is the most Christian of all the candidates. I suspect McCain could not care less but is stuck pandering to the religious right, and i am not sure i can fault him for it, as he basically had to do it or not get nominated. Hillary i suspect is really a Christian as well. But Norm being a Christian is just not as bad or stupid as you think.

k, thanks for the info on when/why Obama joined his church. I was starting to wonder if it was because he was dating Michelle. It often happens that way.

the Wikipedia article, in the personal life section supports your book reference as well.

As for Christians or followers of other religions doing good, this has been documented throughout history. Part of a non-believer's bias is that more do ill in the name of religion as opposed to the name of aetheism. Stalin is a poster boy for the latter, and even there, religion was only a factor, not the main vehicle as in the Inquisition. We do have to keep in mind that there are many who take the golden rule and their faith seriously, and they often pay quite a price.

Norm:

If I had to guess I'd say he's an atheist who took on Christianity so that he could run for political office.

See, my problem is that I don't know what Clinton believes, if I had to bet I might bet she actually believes.

Both Obama and Clinton receive a 100 percent rating from Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

He was the first black person elected to editor of Harvard Law Review; Senator Obama is probably smarter than the majority of the posters on this blog. Let's assume he knows what he is doing.

But Norm, if you want to keep posting West Wing clips, feel free. God I miss that show.

Norm, It is clear that many intelligent people are also believers, and Barack Obama may well be one of them. I even have scientific colleagues who are believers and are excellent chemists. Christianity isn't as prevalent among scientists as among more liberal-arts educated people, but they do exist. I don't pretend to understand how Christianity persists in otherwise intelligent minds, but in its less literally-interpreted forms, it does - and you know it.

Personally, I have never met a literal interpreter of the Bible who didn't either have shit for brains or hadn't been trapped in some educational backwater for their entire lives, but I suppose even a literalist could be intelligent - somehow. I couldn't care less as long as their philosophy concerning the separation of church and state is on the mark, and as JoAnn indicated, we don't have anything to worry about on that score from either of the Democrats. What blows my mind is the fact that Obama has explicitly disavowed the statements that of his pastor that have ignited this little media boomlet, but John McCain has backtracked from his criticism of right-wing religious lunatics and isn't getting any static at all right now.

Tim:

Yup. Here are some statements from Rod Parsley, McCain's so-called "Spiritual guide". I emphasize some important snippits:

In a chapter titled "Islam: The Deception of Allah," Parsley warns there is a "war between Islam and Christian civilization." He continues:

"I cannot tell you how important it is that we understand the true nature of Islam, that we see it for what it really is. In fact, I will tell you this: **I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam.** I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. **The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore.**"

Parsley is not shy about his desire to obliterate Islam. In Silent No More, he notes—approvingly—that Christopher Columbus shared the same goal: "It was to defeat Islam, among other dreams, that Christopher Columbus sailed to the New World in 1492…Columbus dreamed of defeating the armies of Islam with the armies of Europe made mighty by the wealth of the New World. It was this dream that, in part, began America." He urges his readers to realize that a confrontation between Christianity and Islam is unavoidable: "We find now we have no choice. The time has come." And he has bad news: "We may already be losing the battle. As I scan the world, I find that Islam is responsible for more pain, more bloodshed, and more devastation than nearly any other force on earth at this moment."

Parsley claims that Islam is an "anti-Christ religion" predicated on "deception." The Muslim prophet Muhammad, he writes, "received revelations from demons and not from the true God." And he emphasizes this point: "Allah was a demon spirit." Parsley does not differentiate between violent Islamic extremists and other followers of the religion:

"There are some, of course, who will say that the violence I cite is the exception and not the rule. I beg to differ. I will counter, respectfully, that what some call 'extremists' are instead mainstream believers who are drawing from the well at the very heart of Islam."

The spirit of Islam, he maintains, is one of hostility. He asserts that the religion "inspired" the 9/11 attacks. He bemoans the fact that in the years after 9/11, 34,000 Americans "have become Muslim" and that there are "some 1,209 mosques" in America. Islam, he declares, is a "faith that fully intends to conquer the world" through violence. The United States, he insists, "has historically understood herself as a bastion against Islam," but "history is crashing in upon us."

At the end of his chapter on Islam, Parsley asks, "Are we a Christian nation? I say yes." Without specifying what actions should be taken to eradicate the religion, he essentially calls for a new crusade.

Parsley, who refers to himself as a "Christocrat," is no stranger to controversy. In 2007, the grassroots organization he founded, the Center for Moral Clarity, called for prosecuting people who commit adultery. In January, he compared Planned Parenthood to Nazis. In the past Parsley's church has been accused of engaging in pro-Republican partisan activities in violation of its tax-exempt status.

boy, that is scary stuff, adam. john mccain has a "spiritual advisor"? who talks crazy shit like that? and, according to mccain campaign people, he met the guy for the first time 3 weeks ago? and this guy could become president? i iz hedin 4 th hils.

hey, i think all the messianic/apocolyptic/last battle/armageddon freaks should be put in a big cage and allowed to fight it out while the rest of us watch on youtube. (wait, that's already happening, sort of) but i wonder when and where this term "spiritual advisor" was first used to refer to this parsley fool. seems, uh...incite-ful.

sorry, spiritual guide, whatever

and, according to mccain campaign people, he met the guy for the first time 3 weeks ago?

The point is McCain is pandering to the lunatic fringe--prosecuting adultery?!--and this has not been reported at all. Also, if the administration of W is any indication, McCain will need to continue to pander to them after getting to office. Perhaps you thought I was suggesting a false analogy between Obama's preacher of 20 years, and McCain's more recent, short-term effort to align himself with a lunatic preacher; if you actually read the article I linked to, you would see that was not my suggestion.

Perhaps you thought I was suggesting a false analogy between Obama's preacher of 20 years

actually i didn't mean to imply any criticism of you personally, adam. i did google the thing, since i hadn't heard of it, and i noticed that the majority of stories used the term "spiritual guide" and also suggested the false analogy you mentioned. the only response i found (didn't look TOO hard) from mccains camp was on the fox website, so i didn't bother posting a link and incorporated what i thought to be a key factoid in my response to your post.

pandering to the lunatic fringe- what, don't these people pay taxes? :) no, of course i agree with you, and will be interested to see how the other candidates navigate these waters. i mean, i read obamas' book and recall his exchange with the "pro-lifer" and what he took with him from that...

the other point i was trying to make was that a 71 year old man calls someone he only met 3 weeks ago a "spritual advisor", well, what are we supposed to do? compliment him on his childlike openmindedness? i mean, you'd think he had his spiritual advisors sorted out by now. i expect it was just a poor choice of words, heat of the moment kind of thing and certainly not the last of those from john mccain.

a 71 year old man calls someone he only met 3 weeks ago a "spritual advisor", well, what are we supposed to do? compliment him on his childlike openmindedness?

Exactly! If he was your father, you'd be looking into holding competency hearing before he gives his life savings to a guru.

i don't think anyone has addressed Norm's point.

He's no different from other politicians in that respect except that he uses the religiosity more than most and that is what I personally find offensive. ...I'm just making an empirical observation here that his religiosity came back to bite him in the ass.

why did Obama feel he needed to embrace his religiosity as much as he did recently?

if you're smart enough to think that is the way to counter questions about it and you think it is important enough to put on your radar and that of voters, then you should be smart enough to know it can bite back -

and that's what happened.

Now he'll have to deal with as a nominee and, if he is nominated, as a presidential candidate.

a real mis-step in my book. some might even say it shows a lack of experience

btw. Terry Levine and others still seem to take for a fact that it was Clinton who put out the Muslim accusations.

I have yet to see proof of that.

Terry Levine said:

Unfortunately Obama had to try wear his faith on his sleeve because of all the Clinton campaign's shameful behind-the-scenes attempts to paint him as a Muslim because of his name.

perhaps some people take Chris Matthews a little too much at his word: http://mediamatters.org/columns/200803110002