Good blog post from Steve Duin on these anti-Obama e-mails still making the rounds:
You want to laugh. Until you realize that some Christians take this stuff so seriously that they are forwarding it along.
You've got to wonder how these folks will act if Obama actually wins.
This week my church office has received a series of faxes and a packet of information – including DVDs – that attack Barack Obama on religious grounds. The information comes from a new organization called “The Judeo-Christian View.”
The Chicago Tribune reports the attack faxes and mailings have been distributed across the country:
Dozens of pastors and rabbis across the country are urging their peers to pray for Barack Obama’s repentance and telling their congregations to do the same on Sunday before Election Day. They contend that Obama’s liberal policies on marriage and abortion will fuel tensions with the Muslim world.
Packaged with the inaugural edition of The Judeo-Christian View, a new "multimedia journal" mailed to more than 325,000 clergy this week, is a "video sermon" mixing Bible verses with the positions of the Democratic candidate and his Republican opponent Sen. John McCain. It also includes a copy of "Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West" and a letter signed by dozens of clergy…
The 7-minute DVD sermon—available in mild and graphic versions (the mild version omits the pictures of men smooching)—questions Obama’s policies on same-sex unions, integration of openly gay men and women into the U.S. military, and partial-birth abortion
"Full embrace of homosexual unions by our nation and the next administration would tell violent Islamists that the infidel USA has expressly rejected once-shared Abrahamic, Mosaic and Christian teaching regarding ‘sodomy,'" said the letter. "So too would flagrant ‘gay integration’ of our overseas military forces. We advocate ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’; militant Islamists would murder our fellow Americans for sexual error, as well as us for offering them hope and forgiveness!"
The information contained in the material directly accuses Senator Obama of supporting child sacrifice. The Senator is also linked with fundamentalist Islam. In their words:
Our nation faces a fork, a divergence between the high road and the low road -- and you and your congregation could very well determine the direction we take. The high road upholds America's peaceful tradition of Judeo-Christian tolerance and morality. The low road marches us toward militant secular-paganism, militant Islam, or both.
The high road upholds traditional marriage between one man and one woman, and the sanctity of innocent human life that springs from such unions. The low road favors homosexual "marriage" and child sacrifice (we're not referring to familiar abortion here – see below).
The high road upholds the rights of pastors, priests and rabbis to "speak truth to power" in the tradition of Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, (and for Christians) John the Baptist, Peter, Paul, Stephen and Jesus. The low road would officially censor the Judeo-Christian view from the public square.
Let’s be clear about what is really is: bigoted hate speech from the fringes of America’s religious community. Among the supporters of this material is Dr. Wiley S. Drake, Sr. He’s the Southern Baptist who recently prayed that watchdogs concerned about his church’s political activity would die.
Dozens of people may have signed on to support this mass mailing but nothing included in their written material or the DVDs is representative of mainstream Christianity or Judaism. In fact, many hundreds of clergy acting in their own capacity have endorsed Barack Obama.
During the Democratic National Convention in Denver - which I attended - religious leaders from across America came to support Senator Obama. Some pro-choice. Some pro-life. But all committed to healing the divisions that face the United States today.
When I endorsed Senator Obama in June 2007 it was with these words:
As a minister in the United Church of Christ, I trust deeply in the Constitutional principle of separation of church and state and my endorsement is therefore a personal one and does not reflect on the church I serve or my denomination. But as a citizen I believe that all Americans must engage in the political process as individuals for democracy to thrive. So I choose to add my voice today with millions of other Americans concerned about the direction of this nation.
Barack Obama has shown leadership on the most pressing moral issues of our day – such as the war in Iraq and the global AIDS crisis. During his time in the Illinois Legislature and in the United States Senate he has demonstrated that his values cannot be compromised by prevailing political winds.
Christians, Jews, Muslims – all people of faith in America – share in a deep and abiding love for this nation. But many of us, as William Sloane Coffin would have said, have a “lover’s quarrel” with America. We know things can be better. We know all Americans need health care. We know that no one should be homeless in the world’s richest nation. We know that global warming threatens God’s own earth and that as the stewards of creation we are called forth to protect this planet. We are also called to be peacemakers in times of conflict.
Barack Obama shares these values and when elected president will embody them as he makes decisions in the Oval Office. When that day comes we will be a better nation.
Senator Obama's conduct in this campaign has only caused me to believe more deeply in his leadership qualities and character. It is no suprise that the majority of all religious people in America are today supporting Senator Obama's efforts to change this nation. Americans see Barack Obama for what he is: a man of deep faith committed to ending the war, providing health care for all Americans, combating poverty and reconciling the broken parts of our nation.
The extremists behind “The Judeo-Christian View” have decided that their only chance to defeat Senator Obama is by pedaling hate and fear. In 6 days we can show them that their rhetoric and their lies have no place in American politics or our houses of worship.
Les and Sue AuCoin have been out in Ohio campaigning for Barack Obama. Sue is a professional photographer and Les served as a U.S. Representative from Oregon's First Congressional District for nine terms. They've put together a website chronicling their experiences in the "The Buckeye State". Check out Ohio Political Journal.
I first volunteered for Les in 1982 (when I was thirteen). Both Les and Sue have been friends ever since and I continue to this day to admire their commitment to public service.
From the Barna Group via The Dallas Morning News Religion Blog:
(Ventura, California) - Unless a dramatic shake-up of the electorate occurs in the next two weeks, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is poised to win the November 4th election by a comfortable margin. A new survey from The Barna Group, exploring the voting preferences of registered voters who are likely to vote in the upcoming election found that Sen. Obama has a 13-point lead against Republican John McCain (50% to 37%).
One of the surprising insights of the research is the significant inroads Sen. Obama has made among the Christian community, particularly compared to 2004. In fact, among born again voters there is a statistical dead-heat: 45% plan to vote for Sen. McCain, while 43% expect to cast a ballot for Sen. Obama. Even if Sen. McCain were to sweep the 10% who are undecided born again voters, he would fail to reach the 62% who rallied for President Bush in 2004....
If the presidential election were held only among born again Americans, it would be a close contest. When the rest of the nation's voters are factored into the equation, Sen. Obama is staked to a commanding lead among likely voters, 50% to 37%. In large part this lead is due to the substantial support he receives among other self-identified Christians, that is, individuals who describe themselves as Christians but who are not categorized as born again. Among this group, 54% plan to vote for Sen. Obama, compared with 33% for Sen. McCain. This voting segment represents 36% of likely voters.
Other voters who do not identify themselves as Christians comprise 14% of all likely voters. Among those who are associated with other faiths, the Democratic Senator generates a 60-point gap over the Republican Senator (74% versus 14%). While not as pronounced, atheists and agnostics also strongly prefer Sen. Obama over Sen. McCain (50% versus 28%).
Americans continue to see back Barack Obama for what he is: a man of deep faith committed to ending the war, providing health care for all Americans, combating poverty and reconciling the broken parts of our nation.
Visit People of Faith for Barack Obama for more.
Related Post: Why I’m Joining Obama For America: “People of Faith for Barack”
This blog of mine went live five years ago today.
In that time I've had 2,932 posts, 7,436 comments and nearly 1 million hits. Not bad for a little blog.
Thanks for reading.
What are the Christian values voters need to consider this election? I took a stab at answering that question during the 2006 election cycle and the answers seem to same to me this year. Check out A Sermon On Christian Principles in an Election Year.
I'm scheduled to be a guest on "The Blog Bunker" on Indie Talk channel 110 on Sirius Satellite Radio today at 2 pm Pacific (5 pm Eastern).
Today I voted (here in Oregon we vote by mail). Like millions of others, I've waited for this day for a long time.
Barack Obama has run a campaign with a platform that is central to the concerns of mainline Christians: ending the war, combating global climate change, reducing poverty, and reconcilling the broken parts of our nation.
My deepest hope is that my little girls will look back on 2008 and say to their children and their grandchildren that 2008 was the year the people of the United States embraced reason and once again decided that working together as a united national community was much more important than trying to go it alone. We have too many problems now and a go-it-along approach will not work.
America can be a better place. We still have the capacity to overcome any challegne. Don't think so? Remember 9/11 and the out-pouring of relief after Katrina. Barack Obama appeals to the best in America.
We're coming down to the wire. 15 days until the votes are counted. So don't forget to vote.
Written by The Rev. Robert Chase
It was months before the launch of his Presidential bid. Back in the spring of 2006, Senator Obama’s office was a quiet place when The Rev. John H. Thomas, General Minister and President of the United Church of Christ and I arrived to see the junior Senator from Illinois. We were there to ask him to keynote the UCC’s biennial General Synod meeting in June of 2007 in Hartford, CT. There, 10,000 faithful would gather to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the denomination to which Barack Obama belonged.
It was one of those April days common to Washington, after the cherry blossoms had fallen, when the temperature seemed more like July than mid-spring. Rev. Thomas and I were early and we were asked to wait while the Senator completed some business on the Senate floor.
We shared the waiting room with one other—a solitary figure who was sitting on the sofa, trying to collect herself and sweating from the heat. She was muttering softly and it didn’t take long to realize that she was not fully in charge of her faculties. Elderly, white, possibly homeless, she struck a sad figure there in the halls of power. Barely functional, or so it seemed, she was clearly no high-priced lobbyist, represented no well-heeled interest group, promoted no influential demographic. She was a constituency of one, the epitome of powerlessness. Actually, she gave no indication that she even knew whose office she was in, or why she was there.
But then a remarkable thing happened. Not once, not twice. But four times. Four different members of Obama’s staff asked the unnamed woman if they could help. “Is there anything I can get for you?” “It sure is hot, would you like some water?” “Can I help you make a call?” Joshua DuBois, a legislative aid, who would become the campaign’s Director of Religious Affairs, got down on one knee so he could look in her eye, and spoke quietly to the woman. A few minutes later, Michael Strautmanis, Obama’s Chief Counsel at the time, asked if he could assist.
Four staffers—white and black, male and female, receptionist and Chief Counsel—inquired about the wellbeing of this lost and fragile soul. No cameras. No campaign slogans (indeed, there wasn’t a campaign yet). Just a genuine desire to help, with nothing in return. The woman refused all entreaties, seemingly content to just sit…and whisper to the voices in her head.
Obama came in, apologized for being late (he wasn’t) and we retreated into his office. Rev. Thomas and I made our pitch. He ultimately agreed and, fourteen months later, he would speak eloquently about the role of faith in public service. By then, he was deeply engaged in the campaign.
We had our twenty minute meeting and when it was time to leave, we returned to the waiting room just as one of the staffers was leaving with the woman, gently accompanying her to the elevator and chirpily talking about the weather and other matters important in the day-to-day lives of our nation’s lost and homeless. She had been there, out of the Washington heat, for the better part of an hour: a time of respite from the onslaught of her world.
Much has been made recently of Senator Obama’s “executive experience.” But, executive ability is demonstrated as much in the quality of those you hire and the tone you set for your administration, as in the size of your staff or the largesse of your budget.
We Americans have a short attention span during election seasons. Maybe the imploding economy or an unexpected international incident will cause challenges to Obama’s executive credentials to pale as November 4 draws near. But if they should linger in the minds of some, I offer this experienced as a counterweight. What we witnessed back then is indicative of someone who builds a staff, from top to bottom, with sensitivity to the neediest among us, to those without any power. I left Washington that day struck by the notion that perhaps the sense of service to that unnamed woman might someday become the model for our nation’s government.
The Rev. Robert Chase was Director of Communication of the United Church of Christ; he is currently the Founding Director of Intersections International, based in New York City.
Very funny. This is from the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, held last night, that normally brings together the two candidates for president each year to a night of laughs and fund raising for important Catholic Charities.
Leslie B. Luedtke and Kevin C. Robinson are idiots. And any harassment faced by Gene and Karen Scrutton is an embarrassment for our entire city.
We're witnessing a moment in history that might be recorded as the implosion of the modern day Republican Party. Economic policies in vogue since Ronald Reagan have dragged the country into economic ruin and foreign policy goals in force under George W. Bush have left the nation battered and increasingly vulnerable to both terrorism and the threats inherent in the global climate change crisis. The Republican standard bearer in this election – John McCain – has fallen behind in the polls and there is talk of a Democratic landslide. Unleashed by McCain and his running mate has in recent days been a torrent of ugly and sometimes racist rhetoric at rallies and in interviews that instead of bolstering McCain's November chances have served to further divide America at a time reconciliation is needed to address fundamental challenges that threaten America's financial health and the stability of the planet.
All people of faith ought to be concerned about what direction this campaign is taking.
NPR introduces the subject of McCain tactics in recent days with these words:
In the final lap of the U.S. presidential race some believe Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) attacks against Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) character have gone too far and, for some, are even racist.
McCain was sharply criticized after the debate between the two candidates at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., for referring to Obama as "that one" — a reference that many interpreted as racially loaded.
Dan Balz of The Washington Post writes:
There is a scene early in "Dead Certain," Robert Draper's book about President Bush, when the Bush campaign, reeling from its loss to John McCain in New Hampshire in the 2000 primary, is plotting its moves for a do-or-die struggle in South Carolina.
As Bush's South Carolina team sketched out one tough step after another, Mark McKinnon, Bush's media adviser, listened with amazement. Draper writes that McKinnon was thinking: "They're letting the dogs off the chain."
John McCain was the victim in that campaign eight years ago. Now, struggling to overcome Barack Obama's lead in the polls, he is unleashing attacks and empowering forces that lead him in the same direction.
Through television ads by his campaign and by the Republican National Committee, Obama is under attack for his association with William Ayers, the 1960s radical. On the campaign trail, McCain's rallies have at times turned into angry rants by his supporters aimed at Obama and the Democrats. Frank Keating, the former governor of Oklahoma and a McCain surrogate went on television this week and played the race card, saying Obama should own up to the fact that he was once a "guy of the street" who used cocaine.
Politico reports on the tone of the McCain rallies:
With McCain passing up the opportunity to level any tough personal shots in his first two debates and the very real prospect of an Obama presidency setting in, the sort of hard-core partisan activists who turn out for campaign events are venting in unusually personal terms.
"Terrorist!" one man screamed Monday at a New Mexico rally after McCain voiced the campaign's new rhetorical staple aimed at raising doubts about the Illinois senator: "Who is the real Barack Obama?"
"He's a damn liar!" yelled a woman Wednesday in Pennsylvania. "Get him. He's bad for our country."
At both stops, there were cries of, "Nobama," picking up on a phrase that has appeared on yard signs, T-shirts and bumper stickers.
And Thursday, at a campaign town hall in Wisconsin, one Republican brought the crowd to its feet when he used his turn at the microphone to offer a soliloquy so impassioned it made the network news and earned extended play on Rush Limbaugh's program.
"I'm mad; I'm really mad!" the voter bellowed. "And what's going to surprise ya, is it's not the economy — it's the socialists taking over our country."
Rhetoric like this has one purpose: to demonize your opponent. McCain hasn't tried to calm his crowds and in fact has worked to incite them. The risk isn't just to McCain's campaign but to the safety of all the candidates and the stability of the democratic system.
Barack Obama is responding with the right words:
It's easy to rile up a crowd by stoking anger and division. But that's not what we need right now in the United States. The times are too serious. The challenges are too great. The American people aren't looking for someone who can divide this country -- they're looking for someone who will lead it. We're in a serious crisis -- now, more than ever, it is time to put country ahead of politics. Now, more than ever, it is time to bring change to Washington so that it works for the people of this country that we love.
I know my opponent is worried about his campaign. But that's not what I'm concerned about. I'm thinking about the Americans losing their jobs, and their homes, and their life savings. We can't afford four more years of the economic theory that says we should give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else.
The National Council of Churches USA (NCC) – which does not endorse candidates – notes this week that: "A recent contention by Governor Sarah Palin that Barack Obama has befriended a domestic terrorist elicited a lone call in a Florida crowd to "kill him.'"
The Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, general secretary of the NCC, warned last spring about how the political debate of this election might further divide the America people:
The Golden Rule of Ecumenism has brought vastly different Christian traditions together for conversation and action, and the rule should be applied to American politics.
The rule: “Try to understand others even as you hope to be understood by them.”
That simple axiom is a radical critique of an age in which ideological lines are hardening and real dialogue diminishing in the public arena.
Church folks, like most Americans, have strong political views, many of them based on the biblical mandate to bring peace, feed the poor, uphold the downtrodden and speak God’s truth and justice in all things. We argue all the time about the best ways to fulfill that mandate. But ecumenically-minded Christians start with the assumption that Christians with different ideas are just as committed to Christ as they are.
This is an amazing reality in the 35 member communions that comprise the nation’s oldest and largest ecumenical body, the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA. Our member churches are Orthodox, historic African American, peace churches, Anglican, Main Line. The startling fact that we continue to work and talk together is one of the most underreported stories of our time.
Contrast this with the rhetoric of political campaigns, which are often based on divisiveness, hyperbole, half-truths and innuendo. How much can politicians learn about issues or one another if their positions harden into inflexible dogmas and their ears are closed to opposing ideas?
We profess to be a nation that values diversity – pluralism – as a central virtue, and yet our leaders so often govern, I fear, by surrounding themselves with an isolating barrier of like-minded cronies. Pluralism is affirmed as a social reality and grudgingly accepted as a legislative principle, but virtually ignored as a methodological basis for executive decision making.
That strikes ecumenically-minded Christians as utterly backwards.
There are indeed divisions in political life that need to be confronted and fully discussed, just as there are genuine differences among Christians over the nature of the sacraments or the role of the Church in social struggles or the authority of scripture – difference that cannot be eliminated simply by irenic rhetoric. And it is true that all government policies are not the same; some will be more effective in protecting the rights of minorities or prompting economic growth. But from an ecumenical perspective, the most basic division in American political life may well be between those who insist on splitting the world into polarized camps and those who don’t, between those who claim that they or their party (or their church) have a near monopoly hold on truth and those who acknowledge that their perceptions of complex issues are inevitably partial and that they, therefore, need the input of those with whom they disagree in order to lead this nation in safe and prosperous ways.
Doris Kearns Goodwin, in her book Team of Rivals, describes President Lincoln’s strategy of bringing into his cabinet public figures who disagreed strenuously with him – and with one another. Lincoln’s practice assured that diverse points of view were aired in the very center of the executive decision-making process. Nearly five decades ago, President Kennedy brought hawks and doves into the special committee that recommended action in the Cuban Missile Crisis, and their sharp disagreements enabled the President to choose a path that avoided nuclear war.
An “ecumenical president,” instead of minimizing internal debate and maximizing external differences in the name of ideological truth, would expand the circle of internal discussion and, yes, dissent as a way of identifying those lines of division that, as a last resort, need to be drawn.
This discussion implies a particular understanding of the ecumenical vision of the Church. It is easy and tempting to approach unity as a commodity which, if achieved, would result in certain benefits. I want to argue, however, that ecumenism is much more fundamental than that. It is, as I have already suggested, a worldview that resolutely refuses to absolutize relative perspectives (a tendency that H. Richard Niebuhr identified as the single greatest source of evil). It is a biblically-grounded spirituality that dares to live trustfully with differences in community, not as a result of polite tolerance of a pragmatic acceptance of pluralism but on the basis of a common commitment to Jesus Christ. It is an approach to reality which insists that truth is seldom discovered in splendid isolation but through dialogue in community. The ecumenical movement is, indeed, a spiritual battle for truth; but it is a common battle against error and not a fight between partners in dialogue based on the assumption that one is already right and one wrong.
So long as political candidates continue to vie for votes by rendering complex ideas into misleading slogans, demeaning one another in television commercials, attempting non sequitur sound-bytes in a televised debate, or submitting to television interviews aimed at eliciting faux pas or outrageous statements about an opponent, there will be very little dialogue. And without dialogue, the next president of the United States is likely to spend the next four years in an enclave of like-minded polemicists.
Yes, political decisions matter. But our willingness to live trustfully with differences, because we know that God’s will is always greater than our grasp of it, is the best testimony ecumenists can make in this political season.
We have an opportunity in this moment - all of us - to reject ugly rhetoric no matter what corner of the political spectrum it comes from.
On another day when the economy under the failed economic policies of Bush-McCain continued in a free fall the supporters of John McCain are making themselves heard:
America is better than this. I hope we'll show that clearly on election day.
(HT to Politico which got this from Blogger Interrupted)
I’ll be casting my vote this November for U.S. Senate candidate Jeff Merkley.
Oregonians have a pretty stark choice this election cycle. Gordon Smith, the incumbent Republican is seeking a third term. Yes, we’re talking about the same Gordon Smith who voted for George W. Bush’s disastrous economic policies – policies that have benefited the supper wealthy at the expense of the middle class. Poverty levels have soared under those policies.
Gordon Smith was also an early supporter of Bush’s failed policies in Iraq. It was only when popular opinion began to shift on the war that Smith suddenly became a critic.
Sadly, Gordon Smith has also been a supporter of some of George W. Bush’s extremist choices for the federal bench.
On all these issues – the economy, the war, the courts – Gordon Smith has ignored pleas from mainline Christian groups concerned about the common good of our nation.
Jeff Merkley will be a different kind of senator. Like many other Oregonians, I’ve been impressed with his leadership as the Oregon House Speaker. He took on the pay day lenders and fought for a clean environment. In fact, his campaign has been endorsed by the Sierra Club and League of Conservation Voters. He also has the support of Planned Parenthood of Oregon and NARAL Pro-Choice America. As a member of Clergy for Choice, I know how important it will be for Oregon to have another voice that supports letting women make their own health care decisions. Jeff Merkley will work to rebuild our economy and will fight to confirm mainstream judges. He's right on the issues.
Every vote will matter this November. Make sure you are registered and join me in supporting Jeff Merkley for U.S. Senate.
Note: As a minister in the United Church of Christ, I trust deeply in the Constitutional principle of separation of church and state and my endorsement is therefore a personal one and does not reflect on the church I serve or my denomination. But as a citizen I believe that all Americans must engage in the political process as individuals for democracy to thrive.
As a certified political junkie, I can confirm having watched every single presidential and vice-presidential debate since 1984. Both candidates performed well tonight but there was no "knock-out" victory for either. However, Senator Obama continues to out perform Senator McCain on the issues. Voters clearly believe that Barack Obama won the debate, according to a just released CNN poll. The American people seem to understand with real clarity that the Bush-McCain economic policies of the last eight years have killed our economy and finally - finally - we can put Ronald Reagan's failed "trickle-down" economics in the coffin.
What I don't believe is that this election is over. The polls are looking good for Senator Obama and his progressive change agenda. But I suspect in the end this will be a very close election. It will take an enormous effort and high voter turnout to put Barack Obama in the White House. This is an achievable goal but it will take all hands on deck to pull off.
John McCain is not a young man. Age by itself shouldn't be a factor in voting. But the Republican nominee has had cancer and has chosen a running mate who clearly isn't qualified to be president.
Health is an issue with McCain and as Frank Rich writes in The New York Times it is an issue that hasn't be fully examined:
Back in May, you will recall, the McCain campaign allowed a select group of 20 reporters to spend a mere three hours examining (but not photocopying) 1,173 pages of the candidate’s health records on the Friday of Memorial Day weekend. Conspicuously uninvited was Lawrence Altman, a doctor who covers medicine for The New York Times. Altman instead canvassed melanoma experts to evaluate the sketchy data that did emerge. They found the information too “unclear” to determine McCain’s cancer prognosis.
There was, however, at least one doctor-journalist among those 20 reporters in May, the CNN correspondent Sanjay Gupta. At the time, Gupta told Katie Couric on CBS that the medical records were “pretty comprehensive” and wrote on his CNN blog that he was “pretty convinced there was no ‘smoking gun’ about the senator’s health.” (Physical health, that is; Gupta wrote there was hardly any information on McCain’s mental health.)
That was then. Now McCain is looking increasingly shaky, whether he’s repeating his “Miss Congeniality” joke twice in the same debate or speaking from notecards even when reciting a line for (literally) the 17th time (“The fundamentals of our economy are strong”) or repeatedly confusing proper nouns that begin with S (Sunni, Shia, Sudan, Somalia, Spain). McCain’s “dismaying temperament,” as George Will labeled it, only thickens the concerns. His kamikaze mission into Washington during the bailout crisis seemed crazed. His seething, hostile debate countenance — a replay of Al Gore’s sarcastic sighing in 2000 — didn’t make the deferential Obama look weak (as many Democrats feared) but elevated him into looking like the sole presidential grown-up.
Though CNN and MSNBC wouldn’t run a political ad with doctors questioning McCain’s medical status, Gupta revisited the issue in an interview published last Tuesday by The Huffington Post. While maintaining a pretty upbeat take on the candidate’s health, the doctor-journalist told the reporter Sam Stein that he couldn’t vouch “by any means” for the completeness of the records the campaign showed him four months ago. “The pages weren’t numbered,” Gupta said, “so I had no way of knowing what was missing.” At least in Watergate we knew that the gap on Rose Mary Woods’s tape ran 18 and a half minutes.
The American people have a right to know about his health status.
Here's the ad CNN and MSNBC wouldn't let you see.
Joe Biden clearly won the debate tonight. He was more informed on the issues and obviously the Obama / Biden platform is more progressive and in tune than anything Governor Palin offered the American people. The governor simply isn’t qualified to be president and John McCain is wrong on the big issues. Her biggest achievement tonight was that she didn’t fall down or offer any horrendous blunders (except perhaps lauding Dick Cheney). What the Republicans needed tonight was a huge victory and instead Senator Biden offered Americans compelling reasons to vote for Barack Obama.
NPR.org got in touch with me eariler this week with questions about the economic crisis and my recent sermon on that topic. Here's the story that resulted:
NPR.org, October 2, 2008 · There's financial tumult all around and people are thirsty for answers. Across America, religious leaders prophesy and preach about ways to deal with the roller-coaster crisis. And they counsel congregants who have deep questions, unquenchable anxieties.
Trinity Church on Wall Street sits smack dab at the epicenter of the financial cosmos. Brokers, traders and "masters of the universe" fill its pews. The Rev. Anne Mallonee says the Episcopal church — with a 900-household membership — is seeing a definite increase in attendance. Especially on weekdays, when people from the financial district drift in for services, for solace and for solitude.
The church is offering a number of different programs — including extra prayer sessions and career counseling — to help people cope with the great unease. The first wave included support staff, such as secretaries and administrative staffers. "This week we are seeing more executives," she says.
"Someone who was here for 9/11 says this is the closest thing she has seen to that time," Mallonee says.
Feelings Of 'Fear And Distrust'
Across the country at the Parkrose Community United Church of Christ in Portland, Ore., the Rev. Chuck Currie has noticed that his congregation is rife with "fear and distrust of leaders."
He tries to calm the flock by saying: "Ultimately, our hope rests with God."
But, he adds, "economic problems are moral problems and how we respond speaks about our relationship with God and to the world."
Parkrose is no megachurch. With 114 members, it's a small house of worship in a modest neighborhood of low-income and elderly people. "We have a responsibility," Currie says, "to care first for those Jesus called the 'least of these' in society: the poor, homeless, sick, children and the elderly."
....
The Financial Impact
The current meltdown comes at an especially inopportune time — stewardship season.
Many churches calculate their finances according to the calendar year, and the first of October traditionally marks the time when preachers are talking about money anyway. On any given Sunday, you are liable to hear the pastor refer to the Apostle Paul, who quotes Jesus as saying: "It is more blessed to give than to receive."
This year there may be some blowback.
"Funny enough, our 'Pledge Sunday' is this week," says Chuck Currie. Pledge Sunday is when people tell the church how much they plan to give in the coming year. The church then plans its budget according to the pledges.
What people feel like they can pledge in the middle of this monetary mess, says Currie, "will sure be an indicator of how people are feeling and where we are headed."
The church has faced financial problems for years, he says. "A downturn in pledges could be a disaster."
Click here for the full story.
You've got to be kidding. Really. I mean, oh my God. No one could possibly take her seriously. Besides Phyllis Schlafly.