I for one, I'd like to have universal health care. Politicians say it is a step backwards, but guess what?

Go to other countries.Ask them about it. See what they say.

You'd be surprised how full of crap our government is when it comes to universal health care.

I blaim Nixon. He started this crap.

if you want to know about religion , media, politics , and taxes read about the central bank/fed. look at globalism and the central bank. do it look it up . just type globalism and the central bank in a search and you will begin to understand about a lot of things . you had better hurry because the internet will soon be regulated and cost more than we can pay for it.

if all the phoneys in religion were actually healing people of all these infirmities that we see on tv we would be lined up back to where the east meets the west. we would wrap around the world a million times a thousand wide. these phoneys are takeing money and vacations only and giving nothing. what a joke they are and what a joke we are . the media and news is a big joke and it lies to all who use electricity to run a radio or tv. weather it is ac or dc current.

the above is meant to say ' we are the most emotonially unaware people in the world'

the above is meant to say ' we are the most emotonially unaware people in the world'

yes I am tired of the tricks that polititions have used to get elected by the religious . have they, the religious not wised up yet , na and the reason they are as dumb as ever is that they like the title religious conservatives, it sounds religious. and it sounds more religious than other names they could adapt. it makes them less responsible and they do not need to know anything , they can just quoate a few bible verses if they look a few up , it is doubtfull they could remember them, the verses that is . so since they have a book to refer to they can answer anyone just by opening a book. they have a false insight to everything if not used in the right context. they will claim to know anything and everthing and have the answers to any question . they like politics because it is false promises from most , and a religion also to many. neither need any truth to get elected and neither do the relious need to be truthfull because they have an answer , it is a book in their hand. both are blow hards for the most part and most require a big dose of the taxpayers money. the two like each other because like snakes they like to be with their kind for the most part. sorta like birds. religion is a desease for many. the politions take a big dose of it to inoculate themselves against the religious leaders and the layman as well. the religious are satisfied because they feel potent, they will stand on a false honor about our troops . how can we honor the troops when we send them to a dishonorable war. we use the troops to satisfy or satiate the need for a blood sacrifise and a scape goat . as in the old testament. we are a mess for the most part. all of us. that is why the country is going to ruins. that is why we let the drugs go on in this country , that is why the libertys are being taken , that is why churches are not the pillar of truth . all institutions of this society is are infected with false leaders and a dope takeing ,fearfull , distrustfull and distrused bunch of numed out ,religious dupes . we are the least educated , and we are the most emotionaly aware people in the world. we are numbed out and blindly follow the false teachers of righteousness and dump our blessings on a void , impotent political process made so by the central bank/fed. we are nothing less than dumb , blind, naked spiritless paupers at the mercy of the money elite who control all religion , politics and every institution of mankind. includeing all churches , government agencys , schools , welfare , taxes, market , news media, information media. and human worth and value. we are the deadest emotional beings in history . the least engauged mentally , and the least thankfull. we are the least hopefull and the least in need of food ,clothing , and shelter. but we are loseing it.

It seems odd to me to read a supposedly worldly professor Berlinerblau every week and see that he regards people with Christian moral convictions as aliens from mars. Is he not associated with a university where a diversity of opinions is apart of academic discovery? Yet he cannot understand his own countrymen's opposition to humanism.

How strange that he doesn't see tinkering with the institution of marriage with the same seriousness as does the average man?

How strange it is that 6 million abortions since the Iraq war has started is seen as a "wedge" issue?

Ultimately, conservatives are engaged on these issues, furiously debating, writing checks and promoting policy, and engaging the mind, while secularists are refusing to accept the legitimacy of an opposing view. That is why the left is ultimately fading from power.

YOUR AVERAGE VOTER:

I agree. If any single word can sum up what we have it is "Corporatocracy".

Christian for Liberty,
In the simplest terms I can conjure. Keep your faith and practice out of the public realm and we will all get along just fine. I don't even want to know person's faith.

I am only interested in what people do. If it conforms a law of democratic principles - wonderful, if it benefits the public good fairly, - wonderful.

If not, then woe be unto that person.

Chris, We do not have a free market nor do we have capitalism. If we did, there would be no need for government bailouts or handouts. There would be no contracts without bids.

Norrie, Public religions hanging from a rope - now that is a visual. (BTW, thought it was a Judas Tree - Red-Bud - though any tree is fine with me)

Brambleton, Two comments on: "The greatest argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)". It is the opinion:

1) of one person who
2) cannot abide another's right to hold a different opinion.

The quote is clever, but it is also reveals Winston's defensive, self-absorbed nature.

Perhaps that is why you chose that particular quote.

Hero worship can be a dangerous thing.

Perhaps it should be paraphrased thusly:
The greatest argument for democracy would be a five minute conversation with Winston Churchill.

Carry on.

DZ,
thanks.
He sure seems angry based on his picture.

Myself, I am Buddhist and would respect the politician that can speak without using the word faith, religion, god, etc...

Patrick

CHRISTIAN FOR LIBERTY:

I am not an economist either, but I take issue with your analysis of the minimum wage. Although I have a strong libertarian streak and believe that, in the abstract anyway, free markets are best, the question of the minimum wage goes beyond a first-order economic analysis.

Labor is a commodity. In a free market it is subject to supply and demand. If the supply is high relative to the demand, the price drops due to competition for buyers.

Unfortunately, unlike pet rocks, unpurchased labor can't simply sit on the shelf awaiting the next surge in demand or attrition of supply. It's not JUST and economic commodity. Behind every unit of labor is a person with relatively fixed baseline costs, and when the price of labor falls below what is necessary to pay these baseline costs, a situation of DESPERATION ensues. In the immediate term, which is all that matters in dire situations, it is worse to quit the job than to stay in it, perpetuating the desparation. A living minimum wage says that desparation is not an acceptible status quo.

It is true that a minimum wage can increase prices and unemployment, but at least price increases are a shared burden and unemployed people have the freedom to look for work.

I don't know what the best system would be but I do think that the minumum wage is a "values" issue and that free market arguments have a red herring dimension to them. It's a question of human dignity. Desparate people will do desparate things, many of which we recoil from and don't permit in society. There is a limit to how far a human can be objectified before the situation becomes immoral.

JIM CARLSON: You are clearly no economist. When you create a false wage outside of the market, you remove the incentive for employers to keep low or non-skilled employees at all. Would a burger flipper be better off making $10 an hour? Sure, but he will be better off making $6 an hour than nothing, which is what a large percentage of minimum wage workers get when the wage is raised.

Further more, just like taxes, the cost of the non-skilled workers companies have to keep is not assumed by the shareholders, it is pushed into prices. So, the self same people at the margins who either get slightly more money or lose their jobs, now have to pay more for the goods they were working for in the first place! When Wal Mart is forced to pay its stock boys more, they raise prices. That teenage stock boy then likely looses his job if he is a marginal employee or at the very least his family has to pay more for their needs than they did before.

By letting wages seek out their own appropriate levels, we keep costs and wages at equilibrium and employment will be higher, as will access to goods and services. The definition of wealth is not money in your pocket, but rather what the money in your pocket will get you. Wages only relate to the things you need those wages to buy. The majority of low-paid unskilled workers are not heads of households and they are mostly buying 'luxury' goods anyway.

Now, what does this all have to do with this article? A lot.

We could say this until we were blue in the face, and you all still wouldn't hear it, but it bears repeating I guess. Jesus admonished us to give our money to the poor. Not to put crafty and useless price controls on wages, not to feed an obese government bureaucracy. That is why Christians tend to vote against taxes. Not because they did not listen to Jesus.

There are in reality very few Christians who want to otherwise impose any religious beliefs on the rest of America. There are some. They are mostly marginalized. The desire to protect unborn life is not an attack on your rights, it is a support of the lives of those people. We have to as an honest people agree to disagree on the moment life begins, which most of us believe is the moment when sperm meets egg and egg is implanted in the uterus.

Most Christians are simply defending what they see as attacks on their rights to believe and worship how they see fit. For example, a law the Dems are trying to pass right now would make a pastor who teaches that homosexuality is unbiblical (which to most who believe the Word is true is undeniable) could be held liable for a crime someone in his congregation commits against a gay person. Crimes against gay persons, especially violent crime,s are reprehensible and those who undertake them should be punished, just as they would for crimes against any person. Laws against a state of mind are anathema to our Constitution and anyone who loves liberty.

Is it an imposition of my faith on you to say that I reserve the right to believe the Bible is true? I would never support a Christian who wished to use the arm of the government to enforce biblical teaching. But I guess I fail to see how most "Christian politicians" are doing that. On the other hand, many Christians feel as though their right to hold certain beliefs is constantly under attack from the secular left. I support your Constitutional right to hold and express any state of mind you wish, I just want to defend that right for myself as well.

"Democrat contenders"?! You lot deserve the thumpin you'll get in November, as you so richly deserve the contempt you've been shown by the last pinhead you forced on the nation, not to mention the contempt of your more-evolved countrymen. "Democrat contenders"... sheesh

"All want clear answers regarding what each candidate believes is the proper role of religion in public life."

Not me.

I want clear answers regarding what each candidate believes is the proper role of intelligence and good judgment in public life, and how to bring them about.

As for religion in public life, it should follow Judas's example and go out and hang itself from a yew tree.

If The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops adopts voting guidelines similar to the ones produced during the last election, with virtually exclusive importance placed on Pro-Life positions, it seems that the only current presidential front-runner a Catholic could vote for, "in good conscience", is Mitt Romney. I'm predicting relaxed guidelines.

agree with you and Bruce that neither side in SCHIP can claim the high road, but just for facts, the limit in the bill is 60K, which for a family of 4 just ain't going to cover nearly a grand a month for decent coverage, covers kids who are still in college and need coverage for the same reason 10 year olds do, and doesn't take anyone out of private coverage because all the policies are private, they are just subsidized (and the last version of the bill contained provisions minimizing anyone dropping existing coverage). and yes, Bush is an idiot. of course they go to ERs, where they are treated for free by law, but it costs those of us with insurance a fortune to treat kids there for free when a simple office visit to a doc years before would have sufficed. the cost of that free care is what makes Toyotas cheaper than Buicks 'cause it gets passed on. I don't care how kids are covered, but we are all better off if they all are.

I long for a day when a Fred Thompson would never dream of thinking he had to explain that he doesn't attend church when he is in DC and away from home (which is just about always for the past decade or so) but does at home in Tennessee (where he almost never is), as if anyone would buy such a lame excuse when his home in McLean, VA has a church on every block.

Bruce,

Agreed.

Brambleton,

When we look at the political posturing that goes on behind "values" issues (like children's health care), neither side looks very good, frankly. But to stick to my original point: when Mr. Bush (with his trademark smirk) says something to the effect that "ununsured children could always use the emergency rooms," I just have to wonder where in the heck his moral compass was pointing to...

Bruce,

You stated, "George W. Bush has shown us that a person can be full of “faith” and still lack a moral compass (SCHIP and torture are but two examples that speak to me)."

While I'm sure that I would agree with you on a number of Bush policies, attacking his veto on the "democrat" version of the SCHIP bill is completely off the mark. In fact, I would argue that your entire post becomes suspect when you simply parrot feelings and sentiments provided to you by Senora Pelosi. The Democratic SCHIP bill was laughable at best and an end-around on socialist, government sponsored health care at worst.

The greatest argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)

Jim,

Dig deeper into those statistics. Of those earning exactly the minimum wage, how many were parents working part-time while their children were in school? How many were working at jobs they considered to be "non-primary" employment? How many were high school or college students?

Of those earning less than the minimum wage, how many were waiters, etc. that were compensated in the form of tips and gratuities? 98%? 99%?

The fact of the matter is that you are looking at an incredibly small margin of people that rely on the minimum wage for their livelihood. Additionally, almost half the states already had minimum wage laws that were higher than the federal minimum. In all honesty, a case can be made to repeal the federal minimum wage altogether.

Patrick:

Just so you know, Mr. Belinerblau is an atheist.

Remember "separation of church and state?" yeah, that . . . .

Mr. Berlinerblau,
Politicians should not talk religion except in Church.

Perhaps you forgot that little fact of separation of church and state.

Of colurse Politicians not talking religion leaves folks like yourself; Mr. Berlinerblau; out of the political arena, where you should be kept. preach at church and not at work!

Patrick

Thank-you for your thoughts. I look forward to following this meta-debate. As for me, the candidates’ religious affiliations carry about as much information content as their home towns, or their favorite team sports. It might be of some use in getting to know them better from a cultural standpoint, but it would be a dereliction of my duty as a citizen to cast my vote for a candidate based on his or her public professions of religious faith.

I do care deeply, however, about the moral convictions (the “values”) of our leaders. I am cynical enough not to form an opinion based on what they say. George W. Bush has shown us that a person can be full of “faith” and still lack a moral compass (SCHIP and torture are but two examples that speak to me). “Faith without works is dead.” This places a burden on me, as a citizen, to do the research necessary to get behind the words and discover the deeds that will help me discover where the candidates’ values really lie. Then I can make an informed “Values Vote.”

I just hope that our press will help me out, here. Please don’t revert to laziness (i.e. “stenography”), or treat “values” as some kind of a sniggering little game. I do want clear answers, and I would appreciate a little legwork. Show us where the candidates’ values lie, based on their past and present actions.

I'm sick of all the "faith" talk. I just want all the candidates to shut up on the subject. If they are people of faith, let them show me by their actions not just rhetoric. I want Christians to act like Jesus. I want Jews to act like Micah. I don't think any other faith traditions are in the mix.

Hopefully, people are tired of the demagogues with the cross of Jesus in one hand and the other hand in the taxpayers' pockets. Save your religious posturing for Sundays among your own. Fatigue is the right word - we've had enough of the Quayles, Cheneys, Roberstons, Craigs, Haggards and Vitters.

Give us back America. Give Christianity back to Christ.

Comment on: The God Vote , PostGlobal 11-20-07

Ben E. Hill had it exactly right. Virtually all "God Talk" comes forth to get you to follow,
give money, convert you and make you into sheep.
We can see it readily to what purposes it has been used in the current versions of radical, militant Islam:
suicide bombers, intolerance,suppression of half the populance (female), no justice for all, misuse and misquotation of their scripture, the Quoran.
What do we have in the US? The loudest voices are the preachers who got rich out of their congregation's pockets, who meddle in politics, practice self-aggrandizement, and seek the limelight. In extreme form, I label them the American Taliban, who want THEIR beliefs to govern everyone, instead of just them and their followers.
We have religious groups that insist on calling a man-written script [the Bible] to be inerrant, when in fact it has been modified by men in conferences which expelled anyone not joining the majority {Council of Nicae, 325 AD)and many times since. They firmly believe that the earth is only 5500 years old, when in fact it existed for many millions of years.- How is that teaching different from what the Madrassas instill in their students?

Religion and politics mix badly and always lead to extremes or excuses for ignorance and actions
not in conformance with proffered beliefs. It is used to accumulate wealth for the elite by convincing the sheep that this is good.

Well, Jacque, maybe our presidential aspirants are finally getting the word that the average, "normal" American voter could give a hoot about a candidates religion.

I will vote for a candidate who has a solid grasp on the issues, has diplomancy and tact, and will uphold our Constitution, not the bible.

Pat Robertson's endorsement of Gulliani says it all. Defense comes first. Falwell is gone and Mitt might get in.

Who wants that? Not the Baptists, would you want a president who has his own corrected version of your bible? That same bible that is your only justification for breaking away from the pope? Unlikely, it it makes the secularists so much more attractive.

In the 2000 election, the American people supposedly suffered from "Clinton fatigue". Maybe now after eight years of fundamentalism in the White House, we're suffering from "God fatigue"...

RE: The mere 'handful' of Americans helped by a minimum wage boost -

From the Dept. of Labor:
"According to Current Population Survey estimates for 2003, some 72.9 million American workers were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.6 percent of all wage and salary workers.
1) Of those paid by the hour, 545,000 were reported as earning exactly $5.15, the prevailing Federal minimum wage, and another 1.6 million were reported with wages below the minimum.
2) Together, these 2.1 million workers with wages at or below the minimum made up 2.9 percent of all hourly-paid workers.

Although these statistics are from 2003, I doubt much has changed in this group's favor.

I'm no economist, but 2 million seems considerably more than a handful.

RE: The "handful" of Americans helped by an increase in the minimum wage, cited in a previous post.

Per the U.S. Dept. of Labor:
"According to Current Population Survey estimates for 2003, some 72.9 million American workers were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.6 percent of all wage and salary workers.
1. Of those paid by the hour, 545,000 were reported as earning exactly $5.15, the prevailing Federal minimum wage, and another 1.6 million were reported with wages below the minimum.
2. Together, these 2.1 million workers with wages at or below the minimum made up 2.9 percent of all hourly-paid workers."

I'm no economist, but 2 million workers at or below the minimum wage sounds like considerably more than a handful.

God talk was always trash talk.

The only time people talk about God is when they are either trying to convert others, collecting money, or acquiring power.

From the time of Augustine, It has never been sincere.

God talk may be new to you religion-obsessed people, but, unfortunately, the rest of us have had to endure it for quite some time.

The rest of us see it for the joke that it really is.

This just in : The most important bill the democratic controlled congress has passed thus far continues to be the increase to the federal minimum wage. Hoo-rah. The people this bill helped, of which you can count on one hand, are extremely thankful. For the other 250 million americans? Oh well.

RICK,

Check your statistics on gay marriage. The idea that this issue is strictly some sort of Christian-right vendetta is absurd and idiotic. States across the country, a number of which are geographically located outside the Bible belt, overwhelmingly rejected referendums on gay marriage.

LARRY,

Diminishing the issues of abortion and same-sex marriage is laughable. How many blacks will be voting for Obama solely because he is black? How many women will vote for Hillary soley because she's a woman? If you want to talk about nonsensical issues, start with these two.

But your naivety regarding the average american voter is even more astonishing. Finding a voter who has an educated opinion on just two issues, such as abortion and same-sex marriage, is not commonplace. Just listen/watch CSPAN or NPR. Ask the average voter why he or she is voting for a particular individual and you'll get embarrassing brevity or even silence.'

AMBER,

When you refer to "poverty alleviation" are you talking about programs that increase the number of people on welfare? Or that diminish the number of people who pay taxes? Or the programs that provide additional $$$$ to produce more and mroe children to already poverty stricken families?

And by "health care" are you talking about the SCHIP bill the Democrats sponsored that would provide taxpayer funded health care for families making $82,000 a year? Or the same bill that would have transferred 1.9 million children from private medical insurance to government sponsored socialist insurance? Or the same bill again that would define the term "children" to include 20 and 21 year-olds?

Amber Concepcion: SAID.....
The Democrats, on the other hand, are missing a big opportunity to link support for poverty alleviation, health care, and environmental protection to Christian values.""

No they are NOT..
Because the Democrats intent has nothing do with the Dogma of Xian Values. (Your prejudice of other religions and non-believers is loudly received.)

It has to do with something fundamental.

HUMAN VALUE...Humanity.
(notice I did not say Human Values)

Frankly, I get the chills whenever I hear a candidate for the highest office in the land make religious pronouncements.

George Bush's frequent conversations with god over the past 6 years have not -- to put it diplomatically -- yielded sound policy decisions for the country.

Candidates need to cite the Constitution, not the bible.

I think a Washington Post columnist summed it up best for me today -- in this case a reference to Mike Huckabee's overt statements of faith but applicable to all: "We know Mike Huckabee's faith matters to him. We want to know if it will matter to us."

Amber, you make a couple of interesting points. Firstly, yes... absolutely and without doubt, you must equate the willingness of candidates to condone torture and war (because of their fear of appearing weak) with their simultaneous willingness to call on Christian values and culture of life slogans. Candidates need to be called to the mat when their contradictions on the value of life are so insultingly made bare.

Alas, while Wolf Blitzer and CNN try so hard to uncover candidates hidden agenda with regard to underperforming teachers, there is hardly a whisper about the hypocrisy that abounds in some of our mainstream policies.

The second interesting point you make, and which I think is worth mentioning is this concept of needing to link political positions to "Christian values". It is as if the mere "linking" and pandering to these groups is what is needed. Why is it that these voters cannot themselves look at the policies and positions and determine whether they align with their beliefs. I feel as though the focus is now not on what people, or parties do. It is on their willingness to bow.

Have the Republicans really lived up to the expectations they set with the Religious Right? Of course, they did do everything in their power to curb gays from marrying and they have given the perfunctory attention to transferring the abortion decision to states. Terry Schiavo (I'll say no more). But when you look more broadly at the accomplishments of the past 6 1/2 years I also see an awful lot of death, horrible fiscal management and the resulting pain this will cause, a significant amount of scandal and an overuse of religion as a slogan.

To close up, I don't have the unrealistic expectation that our actions as a nation are going to align at all times with religion. Moreover I am looking for a leader who is a good decision maker, who has a conscience and who understands the unfortunate contradictions that sometimes accompany power. What I am tired of are politicians who wear religion on their sleeve when it suits them, religious leaders who ignore their own "values" in exchange for access and power and the increasing number of voters who are simply looking for words from politicians.

I too watched with interest the comments from the faith-based Republican love-fest. I was fascinated by how single-issue focussed some of the people were. Sweet-faced girls chanting the mantra-like response to questions by saying that all that really mattered was how the candidate felt about same-sex marriage and abortion. I was appalled. In an age when secular fears should dominate we have spiritual rubbish spewing out. M. Belinerblau's comment about "grandstanding" was particularly apt. If the so-called religious right is fixated on values, let them also examine the values of health care for all, jobs, peace in the middle east and some political will to end climate change. My only consolation is that most people of faith don't parade it and are genuinely concerned about the realities of life.

I suppose the GOP front-runners might not be sure how to work in the God-talk while they're condoning the use of "harsh interrogation methods" on terror suspects and avoiding talking about their divorces. It's hard to see how playing up the "values" issues is going to help any of them, except perhaps Huckabee, win the GOP nomination.

The Democrats, on the other hand, are missing a big opportunity to link support for poverty alleviation, health care, and environmental protection to Christian values.

I guess that would mean that you're out of the job then, right?

Let's face it - people are starting to re-think what their "values" really are. Do they want a Fundamentalist Christian theocracy? How can one say that "all life is precious" when you're talking about abortion, but fail to recognize that we're killing children (and adults) in Iraq? Did God really punish the entire Gulf Coast for the sins of New Orleans, or was it the negligence of the Federal and State government? How can we continue to bar homosexuals from the military when we can't get enough people to enlist in the first place? If the Rapture does happen (which I doubt),is God going to judge Christians on their stewardship of Planet Earth?

Regardless of how many people answer that they "believe in God" when you ask them that specific question, the majority of the American public has always been secular in their lifestyle and outlook. Religion is something they keep in its own compartment of their private life and trotting it out into public space in an in-your-face way is seen as rude, awkward, and a violation of the rules of public behavior. It's not that the media is failing to cover your professional obsession, it's that the large public has seen enough, has decided that the Bush Evangelicals are not their kind of Christians, and have decided they really don't want religion in their face or in their politics 24-7. We all want to return to the Jeffersonian secular public space, away from public displays of religion by people who can't seem to bear their faith without bigotry. Candidates will make a very big mistake to keep pushing religion in public when the public is fatigued with the whole obsession...