RSS Feed
Obama, Clinton Put on Their Sunday Best
As I get ready for this Sunday’s Compassion Forum, I keep repeating to myself the French maxim: “Les absents ont toujours tort” (Who said that? La Rochefoucauld? When in doubt always say La Rochefoucauld).
The proverb translates as “those who are not present are always wrong” and my guess is that senators Obama and Clinton will discuss at length what they view as the wrongfulness of (the absent) John McCain’s policies, not to mention those of the party that he represents.
This raises the question as to why the Senator from Arizona declined the invitation to participate from the sponsoring group, Faith in Public Life.
One possibility is that he didn’t want to prevent the Democrats from continuing to kick one another’s heads in. The Obama and Clinton campaigns are not only sapping one another’s energy (and money) but graciously identifying weaknesses in one another’s candidates for the GOP to exploit in the fall.
Still, if this was McCain’s rationale I think he was mistaken. For my prediction is that Obama and Clinton will suppress their reflexes and refrain from enfilading one another. Those expecting a repeat of that raucous, zinger-filled Congressional Black Caucus Institute Debate with its parrying, pugilism and perfect ill-will are likely to be disappointed. On the contrary, the senators will be doing the discursive equivalent of wearing their Sunday Best.
After all, the headlines coming out of the event can’t very well be CLINTON JACKS UP OBAMA AT COMPASSION FORUM!: MCCAIN:"I FELT BAD FOR BARACK." or, BARACK SMACKS DOWN HILLARY AT RELIGIOUS COLLEGE DEBATE!: MCCAIN:"I FELT BAD FOR CLINTON>" In short, the candidates will be taking the high road—the road less traveled.
This is not to say that the evening will be dull or lacking substance. I do expect less spectacle, less rancor and less "dialogue" between the belligerents. But given the format--which seems immune to sound-biting and provides us with skilled moderators--we may hear some well-rehearsed monologues and impromptu asides that afford glimpses into what the candidates truly believe about the proper role of religion in American politics.
On their website Faith in Public Life notes that a variety of issues will be addressed such as global AIDS, climate change, poverty and human rights. I would be surprised if abortion and gay rights did not come up as well.
“Men,” as La Rochefoucauld pointed out “give away nothing so liberally as their advice.” So I meekly submit that it would be swell if the candidates shared their views on Church/State separation too. As I have noted elsewhere, this topic has been strategically expunged from Democratic Party rhetoric in 2008. All I can say is that its continuing absence in national debate may be leading more and more to assume that everything about secularism is plain wrong.
For more information about religion and the candidates check out Faith 2008 by the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs
By Jacques Berlinerblau |
April 10, 2008; 11:20 PM ET
Share: Email a Friend | 
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Baseball: Bad Sport, Bad Religion, National Security Threat |
Next: Religion and Politics Can Mix
Posted by: diflucan | August 21, 2008 12:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: fluconazole | August 20, 2008 5:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: yasmin | August 7, 2008 12:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Get zithromax look azithromycin Where can I look for azithromycin buy zithromax online without prescrption?
Posted by: azithrom | July 12, 2008 2:06 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Hi
I Don't Believe!
Simon Cowell is quitting the show?!
Eva Longoria car crash?!
ALL NEWS >>>
Thanks!
Posted by: topforusa | May 28, 2008 6:09 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Please, let me know if this is true! I received this email today:
Subject:Clinton's Pastor Charged in Child Molestation!!
Google it if you don't believe it. Have you heard the media disparage Clinton like they did Obama? NO!!
When the Rev. William Procanick put his hand on the Bible during his sex-abuse trial in Oneida County Court earlier this year, he swore to
tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. But as the former
Clinton pastor was sentenced Friday to three years in prison for
inappropriately touching a 7-year-old girl at his home last March, Judge
Michael L. Dwyer said Procanick sacrificed his honesty the day he testified.
Okay, so now that Clinton's pastor has been convicted of child molestation, will we see the same furor directed at Hillary that Obama
has had to endure these last few days?&a mp;n bsp;
IF A CANDIDATE IS KNOWN BY THE PASTOR THEY KEEP ......
Then you need to email this article to everyone you know. Here the
CLINTON'S Pastor is convicted of child molestation.
So, if Obama bears the guilt for his pastor's comments, then Hillary has to be equally tainted by this guy's crimes
Posted by: T. Lewis | April 17, 2008 1:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I watched the Compassion Forum and noticed Clinton got more religious questions. I feel I know her views, fave Bible stories and how she looks at life and religion. Obama had more general political questions and it seemed more like an infomercial and I still really don't know any of his views on religion or spirituality. Yet, it was uncanny how after every question he vaguely answered, he got a room full of applause.
Posted by: Lauren O'Rourke | April 13, 2008 11:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Michael when better than 80% of the population professes belief in some sort of God it is absurd to believe that politics will ever be wholly divorced from religion.
Posted by: Garyd | April 13, 2008 12:31 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I find it a bit alarming that matters of faith have come to play such a major role in America's supposedly secular political world. McCain panders to the fundamentalist right, Clinton and Obama pander to the center and left of center.
I have attended enough fundamentalist Christian churches to wonder if these "Christians" whom McCain has been pandering to so much have followed their vision of America to its logical conclusion. If they were to succeed in carrying out their agenda we would be a nation with less freedom than North Korea, with neighbors and friends denouncing each other for "Unchristian" activities or statements, spies everywhere looking for reasons to disappear people...Jesus' message turned on its head and Orwell's 1984 would be a reality, though a twisted, hate-filled version of Christianity would be Big Brother.
It's unfortunate that our presidential candidates have to present themselves as the right type of Christian to the voters they're trying to reach, when their positions on the many issues facing our nation and the world are far more important than which church they attend.
Posted by: Michael | April 12, 2008 4:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Garyd:
I thought it was Pete Rose that said, "wanna bet."
Anyhow you're correct about Clinton not dropping out at least for the present. According to MSNBC, Chris Matthews and many others the Clinton plan is to defeat Obama now and if that fails hope McCain wins in November. Why? So Hillary can try again, 2012. That's called planning ahead, something that's seems to be missing economically speaking.
Posted by: BGone | April 12, 2008 11:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Au contraire, Monsieur Jacques, Dems best serve the cause of Church/State separation by NOT playing into the GOP subterfuge that it's a matter of government policy, when, in fact, it's the law. Case closed. Similarly, Dems don't need to mention reproductive rights or gun control, because we have both. To offer views is to be unnecessarily defensive about done deals.
On the other hand, Dems might well speak out against the movement to restrict marriage on the grounds that marriage offers such profound benefits to society and individuals, that it ought not to be discouraged, much less outlawed. Still, changing state laws is not a presidential prerogative. Wiser tactically for them to stick to policy and leave advocacy for a presidential soap box.
Posted by: jhbyer | April 12, 2008 12:46 AM
Report Offensive Comment
In the words of the Great entrepreneur PT Barnum, Wanna bet?
If you think for one moment Hillary Clinton is going to disappear from this without leaving a mark you're dreaming. I'm sure Obama will attempt to do that very thing but Hillary is going to almost certainly unload whatever she has in one last desperatte attempt to wrest victory from the Jaws of defeat.
Posted by: Garyd | April 11, 2008 4:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
We're sorry for the technical difficulties. We think a system glitch is inadvertently blocking some perfectly acceptable comments. We are looking into the problem. We think it may have something to do with whether the comment is posted multiple times. Please be patient when you post a comment. Try to wait 5-10 minutes before posting again. Thank you.
Posted by: On Faith Producers | April 11, 2008 3:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
How is church/state separation a pressing issue? Personally I would like to hear more talk about how we are going to stem the worsening recession, extract our people from Iraq, and find new energy solutions. Whether or not the irrelevant wedge-issue arguments about school prayer and "compassion" continue in the presidential debates are of no concern to me.
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." -Thomas Jefferson
Posted by: Stuart | April 11, 2008 1:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
obama; i am a firm beliver in black liberation theology but the seperation of church and state compell me to check my beliefs at the door of the white house ,cracker.
Posted by: gary | April 11, 2008 1:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I find it disappointing that the candidates are so willing to discuss faith, but don't want to talk about science. There has been a call for a debate on government sponsoring of scientific research, including the space program and stem cell research. None of the candidates have accepted the invitation.
Posted by: Athena | April 11, 2008 1:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
It is morally incorrect to tell a lie. It is politically incorrect to tell the truth. So potential leaders run a tremendous risk talking about religion. Chances of making new friends are remote. Anything you say makes new enemies.
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | April 11, 2008 12:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul
Posted by: Please visit. Business is been real-bad. Tonk asham | April 11, 2008 11:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Frenchie got that right, "those who are not present are always wrong." Brings to mind the one that is missing here, hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul.
That is how we avoid going to hell, (in a hand basket). Maybe the senator from Arizona would like to avoid a bit of hell here and now?
Posted by: BGone | April 11, 2008 11:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
fluconazole results