It won't work though. I've spent a lot of time lately around evangelicals. There are a ton in the army.

Even the moderate ones (ie; that care about the environment, want to stop putting so much emphasis on abortion etc) are not going to support Obama. In fact, I think this will have a blow back effect.

Evangelicals aren't just religious, they tend to also be very patriotic. He can NEVER explain away Rev Wright. Further, they are very attached to their local cultures. By this I mean, Southerners, Midwesterners, etc. He obliterated an chance of connecting with his guns and bitter remarks. If he thinks these people are going to vote for him simply because they go to church he is further insulting them. They pay taxes too. They have to pay for college for their kids. They know people with serious illnesses or they are sick themselves.

Pretty much 100% of the evangelicals I know will vote for McCain. I grant you, a lot of these people are attached to the army in some way and McCain is a natural tie but cultural and economic issues will trump religion for most of them.

people were outraged

an O! supporter that posts at Clark's blog sez they're going all out in KY. Money, ads, volunteers, offices, brochures, surrogates galore, etc. Said they were barely even asked to phone bank in WV, knew they'd lose, and set up the scenario so that as soon as it was over, they changed the narrative w/ JE's endorsement.

So they sacrificed WV knowing the would bring out Edwards and go full force in KY for a come back?  Do they think they are going to improve on their projected loss of 14 or are they trying to say they made a come back from 30 pts?

That is what he's going to do, right?

I am not convinced that's what he'll do at all. His
position vis a vis Roberts was not principled but
political and calculating. His heart was with Roberts but refrain b/c he wanted to run.

1. Ran as a uniter
   
2. Didn't have concrete positions
   
3. Slandered rivals, but never personally
   
4. Virtually no experience

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/14/obama-featured-with-farrakhan-many-times-on-trinitys-trumpet -magazine-cover/

He was featured with Farrakhan on Wright's magazine cover several times.  How could he not know?  Is Farrakhan the kind of fellow Wright taught him was a fellow Christian of their ilk?

Here's more, from another site on the same theme:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/05/obama-farrakhan-shared-cover-of-wrights.html

It's all over the web.

I do not want and &%#%@ politician of any type running pictures of themselves *in the pulpit and appropriating messages about personal growth/change for the own political agenda.

If he thinks he has the nomination in the bag, why on Earth would he do this?

He can't win Kentucky in the general, can he? Is he trying to do that?

When I used to go to church, I taught Sunday School,  gave children's sermons, served on the Stewardship Committee and the Pastoral Search Committee.

So what did this committed Christian actually do - other than soak up Rev. Wright's wrong messages?

Is this some new kind of doing politics where Democrats increasingly become like Republicans.

Democrats were supposed to be the practical people who talked about issues like jobs, healthcare, economy, state of the nation etc. It was the Republicans who used to talk about "family values, "church values" patriotic values" etc over everything else.

Yet here we have the supposedly nextgen Democrats led by Obama who are more comfortable with their  virtuosness rather than common man issues. Michelle O constantly derides the clintons as lacking "family values". Obama supporters (especially females) can't seem to forgive Hillary for staying with her husband after his affairs. When Obama supporters talk about clinton baggage they usually refer to Bill's affairs. And then Obama's constant talk about God and his flyers which are disturbingly overtly religious.

Read the rest

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/

Barack Obama just got a new makeover. His campaign has finally realized that some of the things about him they thought they could explain away are actually issues that ordinary Americans take offense with. Most recently Obama has been seen wearing a flag pin on his lapel. And all the time we thought that he meant what he said about not needing to prove his patriotism. But ever since Hamas endorsed him the flag has been Barry's best friend.

And just yesterday it was revealed that the leader of The New Black Panther Party, Malik Shabbaz has endorsed Obama. Shabbaz said a few interesting things. Apparently the Nation of Islam believes that Obama is the chosen one spoken about in their theology. They believe he is the black man that will rule the world and restore Africa and black people to their rightful place as rulers over everyone else. And if that isn't troubling enough, Shabbaz made it clear that his mentor Farrakhan has not only endorsed Obama, he is backing and supports him ""from a safe distance".

Then we have this thing.

Then we've got this kind of stuff from his old campaign speeches, which I know was meant jokingly, but really, it's kind of telling that he'd even say something like this:

"My job here today is to be so persuasive that a light bulb will go on over your head and a beam of light will shine down on you," Obama said. "You will have an epiphany that you will have to vote for Barack."
http://www.iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1781

I'm really not okay with this kind of thing.  I'm looking for a president, not a savior.

What a failed, miserable, pandering tool.

I was at an Alicia Keys concert and I just got home.  I missed all the excitement on the JE endorsement.  To all my TL friends who know me by my posts,  two words on his endorsement:

So. What.

"called to serve?"

Is he being drafted by God like those Vietnam War soldiers who "simply answered their country's call"?

::::rolls eyes::::::

This is unacceptable to me. I didn't like it when Huckabee did it and I don't like it now. It made think of a song by Dar Williams, The Christians and the Pagans:

The Christians and the Pagans.

"the philosophical boundaries between the church and the campaign, and the very real Internal Revenue Service restrictions"

To me it brings up all negatives. The obamamessiah factor,Trinity's problem with the IRS, the black jesus, Wright's humping, the dem's normal separation of religion, his clinging to religion remark.

What's he going to tell these evangelicals if he is elected and appoints a Supreme Court Justice likely to uphold Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choice? That is what he's going to do, right?

Obama is going to do what he's done his entire career - whatever is politically beneficial to Obama.  I don't trust him one bit on Roe, especially after he gushed over John Roberts and was only held back because someone told him it would stand in the way of his political ambitions.  And of course marijuana should be legalized (after all, alcohol is) but its proponents must be smoking awfully good if they think Obama is going to stick his neck out over that.  It wouldn't be politically expedient.

As for the overtly religious Obama ad, as a religious person myself, I find it offensive.  Few humans on earth are eligible to be painted as angelic, which is what that ad does.  Even if you know only one fact where he showed his true colors, it would be enough for that ad to scream hypocrisy.  It looks like someone in his campaign copied some of the parody graphics on http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/.

And it is yet another thing for the "creative class" to hold their noses on - don't they usually slam mixing with religion with politics?    

Matthew 6:5-6
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

I've been making myself listen to right-wing radio the last few days to remind myself how wrong Republicans, and McCain, are, so that I can support Obama and try to help other Clinton supporters rally behind him.  It helped a lot.  I even called the Bill Press show yesterday on Air America to add my two cents to making this case (but didn't get on).

And then, just now, I see Obama's "COMMITTED CHRISTIAN," "POWER OF PRAYER," "CALLED BY CHRIST," flier with a crucifix lit up like Las Vegas behind him.  I was not aware he'd used this flier in South Carolina, as he's doing now in Kentucky.  

I have dedicated decades of my private and professional life to three causes: the environment, science education, and church-state separation.

I deeply believe that religious strife and violence, with the corollary and neverending war on science, the environment, and critical thinking, are responsible for most human suffering in the world.  

This flier crystallizes everything I oppose.  I can no more in good conscience support this man than a Quaker could fire a cannon.  This man stands against my deepest convictions.  I am in tears.  For the first time in my life, I will not be able to vote for the Democratic candidate for President.  He is remaking us in the image of Republicans and it will ruin us.  

Meanwhile, McCain is again making the appearance of swinging left with his endorsement of climate change science.  He steadfastly refused to join Huckabee and Romney's religious pandering and has stayed nearly mum on religion.  It `s certainly not enough to make me support the man.  But having studied ethics, it seems to me that to allow a McCain victory through not voting is a less unethical act than to actively support the destruction of future Democratic pushback by voting for Obama.  I fear we'll lose far greater long-term leverage to limit war, poverty, attacks on the environment and personal freedom, by destroying liberalism in America.  

I had already believed that to support Obama was to support a societal turn toward misogyny and an undemocratic press, because it was these two things that made the weaker candidate victorious.  Yet I was going to do it anyway as the lesser of evils.

In my perfect world, a politician's faith would be a personal thing, but clearly we're not in a perfect world. As long as Obama (or anyone else) doesn't use faith as an excuse to do things that he would otherwise find objectionable, then I guess I'm okay with it. Has he done that? I don't know--I know he's based his opposition to gay marriage on his faith, which is a little disappointing. But he's a long way away from Bush, Huckabee, and the GOP.

??

What's he going to tell these evangelicals if he is elected and appoints a Supreme Court Justice likely to uphold Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choice? That is what he's going to do, right?

For one, the separation of church and state in America has preserved not only our democracy but also the robustness of our religious practice. After all, during our founding, it was not the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of this separation; it was the persecuted religious minorities concerned that any state-sponsored religion might hinder their ability to practice their faith.

This separation is critical to our form of government because in the end, democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. If I am opposed to abortion for religious reasons but seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

This might be difficult for those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, but in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics involves compromise, the art of the possible. But religion does not allow for compromise. To base one's life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime; to base our policymaking on them would be dangerous.

EnVision: the Gospel, Politics, and the Future

An Evangelical Manifesto