I've been recording... and avoiding. But now I'm taking a look. [ADDED: Link to news story about the Compassion Forum.] The first question, to Hillary Clinton, is perfect: Why criticize Barack Obama for saying that people turn to religion in hard times? What's wrong with doing that? Hillary says she'll let Obama speak for himself... and then she lambastes him. So much for compassion! The questioner persists: You know "he's a man of faith." This is all very weird. Not only are the candidates put to a test of their own religious faith, but they are being tested on each other's faith!
Does Hillary know whether Obama is a "man of faith"? I don't. I just read his first book, "Dreams From My Father," this weekend, and my sense of it is that he is not a religious man. The only significant discussion of religion comes when he joins Jeremiah Wright's church, and that is all about his worldly, political concerns with his community organizing in Chicago.
Now, Hillary is asked to "share" her experiences with the presence of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit! She says that since she was a child, she's felt the "enveloping" love of God and that, on many occasions, she's felt the Holy Spirit has been with her as she made "a journey." That's 2 down, 1 to go! She's "anchored" in "God's grace" and has "you know, that sense of forgiveness." Yikes, this is excruciating. And speaking of excruciating, when has she felt the presence of Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Savior? She left Him out when answering the question. Is she going to get back to Him, or has she forgotten?
She doesn't get back to Jesus, but she does say she's uncomfortable — she's a reserved person — making assertions about religion. What matters is what you do. She finds a way to shift over to talking about the religious faith that other people have. She plugs in some campaign trail anecdotes — a good rhetorical move, I think.
Why does God allow innocent people to suffer? The classic question. Hillary's answer: "I don't know. I can't wait to ask Him." Which gets a laugh. Then she goes on to say — very well, I think — that "the very existence" of suffering is, for us, "a call to action." "Maybe the Lord is waiting for us to respond to His call."
Her favorite Bible story? Esther! She had the opportunity to make a decision, to take a risk.
A question from a Muslim: Can we address climate change without changing our standard of living? Answer: Compact fluorescent bulbs, blah blah blah. We can do a lot of things that won't really be too hard. Voila: Compassion!
Is God watching this show? Is He fast-forwarding through some of it? I am.
Ah, the Hillary section is over. She did a good job. She hit an appropriate level of humility and piety, and she seemed smart and focused on the things a President should be concerned about. I think — based mainly on reading biographies of her — that she actually is a religious believer.
Now, Obama is introduced, and as he walks down the aisle the crowd acts idolatrous.
The first question for Obama is about that bitter small-towners quote of his. He says he never meant to demean people for clinging to religion. He himself has turned to religion in times of need. People need to understand that "I am a devout Christian." He sounds genuinely angry — and I felt that I could almost hear tears in his voice — when he says he's been working all his adult life through churches. He wants credit for that, and he hates the way politics works, needing to tear things down, seizing hold of one aspect of something he's said and misusing it. To me, he looks ravaged — acne'd?— older. Maybe he's just awfully tired.
Does God punish and reward in real time? He doesn't know but he tries to "move [God's] agenda forward." He's saying "uh" a lot. I noticed that Hillary has completely eradicated the "uh" that had once plagued her speech. There is a really noticeable shift in energy and alertness from Hillary to Obama. "What I think we can do is to uh act in ways that uh that are consonant with uh the values that uh that we cherish."
Asked about the Biblical creation story, Obama says he's one of those Christians who don't take that part of the Bible literally, though he says there's a legitimate debate over whether the universe was created in 6 of our 24-hour days or some other time frame. He's firm that God created the world, but hastens to say that he believes in evolution and thinks religion and science are fully compatible. The more science discovers, he says, the more he is aware of "mysteries" that strengthen his faith.
Now, he's talking about Jeremiah Wright. He's interrupted by audience applause when he says that Wright has been misrepresented by that "greatest hits" video that's been going around. He goes on to say that he finds much of that video "deeply offensive." He emphasizes his church's "community" and "ministries" — it's not just Wright.
He speaks of his experience with Islam when he lived in Indonesia as a child. It's made him familiar the form of Islam that is compatible with the modern world. I think this is the only discussion of Islam in the entire "forum." Neither candidate was pressed to opine about fundamentalist Islam, its connection to terrorism, or anything about Israel.
He makes a commitment to cut poverty in half in the next 10 years.
I've reached the end of the recording. I haven't commented on everything, and I can see that Hillary got the advantage by going first. It was hard to put up with the whole second interview, especially as it frequently lapsed into mundane statements of policy. Obama seems to have handled it well enough, though he did seem a bit bland and tired. Why did he have to go second? He lost a coin toss. Pure chance or divine intervention?
April 13, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
52 comments:
(a) "Why criticize Barack Obama for saying that people turn to religion in hard times?"
As I understand it, the point is not about "turning to" religion. The criticism is based on the idea that Obama equated faith (among other things) with a superficial reaction to economic hardship. The phrase "cling to" is important here.
(b) "...my sense of it is that he is not a religious man."
See point (a).
(a) "Why criticize Barack Obama for saying that people turn to religion in hard times?"
Patrick Hynes: "Sen. Obama’s explanation and pushback are actually worse than his original offense. By refusing to acknowledge that the lumping of Americans of faith together with racists and xenophobes is empirically insulting, he essentially restates his position and digs in: Religion, racism, xenophobia are just “refuges” (his new word) for people who are not as privileged as he. Really repugnant stuff.
Yep, that’s us: Just a bunch of uniformed racists who hate everyone who isn’t just like us and cling to our God and our guns because we didn’t get to go to Princeton or Harvard Law School. They know us so well."
She certainly knows the right words but, really, I find the questions themselves disturbing. And even if she's saying the right phrases, what I *want* someone to say is they won't answer. Like Fred refusing to raise hands. I want someone to take a stand and say that this is not proper that, as Ann points out, anyone can say words and it means nothing. The right words, after all, include that only God can see into our hearts.
Obama may not be a man of faith now, but no doubt he'll be clinging to it in bitterness after November.
I happen to think that religion is an opiate of the masses and all that. But were I a politician, I wouldn't SAY it.
The description sounds just harrowing.
I add here that when Hillary Clinton cried, I found it staged and ridiculous. I couldn't believe people felt sorry for her. Also, I think she has a far better chance in the general election than Obama, so I want her to lose the nomination because I (fellow conservatives, take note), I have already resigned myself to holding my nose and voting for McCain. All of that said, I really do feel sorry for Clinton now. The poor schmuck. What other absurdities await her?
LOL, Joe. Exactly.
People aren't misusing what Obama said. He says that he said what people know is true.
What *else* is true, is that it is impossible to say that there is something wrong with Kansas without saying that there is something WRONG with Kansas.
Or Pennsylvania... as the case may be.
Ann wrote...
"Is God watching this show? Is He fast-forwarding through some of it? I am."
Part of the benefit of omniscience is never having to waste time wondering whether a TV show's going to be crummy. It does ruin Perry Mason, of course.
I only say the last half of Obama. I thought he was pretty smooth answering the questions, but I think he is becoming increasingly cocky and probably will wind up losing in the general electoin because of all his baggage and because his charm will wear off. Over the past several months, I have gone from liking him to being turned off by him.
He is pretty good at talking his way out of stuff like his reverand and his San Francisco comments, but the problem is that he likely will be hammered with them in the general election such that voters will hear the hammering but not get to hear his smooth talking efforts to escape. It is hard to imagine that such a unqualified person with his background could actually be elected president.
He makes a commitment to cut poverty in half in the next 10 years.
I'd love to hear his definition of "poverty."
Hey, let's not blame Obama. His most substantial, direct exposure to religion has been Trinity United, so it's perfectly natural for him to believe that religious belief is motivated by being bitter.
It also is remarkable how Obama gets away with painting Reverand Wright and Trinity Church with a favorable brush - I suppose it is a credit to his political skills and the media's partiality to him.
The first sermon that Obama heard Wright deliver (according to his book) included Wright saying something like "the white man's greeds makes a world of need."
But I think bottom line is that Obama's lack of experiences and his inability to get necessary white democratic votes will cause him to lose, perhaps badly.
I get the feeling that "Rev." Wright's not into the whole "humility" part of Christianity.
For that matter, Obama isn't either.
/via Instapundit
Roger Kimball: "And so it was with Obama’s bitter, small-town, gun-toting, God-fearing, xenophobic, unemployed isolationists. Really, he says now, he meant all that in a Pickwickian sense. What do you think? I think we all know exactly what he meant. He meant that he regarded most Americans as bitter, small-town, gun-toting, God-fearing, xenophobic, unemployed isolationists who needed help. That is bad enough. Even worse, however, is the disgusting pretense that he actually meant something more emollient. Most of us have gotten used to being treated with contempt by politicians. But Obama has upped the ante. It isn’t pleasant. But it is, at any rate, useful to know just how stupid he thinks we are. I for one will not forget it."
kimhill said...
"As I understand it, the ... criticism is based on the idea that Obama equated faith (among other things) with a superficial reaction to economic hardship."
Gee. Where could he have gotten that idea?
Paul Zrimsek said...
"Obama may not be a man of faith now, but no doubt he'll be clinging to it in bitterness after November."
November? Try the convention.
Althouse, I am also reading Dreams from my Father (about 1/2 way through), you should do a post for it....challenge your regular posters to read it and the McCain book. I have actually been surprised at how much about race the book is. I expected something different. Are all black poeple in this country constantly suspicious about the motives of white people? That's the impression I get from Obama's book (at least the first half).
I read McCain's book last month. A very different life and book...
If Obama believed in the good works of Trinity United so much, why did he contribute so little to its efforts?
From the Chicago Tribune:
The Obamas are members of Trinity United Church of Christ. The South Side congregation encourages its members to donate 10 percent of their income, according to a church spokeswoman. The Obamas clearly fell short of that goal, their tax returns indicate.
From 1997 through 2002, the Obamas reported devoting less than 1 percent of their household income to charity. In 2005, as the book-deal money poured in, they reported $1.65 million in combined income, with $77,315, or 4.7 percent, going to charity.
Only a few of the tax returns released by Obama detail the recipients of his charity. In 1998, when the Obamas reported a combined household income of $191,146 and $1,100 in cash donations to charity, the biggest gift went to Trinity. It totaled $400, about 0.2 percent of their combined income.
In 2005 they gave the church $5,000 and in 2006 it received $22,500.
"He makes a commitment to cut poverty in half in the next 10 years."
Can you say Messianic complex?
I thought you could.
Trey
He speaks of his experience with Islam when he lived in Indonesia as a child. It's made him familiar the form of Islam that is compatible with the modern world.
Did he say if it made him familiar with the routine massacre of thousands of ethnic Chinese non-Muslim Indonesians? IIRC, 42,000 were murdered in Kalamantin while he was living there.
Are all black poeple in this country constantly suspicious about the motives of white people? That's the impression I get from Obama's book (at least the first half).
Maybe, maybe not, but if one digs around, I suspect one will find that much of what is in that book does reflect the inner tension and lack of belonging that significant numbers of other bi-racial children have reported feeling.
Jane did some excellent live-blogging snark over at Just One Minute.
Esther was also a king's wife, who exercised considerable power--all for good, of course.
I certainly prefer reading people's reactions to these events than seeing the events themselves. Thanks for taking the hit.
God is irrelevant. Elect Clinton(v) or Obama and THEY will fix every inequity, right every wrong, rescue every victim... Just send lots and lots of your income to Washington, the modern liberal-progressive version of Heaven (from whence all good things will flow once they are in charge).
Hell(oops), if they promise to round up some virgins and throw large subsidies at the milk and honey producers or whatever, they can lock up the Muslim jihadist vote, too. Just saying.
"He's interrupted by audience applause when he says that Wright has been misrepresented by that "greatest hits" video that's been going around."
Wright came out this weekend and cleared up all the misrepresentations by calling Thomas Jefferson a pedophile, among other soon to be new incendiary greatest hits.
He's just a gift that keeps on giving, LOL (to the GOP)! McCain is getting a nice rest and taking copious notes.
I'm not sure what the Compassion Forum is, but it sounds dreadful. Thanks for watching it so I don't have to.
I certainly prefer reading people's reactions to these events than seeing the events themselves.
Pure gold.
Fast-forwarding doesn't help God.
Omniscience has its drawbacks.
You know, I read over 100 posts today, roaming far afield from the usual circuit, and was hard pressed to find posts unrelated to Obama or to Clinton or to both. It's Obama and Clinton ALL THE TIME 24/7, a good 98% and that's no exaggeration. <--contains possible 5% distortion of fact. I could run the curser down an arbitrary blogroll and blindly click, bet $$$ on the outcome being Obama or Clinton related, and win. How did we end up here? As a nation, what has happened to us? No wonder these characters are invading my dreams. By dreams I mean other-consciousness dreams, those mental occurrences one has while asleep and so not completely in control, and not the aspirations kind of dreams. It's sick. They're getting far more attention than either one of them deserves. This should not be happening. Nearly anything is more interesting at this point than penetrating and analyzing the plasticine falseness of these two, make that three, people and their secondary support characters. I'm quite near shutting off the television entirely until way after November and just stay off the internets and away from blogs altogether, and risk missing the lovely artistic photographs and other occasional diversions. I'll make pop-up cards instead and send them to random people, concentrate on gardening, that's what I'll do. I'll read more books. Draw pictures, cook things and photograph the results, create inane but amusing animated .gifs, walk my neighbor's dogs and clean up their poop, struggle through magazines in foreign languages, apply thousands of pronged studs to leather jackets, anything to get away from these two freaks. I'm concerned for my psychological well-being, it's going to be hard to get back to being my disarming light-hearted naturally charming self. I've pretty much given up on the rest of you.
As to the post here, religiously, they're both frauds. I have no doubt there exist spiritual beings somewhere inside both of them but you're unlikely to notice it in the political arena while they're walking around on stage holding microphones to their mouths like they're strangling a phallus. Whatever they have to say about religion or have to do with it would be entirely Machiavellian. It doesn't take 1,000 posts to get at that. I understand a lot of people are really enjoying this dragged out dog fight. I don't.
Damn, got me.
*alters thoughts*
I totally channeled Cathy Millhauser today. That was so cool. I thought, "I'm not even going to solve the NYT puzzle this Sunday unless it's by someone I know I can trust, Like Cathy Millhauser." Then I opened it up and BANG!, there she was. She is so clever, deviously erudite, and demonically misdirective, but I completely get her. I recommend it.
Here's the money quote from the arrogant Barack Obama:
"Everybody just ascribes it to 'white working-class . . . don't want to vote for the black guy,' " Obama said at the fundraiser.
"Here's how it is: In a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long. They feel so betrayed by government that when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by -- it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism"
Quoted from the biggest wet-kiss-on-the-Obama-ass article yet from the Washington Post. Chiropractors everywhere are having multiple orgasms when reading the twists and turns the article's reason-challenged authors employ in an attempt extricate Obama's feet from his mouth while also trying to paint this as bad for both McCain and Hillary.
So Obama's main point is even beyond the premise that Ohio and Pennsylvania voters aren't only bitter and stupid - they're mainly racist! And he says that's because of the Because of the failures of the Clinton and Bush administrations!
Please! Please! Just keep getting the man talking away from the script. Perhaps we can start with him going again with this question:
"Senator, exactly what is the difference in your explanation regarding the embrace of religious faith by the economically deprived and it's explanation by Karl Marx?"
Obama is, of course, the smartest guy in the room. He also fits the psychological profile of someone who views himself primarily as a "victim", which manifests itself through his insufferable arrogance and condescension towards all of the "little people" he is going to help. Inside this man is a very resentful, egocentric, leftist version of Bill Clinton.
His wife Michele fits the same profile.
Barack Obama wants to cut poverty in half? Hillary said something similar a while back.
I did not know we still had poor people in the United States. I thought that poverty was eradicated by that hero of the masses, Lyndon Baines Johnson through his Great Society Programs. I thought that welfare and food stamps eradicated poverty and put people on theroad to great wealth. That is what we were led to believe. Guess we were sold a massive bill of goods; one we are still paying for today.
I wonder if Obama and Clinton are trying to now sell us the Brooklyn Bridge.
God bless you, Althouse!
God bless us, everyone!
Obama has totally screwed this campaign for both Democrats. He is ruining the brand.
I want to see Obama ride a horse. I want to see Clinton at an outdoor shooting range.
And one other thing I want to see. John McCain take the oath of office on 20 Jan 009. With the help of the Democrats I think that can be accomplished.
Hillary was in Backwater Pennsylvania Sunday morning, and after attending church and slapping a couple of snakes around, she spit tobacco juice some ten feet, and said: "Do you know why Chuck Norris is alive? It's because I ran out of bullets, ha ha ha, huck huck huck, cackle cackle cackle."
Nobody laughed, but turned and ran!
I thought that poverty was eradicated by that hero of the masses, Lyndon Baines Johnson through his Great Society Programs.
Almost. After 40 years of effort and a few trillion dollars of taxpayer money, the poverty rate has gone from something like 12.6% to 12.5%.
The only way his Highness can cut the poverty rate in half is if he re-defines poverty as an income below $5,000.
Also, is it just me, or are these demonstrations of Democrat faith only interesting to ultra liberal people who are hoping to see their candidate do a better job of trying to fool red-staters?
TMink said...
"[Obama makes a commitment to cut poverty in half in the next 10 years?] Can you say Messianic complex?"
No kidding. His stump speech rhetorically asks why he chose to run now; why not wait a few years? Because, he answers himself, with all the bad stuff happening in America today, America can't wait. We need answers now, which (to connect the answer to the question) means that he's running because only he can save America!
Esther was a beauty contest winner who married the King to save her people. i.e. no love involved. All political calculation.
That sounds like Hillary all right. Except winning the beauty contest bit.
Chip Ahoy,
Cracked me up.
The Ds can stand disagreement. But constant ridicule?
It is over for the Ds this year. Fork 'em. They are done.
Re: Obama's 'sound-bite' comment.
I picked up a black community newspaper yesterday.
The editorial was by an AME Bishop who writes that "African-Americans articulate and use language differently than whites by juxtaposing words to paint indelible psychological pictures. For example, in the overplayed sound byte, Wright was not cursing American or its people. Rather, he was pointing out historical and modern-day incidents of racial intolerance or violence that were both heinous and damnable."
The editorial page also reprints at tremendous length various quotes from Wright, including the "G*d damn" piece.
It is fascinating: "G*ddamn America—that's in the Bible—for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating its citizens as less than human. God damn America as long as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme. The United States government has failed the vast majority of her citizens of African descent."
It's in the Bible?
The government (since the Civil Rights Act of 1964?) has failed the vast majority of African-Americans?
My jaw is still on the floor.
Sloan - Are all black poeple in this country constantly suspicious about the motives of white people? That's the impression I get from Obama's book (at least the first half).
I noticed a column-filling blurb in my local paper a day or two ago about some remarks on hip-hop music from Alicia Keyes about how "gangsta-rap" is a government plot to kill black people and that the government forments fueds between rappers to supress potential black leaders.
No word if Bush has had her disappeared, yet, though.
Thanks for the overall coverage of the forum. I agree that the American Muslim's question on global warming was pretty off-topic. Further assessment here:
http://www.religionwriter.com/politics/presidential-politics/the-compassion-forum-highlights-and-lowlights/
I get frustrated with the lack of follow through questioning the Media demonstates. When Obama was questioned about whether or not life begins at conception, his response was that he believes the "possibility" of life exists at that point. (Hillary used almost the same wordage). However, I would have liked to have seen Obama questioned about his 2 time vote against the Live Birth Protection Act while he was in the IL state legislature. By voting against that bill, Obama was saying that it is OK with him that if a baby survives a partial birth abortion procedure and comes out still fully alive, the hospital can kill it anyway. Talk about compassion or the lack there of. Frankly, I believe the reality of that voting record is going to be fodder for ads in the general election if he is the nominee. That is a pretty extreme position to take even if you are pro choice.
You know what frustrates me?
Not enough laughter. From the audience.
It was a comedy show. Total comedy. And every one was soooo serious.
Doesn't any one get the joke?
Ann: thanks for taking this bullet for us--sounds like it was terrible. Me? I spent my Sunday watching the Steven Seagal's greatest hits film fest on the tube.
As surely someone must have observed, opium is the opium of the masses. Bitter people take drugs; hopeful people go to church. Also hunting is the world's most expensive way of purchasing tough meat. It is not a pass time of the poor and oppressed. I have a fair number of probably unwarranted suppositions about Ivy League intellectuals. Surely not all of them drink latte and cling to the Democratic party hoping to keep alive their fading dreams of socialism. It is so unfair of all of you to make fun of them.
challenge your regular posters to read it and the McCain book.
Thanks, but I'll pass. Those types of books bore me to tears. I prefer historical biographies -- from pre-1900, or mysteries, or science-y type books. To read a ghost-written "bio" piece from a politician is nails on the chalkboard for me.
Ann, you asked:
"Is God watching this show? Is He fast-forwarding through some of it? I am."
God can probably see the entire show in a single instant. Thus poor old God doesn't get to avoid the junk that you didn't need to see because of its predictability and idiocy.
It must be hard, being God, having to hear all that stuff all the time, knowing that you can't just surf to another channel, because you receive all channels all the time.
Esther is an interesting story to pick. Sure it's got a strong female lead, but her success directly leads to the slaughter of +75,000 Persians. Just saying.
Why will Barack only cut poverty in half? Why won't he eradicate poverty from the face of the earth? It seems kind of heartless of him.
Why not by at least two-thirds?
If it were me, I'd say that I would cut it by exactly six-sevenths.
Jesus never promised to eradicate poverty. He said, "The poor shall always be with us."
But at least Barack will cut it by half so why quibble. That's better than doubling it, or tripling it, or adding to it infinitesimally.
He has talked a lot about reparations. Perhaps that's one way he's going to swing his budget ax into the meaty ogre of poverty.
In Obama's Chicago there are street people, right? I think I saw some real nutty basket cases right in front of the Swissotel pushing grocery carts and muttering stuff about the Pope and nerve gas when I was there for a conference over Christmas. Why hasn't Barack given up part of his ten million dollar yard to give them a tent to sleep in. But Barack is only going to help half of them, or is he going to take the poverty of each poor citizen and cut it EXACTLY in half, so that they are only half as poor, and only half as crazy, to boot?
Poverty makes you crazy, and craziness can also make you poor.
but by what means is he going to make the poor exactly only half as crazy? By what measure is he going to ascertain how crazy they are in the first place?
And one other thing I want to see. John McCain take the oath of office on 20 Jan 009
Can't it be the Blessed Nun Ophie Theabov?
I spent my Sunday watching the Steven Seagal's greatest hits film fest on the tube.
Oh, that's too bad.
Post a Comment