What Tennesseans will get will be a Jesus-loving, gun-supporting believer that families should come first, that taxes should be lower and America should be strong. When Tennesseans send us to the Senate, that's what they'll get in my votes and that's what they'll get in the kind of leadership that we have not had in the Senate over the last six years.Speaking of scaring people, I'm still laughing about the "TV Funhouse" cartoon on SNL last night. It spoofed the scary Republican ads. In one, kids are trick-or-treating, and at the door is a pregnant woman; we see her belly burst open -- in the style of the movie "Alien" -- and out pops Hillary Clinton, who croaks: "Here kids, have some condoms and abortion pills."
I know there's going to be an effort to scare people, but you cannot scare people to be inspired. You cannot scare people to do good and important things. I say to the national Republican Party, that message has run out of gas here in Tennessee. We know we are better than that as a country, and Tennesseans are ready to vote for something better and stronger and more positive than that.
But, anyway, back to Harold Ford, that "Jesus-loving" response came after Wallace asked a great question:
Congressman, as we've said, you vote pretty conservative for a Democrat, but the fact is that if you win and if you're part of a Democratic takeover of the Senate, that means that ... Harry Reid, ... becomes the Senate majority leader, Ted Kennedy becomes a committee chair, so does Joe Biden. Doesn't a Ford victory as part of a Democratic takeover, doesn't that end up helping liberals?I'm not surprised he flipped into Jesus! guns! mode.
UPDATE: More religion from Ford here: "Republicans fear the Lord; he said Democrats fear AND love the Lord." Via Instapundit, who thinks Ford needs a good night's sleep. I feel a little sorry for Ford -- and for other Democrats -- not because they don't get enough sleep, but because it seems unfair that religion works as well as it does for Republicans. But you can't turn things around by just proclaiming that it's not right. And bragging about your own religious piety is not a good way to impress religious people... and it's really off-putting to people who are wary of religion in politics.
पोस्ट्स
४६ टिप्पण्या:
If you don't think the Republicans have been talking about Jesus for the last 25 years, you haven't been paying attention. We have a president who declared Jesus to be his personal savior, after all.
Charles: They sure don't run for office saying "I'll be a Jesus-loving senator/president." They try to convey their religious commitment, but they don't put it like that. I was stunned by that phrase.
When Tennesseans send us to the Senate...
What gets me is how politicians have started referring to themselves in the last few years as "we" or "us"... The Queen is the only one allowed to use the Royal We, you douchebags.
All I have to say about this Jesus talk Harold Ford is up to these days, is an old phrase Glenn uses a lot....
"Jeez."
I guess I was hallucinating then when I saw Bill Clinton (a Baptist, not a Methodist like GW Bush) ostentatiously lugging around a Bible that looked like it weighed about 80 pounds?
And Jimmy-Crack-Corn Carter was waaaaaaay more Evangelical in the WH than Bush has ever been. His sister, Ruth Carter Something did just about everything but bring a box of rattlesnakes into the WH.
And, since a major tenet of the Baptist faith as claimed by both Clinton and Carter, which is a part of the baptism, is a belief in accepting Christ as one's 'personal savior' by declaring so before the baptism. So, according you giacometti, I guess Carter and Clinton must have been very much in the same religious vein as our current president or else they were lying when baptised or later when they claimed to be Baptists. Which is it?
And then there are the Revs Jackson and Sharpton.
I'd be just a tad careful about trying to hang excessive portrayal of religion solely on Republicans were I you.
Well, OK, he likes football, he likes girls, but he loves Jesus. Actually, it sounds like he has his priorities backwards. This is Tennessee you know. :)
yetanotherjohn: Very funny... and probably apt!
I like Ford, but he's not quite ready for prime time. Imus, et al, blew so much smoke up his backside that he started to believe his press agent.
Clinton pulled off his bible thumper schtick after long practice, after everyone knew he was pretending, and just tryig to be courteous to his constituents. Old church ladies see that type from a mile, but they stil appreciate the good manners.
Ford can't quite pull off the religious phony routine, but give him time.
Of course, the Republicans also offer Michele "fool for Jesus" Bachmann, who tells us that God called on her to run. I think that rivals "Jesus-loving" pretty much anyday. Unless you are looking at the issue from a purely partisan lens.
"And, Professor, you have heard another candidate "promise to be Jesus-loving." That's what Pres. Bush implicitly said when he told an audience that Jesus was the philosopher who had the greatest influence on him."
If it was implicit, I didn't hear it. My exclamation is about the expression. Express ≠ implied.
Charles Giacometti said...
"We have a president who declared Jesus to be his personal savior, after all."
What is so unusual about that? To be a Christian IS to declare that you have accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior. To so accept and declare is the sine qua non of Christianity, its ineluctable core. I would find it far more troubling if a born again Christian like Bush did NOT say so, and in as many words. It would seem faintly dishonest.
I'm just impressed you have/found a "not equal" button.
Living in Tennessee and having already voted for Ford, I must say that his recent actions are disheartening. His response should have been something more like, "I am an independent think" or "I work for the state of Tennessee" or "I feel the alternative tide, keeping Republicans in power, is not healthy to our nation," or maybe a combination of all of these.
Professor, maybe you don't hear it in
Wisconsin, but I sure heard it in the South, in my youth
As a side note, not being a "traditional Christian," this hurts my image of him. So does his gay marriage stance.
Hearing the term "Jesus-loving" is not at all uncommon where there are Primitive Baptist or such churches. And I don't know that Ford was being 'insincere or calculating' but it certainly does sound odd coming from a Democrat running for office, when I've heard so many cracks about, say, "Jesusland" (that part of the US between the coasts except for the Upper Midwest).
When the term (that I used deliberately before) 'Christers' or 'Xtians' is used (I've never seen it used by non-Leftists except in quotes or such) it is hardly used as an endearment.
I am quite ready to believe that Ford is a good, born-again Christian. It wouldn't be unusual, given where he grew up. I'd be really surprised if that part of his life was really embraced by his party.
don't find hearing the phrase "jesus loving" jarring, but then I live down in the southern section of what liberals from the coasts refer to as Jesusland. That's just the way people talk here, politicians included.
To document this contention I did a search on google using the terms "jesus loving" and found a link to a Wikipedia entry that documents something so bizarre that I suspected that it was a hoax.
"Practiced since 1995 by members of the Children of God/Family International — both male and female members as young as 12, but more fully from the age of 14, are taught that Jesus literally desires to have sex with them.
The "Loving Jesus revelation" calls on Family members to do three things:
1. They are to visualise their sexual activity as happening with Jesus;
2. They are called on to masturbate to Jesus — men are instructed to visualise themselves as women so that Jesus can make love to them; and
3. They are told to say "love words," or talk dirty, to Jesus as they are having sex. Karen Zerby has published a list of sexually explicit expressions that her followers could use when making love to Jesus."
Some people take their "jesus loving" just a little too far. You just can't make this stuff up.
Some people take their "jesus loving" just a little too far.
That gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "come-to-Jesus moment".
Johnny Nucleo said...
"Jesus-loving? It's redundant. Like, duh, you love Jesus, that's the whole deal, isn't it?"
It might be redundant if the GOP hadn't been running ads that seek to tarnish his image as a man of faith, which is a major plank in his election platform. But since we have, I think it's fair game for him to try to rebut those ads in whatever terms he feels appropriate.
Lastly, as much as it might make politically good sense to keep my mouth shut and let Josh Kinniard waver against Ford, even as an agnostic, I find the idea that someone's opinion of a candidate could be diminished by a restatement of the candidate's already-known Christian faith really just plain weird.
Well, Ford says it comes down to a choice between a candidate who loves and fears Jesus compared to one that merely fears Jesus.
It's now up to the republicans to prove that they love and fear Jesus, and they'll rake his leaves, take out his trash, and pick up his drycleaning for Him.
V.W. "sklemnyl": An antibiotic for the skin condition contracted by rolling in political slime.
By total chance, I saw the interview. The "Jesus loving" line wasn't the only odd thing he said. Early on, when asked about the infamous commercial he said (and reiterated this several time) that "[T]he first ad you showed was a piece of smut." If this was smut then what does actual smut look like?
Once again, Harold Ford came off as an unhinged weirdo. (Unfortunately, Wallace pretty much gave him a pass.)
Hi Simon,
You mentioned "What is so unusual about that? To be a Christian IS to declare that you have accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior." Not all Christians hold this idea, particularly Catholics who are satisfied to be born once and don't seek to be born again, with the necessary step of accepting Jesus as personal savior. But I will leave it at that. We likely have different opionions about this.
But I am not not necessarily critical of Bush for proclaiming Jesus to be his personal savior. I was merely pointing out that Republicans invoke Jesus all the time. And some of these invocations are as jarring to the ear as "Jesus-loving" was to Professor Althouse. For example, I cited above the Minnesota congressional candidate who is a "fool for Jesus" and said that God called on her to run. This contrasts with Professor Althouse's statement that, "They sure don't run for office saying 'I'll be a Jesus-loving senator/president.'"
But I suppose each of these candidates, on both sides of the aisle, think they are addressing the concerns of the voters. In Massachusetts, proclaiming you are "Jesus-loving" or a "fool for Jesus" wouldn't work, but maybe it does elsewhere in the country.
Finally, the irony of Professor Althouse scolding the Democrats that "bragging about your own religious piety is not a good way to impress religious people." We have had 25 years of Republicans doing precisely this, and the Professor decides it is now time to lecture the Democrats. But, no, Professor Althouse is not the least bit partisan. No, not the least bit partisan at all.
Yeah, but did you notice Wallace's little smirk, and how he thinks he's sooo clever, and how he did such nice little conservative hit job on Ford?
Me neither. But just ask Bill. He knows that Wallace merely does FOX’s bidding on that show.
Yeah, this thread has done two things: ignored why Ford really said it in a question-begging attempt by people on here to paint him as desperate (which is as silly as the WaPo article today saying Michael Steele esd defensive in the Meet the Press debate); and repeated a new meme of the Corker campaign. How accidental.
One of you actually hit the nail on the head: Ford's GOTV plan requires jazzing up a lot of Baptists in Memphis. They like phrases like "Jesus-loving". In addition, Fox News Sunday broadcasts to a wider audience than those nasty RNC commercials did; Ford simply countered the contentions of that nasty ad to blunt their effect. The sad tactic of Corker people is to spin that into a mental problem or excessive religious fervor, but anyone paying attention knows Ford is simply saying he won't take away your guns because it's true and because Corker's ads falsely claimed Ford would take your guns away.
In the same vein, everyone on here seems to have overlooked why Corker needs to attack Ford's credibility on religion. Those stupid ads the RNC ran. When Corker tried to claim he was above mudslinging during the third debate, the entire audience (except his lovely wife and daughters) erupted into laughter.
What I find odd about calling Ford's religiosity insincere is that he has had a large number of actual preachers, pastors, and reverends supporting his campaign and vouching for him. If you're attacking Ford's faith, you're essentially calling the priests who have vouched for him liars, too, which is just a really bad move for the Corker campaign. Those Tennessean religious figures have congregations.
Neither one of the candidates, Ford or Corker, is desperate -- the race is a dead heat and they're both fighting hard. But pretending either is "desperate" is just contrary to what the polls show. This is a close race, and neither man is the clear victor.
If you're attacking Ford's faith, you're essentially calling the priests who have vouched for him liars, too, which is just a really bad move for the Corker campaign.
Being wrong about someone just makes you wrong. It doesn't make you a liar.
Not that they are wrong. Or right. How would one go about determining if another person's faith was sincere or insincere?
Barak Obama the other day admitted on a bay area (SF) radio show to smoking pot and doing some coke.. haven't seen much of a response to that either.
I'm not sure what Obama has to do with Ford... but, anyway, the reason his drug stuff isn't a big deal is that it's been known for a long time. He put it in his first book. It came up during his Senate campaign and he won, anyway. The real question is why you're bringing it up. In a thread about Harold Ford, no less.
Well, if you claim Ford is -- as a matter of fact -- a faker-on-faith, then either the priests supporting him can't tell when someone is a faker-on-faith or they know he is fake and are supporting him, anyway. Either you're saying these priests are terrible at doing their jobs or they are liars. Neither is a pleasant thing to say about men of the cloth. And their congregations won't be pleased by it. Deny reality all you want, but nobody religious likes seeing their pastor sucker-punched.
I loose respect for anyone who tries to claim that someone can’t be a Christian just because of their political affiliation and I don’t like Ford for doing it.
I really don't think this was what Lincoln Davis said. Frankly, I think non-religious people are taking this out of context. The difference between fearing God (Old Testament) and fearing and loving God (Old Testament plus New Testament) is one of how one worships, not proof that one does not worship. Some people believe in the vengeful, reprimanding God of the Old Testament who ordered Abraham to kill his son; others worship the God is Love God of the New Testament and so are non-judgmental as a result. Of religious voters in Tennessee, the ones most likely to get out and vote on a religious basis are New Testament-types, i.e., religious Democrats. I don't think Ford is attacking anyone. It isn't an attack to say that Catholic ceremonies are less boisterous and warm than Baptist ones. (And, yes, I'm a Catholic.)
The comment that troubled Ann is just simply different than the "Jesus-loving" one. Though I don't have a problem with either.
A week from Election Day and all anyone can talk about is whether or not the candidate is a religious man....
Ha. No, the question is why the Corker campaign feels the need to question Ford's faith -- and the answer is his credibility was hurt by those RNC ads. And Ford knows that:
"We'll have to wait and see, but I'll tell you this, if their National Republican Committee believed what you just said, they wouldn't be running these awful, despicable, inhumane ads in my space. They know that we've got a chance to win this, and, come November 7th, Tennesseans will speak loud and clear. It's time for a new day in Tennessee and a new day in America." (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,226104,00.html)
All this does is play into Ford's GOTV campaign; he didn't make a mistake on Fox News Sunday, at all.
The comment that troubled Ann is just simply different than the "Jesus-loving" one. Though I don't have a problem with either.
Sorry, I meant the Lincoln Davis one.
Mortimer: my comments were more about the press. What's considered unacceptable for one side is perfectly innocuous for the other.
Hmm. I think you'd have a hard time saying the media loves Ford; I'd say the media coverage in TN has been even-handed across-the-board. Obama, on the other hand, yes, the media loves him. But he also isn't running for President, yet. He's sellng a book. As soon as he makes a serious bid for national office, the gloves will come off. The same thing has been happening to McCain, and it will get more intense as 2008 gets closer.
I'm a person of faith.
I wish all these politicians who are bleating on about how they love God and are fools for Jesus and that their worth to the voter is being a Jesus-loving politician...
...would just go on and take the plunge and become pastors, ministers, priests, nuns, brothers, imams, rabbis, gurus, etc.
Makes them seem like they're promising to be politically messianic. There is no creating heaven on earth.
Don't sell me your Jesus-loving. Don't show me ads of you in church all the time.
Sell me on your prudential judgement that you'll exercise in office all the other days of the week...the job you're asking us to hire you for.
What I find odd about calling Ford's religiosity insincere is that he has had a large number of actual preachers, pastors, and reverends supporting his campaign and vouching for him
I don't live in that area anymore and I'm not sure which reverends are supporting Ford. But it is worth noting that the heads of most of the major black churches in Memphis were basically bought and paid for by the Ford family decades ago -- which is how Ford's dad, who was about as Christian and law-abiding as Idi Amin, was able to get church endorsements.
It may be that Ford Jr. is being endorsed by a wider range of religious figures (he's certainly more deserving of it than his dad). But if it is just the usual suspects, they're people representing congregations that would never in a million years back a Republican. Or a white Democrat, for that matter.
George,
Except Corker is the one who made an issue of it, taking Ford's actual statements out of context: http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_95657.asp
And pro-Corker people are the ones circulating it: http://sixers.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGZiNzAyMzg2Y2M5ZTk3Y2M2ZmFkNjk0MjNjODkxMTU=
So, while you can pretend this isn't a Corker meme being pushed by pro-Corker people, it is. And everybody knows it.
Revenant,
But it is worth noting that the heads of most of the major black churches in Memphis were basically bought and paid for by the Ford family decades ago
Except I'm talking about white pastors in mainline conservative TN churches, like the ones in Ford's ads and the ones who denounced the Corker campaign literature handed out to conservative parishoners that darkened Ford's image. I have no idea what that has to do with Ford's family, but even Corker has stopped villainizing Ford's family, because it is sleazy.
What I don't like is his feeling free to comment on the millions of people he doesn't know personally by saying "Republicans fear God, but Democrats love and fear God."
Hmm, again, I don't think this is an accurate quotation, but rather the Corker campaign's abbreviated, out-of-context quotation. I linked above to the press release where the Corker campaign does it. If you read it closely, you'll note that the quotation marks end in the most convenient of places. I have a feeling the Corker attribution is misleading, just like the Corker campaign ads that earned Corker derisive audience laughter at the third debate.
So Ford is a corrupt, belligerent black sheep? Wow. Sounds like a Corker ad. Go with the black sheep line.
The print and TV media, especially in Memphis and Nashville
Yes, the TV media running all those sleazy Corker ads just loves Ford. Besides, I'm talking about the whole state. There are regions of TN that have been "slavish" to Corker. Overall, it evens out.
Though I suppose the presence in the state of some people who use "slavish" and "black sheep" in the same sentence with Ford's name might be a reason for Ford to increase his security detail.
Except I'm talking about white pastors in mainline conservative TN churches,
What mainline conservative TN churches? I can't find the information, and I'm curious.
Its accurate. I've seen the entire clip. On video.
Actually, it isn't. Go check Corker's press release, which I linked to. Ford does not say what Corker says he said.
Listen, I have seen the video also. The video is on YouTube. Ford does not say what Corker twists him into saying in Corker's press release. That is a fact. There is no straw-man.
I am not rehashing what is sleazy about Corker's sleazy ads, given that I have discussed that -- in detail -- on this very website for the past few days. You can very easily scroll down and find what I have written, or you could, I dunno, read a newspaper.
Mortimer: You aren't just talking to one commenter. Picture a new reader coming along and encountering this! You're taking up space with multiple comments without providing value as if you are in a private discussion with Fen. I haven't been following it, but I did read what you just wrote. It's really annoying.
Fen,
That was a response to Freeman Hunt, not to you. Freeman Hunt made that claim on another Ford-Corker thread. You would know that if you went and read the other thread. While you are there, you will also find my comments on why the ads are sleazy.
Hey, I don't know why both of you guys are ignoring the fact that your hostess just wrote that this two man back and forth is irritating. Go back and read this stuff. Mortimer, you are particularly annoying. You're talking about something in another thread and we can't even tell which one. You've got a lot of nerve cluttering up my comments like this. Answer the question straightforwardly, with some respect for other readers or I'm going to delete you.
Mort: That was a response to Freeman Hunt, not to you. Freeman Hunt made that claim on another Ford-Corker thread.
Huh? What claim? That Ford went to the Playboy Mansion? I never made that claim in any thread. (I wrote that he went to a Playboy party which is true.)
As for the Jesus-loving comment, I find it ham-fisted, but not offensive. The love and fear versus fear only comment was offensive though.
And you are no longer allowed to use the term here.
Sir, the only reason I didn't respond to your questioning is that you are a bully.
With the exception of the gay marriage lie
So we agree there were sleazy lies in Corker's ads. That's all I said.
OK, doesn't Chris Wallace always smirk?
Secondly, I hope that Jr. does love Jesus. While I did not vote for him, he is a wonderful speaker most of the time, and I think he has a good mind.
But I vote on issues, not the stated faith of the candidates. And I like Corker's past choices more than I like Ford's past votes. But Tennessee could do MUCH worse than Ford. Van Hilleary, a Jesus loving conservative Republican is dumb as a stump in my opinion and we almost ended up with him as governor.
Trey
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा