Letters to the Editor
-
You've all changed my mind...
Obama's not experienced enough, he's got a spotty voting record from his 12 years in elective office, his supporters like him too much, he's too Christian, he's too specific, he's not black enough, he's too vague, he's too tall, a bad person gave money to his campaign, he's too nice to win against the Republicans, he's too mean to win the Democratic nomination, his ears are unattractive, he doesn't avoid large gatherings because an offensive person is there, he's too skinny, he likes sports too much, etc.
If there's anything America needs right now, it's Hillary Clinton-- she has the experience, the toughness, and the proper height to solve all those problems.
-
William Timbermann
"I'm persuaded that his world-view isn't that different from my own, but that his reluctance to confront an enemy who makes no bones about being an enemy is a weakness, not a strength."
I'm not clear on who the 'enemy who makes no bones about being an enemy' is? Would you clarify for me?
-
Glenn is right-and Glenn is wrong
Glenn is right: Both candidates are wrong to use religion to buy votes. Equally wrong, if the issue is not delving into the "shades" of extremisms of their views or the excuses given for it.
But Glenn is wrong to ignore the obvious; that though it may not be surprising to see religion so prominent in politics, that this blending of the two (God and Country) is the far greater evil.
-
@bluestatlib
great post! You said it all. Excellent point!
-
Gladly, Ktwdawg
I was thinking specifically of Christian Dominionists when I wrote that sentence, but in my opinion it would apply to right-wing authoritarians of all flavors -- from missionary-position fundamentalists and bluenoses like Tipper Gore or William Bennett to Likudniks like Norman Podhoretz and Joe Lieberman, to out-and-out fascists like Rudy Giuliani.
My take on them is more than a little terminatorish: They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until they get what they want.
-
Thanks
I don't think you were saying this, but I hope that you don't hold that view of Obama. He is a constitutional law expert as is, coincidentally, the author of this fine blog we all love so much. I am personally confident that Sen. Obama would hold the Constitution above the Bible in all areas of his presidency. He understands better than most the meaning and significance of Plurality. It would be a violation of who he is as a Christian to go back on his word or to pervert the Constitution or violate his oath of office. That is the difference.
[Again, I don't think you subscribe to what I wrote above, though you might. I just wanted to express how I view Obama's relationship to religion and governance.]
-
No.
No, Ktwdawg, I definitely don't hold that view of Obama. I just disagree with him that you can come to any terms with the people I mentioned other than surrender or victory.
-
Hmmmm
Fair enough, but Obama says he is "called to Bring Change" and "called to Serve" -- "called" by whom?
I would have called sooner, but the call of the noon whistle made me realize my stomach was calling. I called on a sandwich shop, then was called to a meeting. But something was calling me back to tell Glenn that he's really found his calling in life. Don't let the call of your detractors call you away, you call their bluff and keep answering the call to call these creeps on the carpet for daring to call out that they've been "called". "Called" by whom, indeed.
-
Constitution
Mr. Greenwald: The only thing that bothers me about any candidate expressing his or her religious beliefs, is if they want to change the U.S. constitution to match it. Your writing has always been as balanced as any one on the net that I've read. Keep up the good work.
-
Religion In Our Politics
We're out of control with this religion thing. There is too much money in churches due to their tax-exempt status and many use that money to advance their political agendas. The only way to save us from the Mecca-mentality is to either eliminate our current tax structure and start over or to begin taxing churches like all other money making entities. Churches now have the ability to use their financial clout to sway politics and elections which has and will lead to problems in domestic and foreign policies.
-
I believe
I shall now call Mona and ask her, "Where in the hell is my pony?"
Now that Thrasher has made a horse's ass of himself, we can allow this thread to go gently into the night.
-
Obama the uniter?
I would have preferred that Obama confronted the issue of him being or not being a Muslim in a different way. He should have said: "I'm not a Muslim, but if I were it should not be held against me. Like being a Mormon should not be held against Mitt Romney. There are many American Muslims whose children may one day want to run for the Presidency."
Glenn, keep on truckin'. Obama supporters have thin skin. They are spoiled by the free ride the media's given their candidate. Hillary's been dumped on so much for so long, she's developed rhino skin.
-
NO! They both are forgetting that there is a "separation between church and state" and
that many of us "spiritual, not religious" Americans are sick of the God talk in any venue or publication, and especially the major influence this breach has had in diminishing our democracy for the last seven years.
Religion is a personal choice. There are Sundays for it and every day of the week if you want. Why talk about it in campaigns except to pander for votes: "My God is better than your God".
And the evolution vs. creation beliefs of the candidates? Not believing in evolution is a major disqualifier. It's just plain stupid!
And Obama channeling Reagan and this Christian crap? It's not what we need in the WH. Why is he using this?
-
"There shall be no religious test for the office...." Do we have to pray for this?
Glenn Greenwald, keen observer that he is, was able to notice the tiny cross in the background of the fliers for Senator Obama. I suspect others did as well. It would truly be nice to see a campaign in which the issue of religion was dealt with in the same way John Kennedy did -- to declare it a matter of conscience and go on to what used to be the real issues. We've had a fundamentalist in office now for seven years, one clearly a "committed Christian." The problem has been that he doesn't seem to stand for the basic principles Jesus spoke of, and is therefore not "committed" to them. (Not much on feeding the hungry or healing the sick, or turning the other cheek, or withholding the first stone. In fact, he loves the idea of the "preemptive stone" overmuch.) And, of course, he has not been "committed" in the mental health sense. It would be nice if one of our three candidates -- all lawyers -- would cite the Constitution on the issue, in the body and in the First Amendment, and just go on. Irving Maidenform was right on the principle, "Separate, and lift" -- you'd think these boobs would understand.