Burris, Palin and God's Politics

Again, Sarah Palin thinks it's all about HER. She wasn't "bashed", if that's what she's thinking. NOBODY thinks that the Iraq war is "a task that is from God", except her. I'm glad she and McCain did not win; we do NOT need someone who is as geographically-challenged as she is anywhere near the White House unless they're on a paid group tour.

"Is there a double standard?"

Of course there is. If Republican leaders of a group of 99 white people refused to allow a black man to join (who cares why), then told him he could sit in the balcony, but only if he used the side door - umm... what do you think the Press's reaction would have been?

Rmember all the screaming about Republicans being so "tone-deaf" to racial concerns that they did things that weren't racist, but could be construed as racist (if the construer didn't have all the facts), so they were too racially insensitive to run a country, enven though they weren't racist?

If the Republicans had held up a lawful and legal appointment because they were looking to the future electoral chances of their party, the press would have been screaming about hyper-partisanship, etc.

Of course there is a double standard. So what?

And why do people still talk about Sarah Palin?

Most rationally-thinking people regard Burris' comments about divine intervention as off-base as those of Bush or Palin. Less is said about them mainly because his role in Washington politics (as a junior Senator-to-be) is less significant than that of a President or potential VP. In addition, there were more important concerns regarding Burris becoming a senator than his religious views.

Any time a politician with significant authority proclaims that he or she is doing the Lord's work, it is reason for constituents to be alarmed. If you believe that God is on your side, then you believe yourself to be infallible, because every decision you make is "God's will". We need to keep religion out of politics lest we become less of a democracy and more of a theocracy.

For the love of God, can we not stop this childish partisan finger pointing? Of course Burris was wrong, you Mr.Waters called him on it soon enough.
The poor man didn't even come close to what Sarah Palin said about the Iraq war being a task from God. That is outrageous.
What Burris said, and the quote doesn't even indicate it, was that he believed God ordained that he may take his seat. Which was presumptuous.

And most certainly, nothing is more annoying in a politician than the capacity to believe that God has endorsed his/hers warped views, including that view that they are "instruments" of God's will.
As well, the fact that Burris the Democrat said something stupid does not make what Palin the Republican said any less outrageous. Frankly, there should be no place for either in politics.
But then, just take a good look at the others and how they take His name in vain.

Paraphrasing Samuel Johnson, "Religion is the last refuge of a scoundral."

The operative question is: Who cares??

Claiming God is behind a war versus behind your appointment is very different. Palin also magnified her gaffe by making other incredibly stupid statements. Burris so far has not said anything like a dropout daughter is not a dropout, being next to russia is foreign policy experience, the vice president's job is to lead the senate, or any number of other stupid statements.

But his statement is along the line of Palin asking her church congregation to pray for a pipeline. But that was one of the least of her controversial statements. Maybe this is why we have heard little about Burris' statement, since it only arises to about 5% of the stupidity Palin showed.

I've heard Palin say those words and only idiots make wrong interpretations of it. They are taking it out of context. She's praying that what we're doing in Iraq happen to be RIGHTEOUS or "task that is from God".

Is it righteous that we pour lots of money to our enemies and protect them from extremists. Of course yes but idiots has no ability to comprehend.

Doomsday is coming because too many people lack that kind of comprehension.

IDIOTS.

Of course there is a double standard. Liberals would be all over Palin if she made that claim. In the end, liberals are probably even more self- righteous that conservatives. I don't believe in god or Obama. For liberals, there appears to be little distinction between the two.

Mr Burris is a crud who got off trying to execute an innocent man. It would figure he thought he was appointed by god.

I'll never forget during the presidential campaign in 2000, Geoge Bush was at a ralley. After the event, he greated people out in the audience. One lady came up to him, looked him in the eye and say, roughly, "God has sent you here to guide us. Please become our president."
Bush looked at the lady, didn't say a word, but bowed his head in agreement and smiled.
Of course, there's been dozens of examples since of Bush stating flat out that he has god at his side, that he doesn't do anything without having a bull session with the Top Critter, etc.
So why are we surprized by Burris' comment?
This is a secular nation, or so says the Constitution. Yet, it is a Christian nation in the eyes of the majority of citizens (don't take my word for it, Google it).
No wonder fanatics like Bush and Burris feel safe in muttering such nonsense; they've got support from the majority of Christians.
I'm waiting for the day that Allah gets really pissed at all of this rheotoric and challanges the Christian god to a duel,
And I'd imagine that a Christian would be the first to offer tickets to the event on EBay.

Because Burris is another member of the Immoral Majority!!!!

There is nothing wrong with what he said because God HAS ordained ALL things that come to pass. No one can deny what the Lord has ordained. Its only those who dont have eyes to see who have a problem with a statement like that. This country is filled with people who hate God, but thats not surprising because its mans natural state and unless God regenerates a persons heart and grants them repentance they will continue to be God haters and enemies of Him who ordains all things.

Here's a sill statement: "I'll never forget during the presidential campaign in 2000, Geoge Bush was at a ralley. After the event, he greated people out in the audience. One lady came up to him, looked him in the eye and say, roughly, "God has sent you here to guide us. Please become our president."
Bush looked at the lady, didn't say a word, but bowed his head in agreement and smiled."
===========================================

Dude, if a crazy-lady came up to me and told me that anything at all was God's will, I would smile and nod too... then walk quickly away and not make eye contact. Jeepers.

You just want to badly to dislike GWB that you have to make stuff up about what you want to believe he must be thinking in order to fit the guy into your own personal biases and prejudices. Why don't you just take exception to the things GWB says and does - not the stuff you IMAGINE that he's thinking.

The guy almost certainly waasn't thinking "Yes, someone sees the Truth, for I am indeed ordained by God to rule over the unrighteaous mob," he was probably thinking "Oops, craaaaaazy-lady, smile and nod, George, smile and nod."

I think that Blagojevich appointed Burris because people would be afraid of saying anything about a Black person. If he were Caucasian, there would be comments about his God remarks. His attitude is remarkably like Sarah Palin's. Both were suddenly chosen, based on "gotcha" opportunity and not because they would be the best person for the job. Neither "blinked" when asked, but just greedily grabbed the chance. They, then pretended that they were carefully and wisely chosen because they were the best for the job. If Burris was not Black; he would be mocked for his comments, just as Palin was.

I think Bush clearly believed he was appointed by god. Judging by the results, appointed by Allah would seem to be a better option. Early indications show Obama may have been as well.

Allah which is God in arabic (for you xenophobes who hate other languages- beware of cursing God who name is Allah) did NOT sanction Burris.
There is a difference between God's Will and God's Sanction or Command. God's Will is the difference between a thing existing or not. For example, if a man dreams of having a wonderful wife but dies without one, it was God's Will that he not have a wife eventhough he dreamed of one.
God's Command is: Thou Shalt Not Kill. He forbids murder. If that same man was murdered by someone, it was God's Will that he was murdered eventhough it occurred in violation of His Command. God's Sanction and Command is through Revelation.

God did not Sanction or Command Burris to be senator. Burris' lust for power, or ambition, or ego, or whichever pushed him to do so. Showing from his mausoleum, he has a big ego and pride and ambition.

The problem is in some Christian denominations, God's Will is invoked as sanctioning. A deceitful preacher can confuse his parishioners and combine the two as one so that anything can appear to be God's sanctioning of this or that, such as the preacher driving an expensive cadillac and wear $3000 suits because since he's wearing it in front of them, God Sanctioned it. The office of US Senator is a highly secular, materialistic, powerful office. Burris' misled people by his preaching.

Such intentional misguidance is an evil of which God condemns. Such faux piety is laced with hypocricy and deceit. Folks should watch carefully how he functions in the Senate.

zzim:

Dude, I see you neglected to address the many times that Bush himself said that he consulted with god in every important decision he made. Why don't you address THAT, or don't you believe that to be the case?
Remember now, there's Google out there that can, in an instant, bring up quotes by the right hand man of god.
Referring to the tape I witnessed back in 2000. This definitely wasn't a case of Bush wanting to get away from a crazy lady. He stood there, took it all in and looked as if he should be getting even more praise.
Does it stand to reason that a religious fanatic such as Bush--a man/child who sees his presidency ordained by god--would picture this lady as crazy?
I think not.

Let's not be deliberately obtuse. There is no double standard. When your party's platform actively espouses anti-science and a return to the dark ages, your appeals to your god will be more closely examined than similar appeals made by someone whose political party is less tied to superstitious nonsense. If conservatives find that to be to their disadvantage, they need to begin to unwed themselves from the fundamentalists in their midst. No one will take a Republican who appeals to god seriously until they lose the creationists, global warming deniers, "family values" hypocrites, and "traditional marriage" bigots.

God is this...God is that...God is blah blah blah.

Whether Dem or Repub, you're exposed as a loser the minute you attempt to have HIM on your side. Or is it HER?

Anyone that claims any kind of devine endorsment for public office should be automaticly barred from running for office. The last thing we the people need in office is someone that looks for advice from some invisible, imaginary person that lives in the sky. Better the tooth fairy, at least he, she or it leaves us some cash. No, the last person I want in charge is someone that was gullible enough to have been taken in by the biggest scam in the history of man. That is to say religion. The biggest can of BS that was ever sold to human beings.

Yes, there is a double standard. And it continues with the way the press treats Ms. Caroline Kennedy in her quest to become the junior Senator from New York.

he didn't get the "treatment" because everybody knows it was just crap he was saying to fuss with everybody. Typical politician-speak, only the fanatics believe it or think he believes it.

Hey, it was a 'white lie' now, wasn't it?

Palin .. now Palin and the True Believers who lust after her (so to speak) .... they actually believe it. It's difficult to see whether she actually believes it or not herself, but it's true that the republican wingnuts require this kind of assertion or they won't pay any attention.

No double standard in opinion from me. That quote is horrid and anyone with such a personality disorder to believe that god has anointed them to take office should be hauled off to the loony bin ASAP. The guy appears to be clean, but with a major ego problem despite never winning a high level election. He's built his own mausoleum with "accomplishments" engraved on it. What else can you say?

We've seen what type of leadership these narcissists bring.....

*sigh*
Another crazy person.
Do you have an endless supply of people with outlandish notions about religion and their own divine importance? (That is - they are strictly serving and obeying, of course.)

How many times should I suppose to post this for atheist idiots to understand it.

Intelligence can produce (dumb and smart) objects but NO dumb object/s can produce intelligence.

In other words, if we try to rewind creation and and look for the beginning of things, we would end up finding INTELLIGENCE as the MAIN SOURCE of creation.

The SOURCE means NOTHING can come before it. The SOURCE means NOTHING can come before it. The SOURCE means NOTHING can come before it.

Despite this scientific fact, they continue to be atheist coz they lack the ability to comprehend.

Their idiotic evolution science is SO BLIND that it cannot see any minute inteligence present in nature.

IDIOTS.

BevJims -

Except that state governors of Alaska, including Palin, do meet with high ranking Russian government officials in their professional capacity as governor. That includes officials as significant as the Russian ambassador to the United States, whom Palin just had a sit-down meeting with. Most state governors, particularly border governors, do meet with foreign officials all the time as part of their jobs.

ScotsGuards

"Not a peep about Burris." Had I not read your special interest article, I'd STILL be ignorant of Burris' statement.

The premise is silly. Burris has been ridiculed openly from the left and right on this very matter. One of the first things I read on this subject was a wag noting that Burris was chosen not by a god but by ROD for this office. But I would also add that Burris is not on record (as Palin is) with a claim that America has a divine mission Iraq, mixing the invocation with dubious history (implying Iraq attacked us on 9-11). The press may have a slightly higher tolerance for garden variety religiosity ("God wants me to do this") than for religion used to justify a military policy, especially if prayer seems used as a licence to ignore history.

johann_cat, let's bring back Saddam and his henchmen to power. It would be exciting to see what would Saddam do in the current world events.

The difference between the two is that Burris said what you quoted, and Palin didn't.

Palin said “Pray for our military. He [Palin's son] is going to be deployed in September to Iraq – pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right for this country – that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God, that’s what he have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan and that it is God’s plan.”

You, Mr. Walters, and Charlie Gibson (sorry to insult you but you picked the company, heard her say that the war was a task from God. She said she didn't know if it was, that no one knows. It was our government's plan, she said, and she asked her audience to pray it might be God's, or that God might guide those who pray to discern his will.

Burris, on the other hand, gets his orders directly from above.

Sorry Spidermean2, you're wrong.

You're confusing Intelligence with Complexity.

Complexity can arise from simpler (dumb) components.

Life, complex and intelligent evolved from earlier and simpler components.

Intellegence isn't the main source of creation, complexity is. Complexity + stable source of energy + time (billions of years, not 6600 or so years) = life. Life + time + evolution = Intelligent Life as a subset of all life.

Humans are not the apex of living creatures, but one part of the wave of constantly evolving life progressing on the earth. Hopefully once we shed the tyrrany of fears of the unknown and death (as shackled to us in the Bible, Koran , Torah) we can continue to evolve.

spidermean2 wrote: "johann_cat, let's bring back Saddam and his henchmen to power. It would be exciting to see what would Saddam do in the current world events."

If it would bring back 4000+ of America's finest, it might be worth it considering the non-threat Saddam was.

Intelligence can produce (dumb and smart) objects but NO dumb object/s can produce intelligence.

Your mother proved that idiot!

Why does Palin and Bush get bashed when they talk about God? Four words: They are not Democrats.

Bevjims wrote "considering the non-threat Saddam was."

Here we go again, spreading stupidity. Have you heard a country named Kuwait? Israel? Iran? Kurds? If not for America, I think Saudi would be in trouble too.

Sadam, a non-threat? Are you out of your mind?

obrier2, God said that "all souls are mine". God is the maker of us all, idiot.

Toryer wrote "we can continue to evolve."

YUP, evolve into monkeys. Do you consider any cell simple? You're crazy if you do. Even a simple virus is not simple. HIV. Does it sound familiar? It's too simple that no doctors can beat it despite their "more complex" brains.

c ya later

spidermean2 wrote: "How many times should I suppose to post this for atheist idiots to understand it."

Forever and ever it seems. Ever wonder whether you are already in hell spidey?

spidermean2 wrote: "Their idiotic evolution science is SO BLIND that it cannot see any minute inteligence present in nature."

Sort of like you being unable to see fossils for what they are. Like your inability to appreciate the fact that DNA cannot be recovered from dinosaur fossils but can from human ancestor fossils quite readily. Religion not only puts on blinders to reality, it paints a picture of a different reality. Most people who are religious still can see what is real. Others would rather live in the false reality you seem to have chosen, where no amount of truth can change your view of the false reality.

Lets start with a little reality. In western MD a highway (I68) was cut into a mountain revealing curved layers of rock. Its called Sideling Hill. This web page describes how that formation was created: http://www.nvcc.edu/home/cbentley/gol_135/sideling_hill/readings.htm
but since it involves millions of years and contains marine fossils I'm sure your false reality has a different explanation for how it formed. The website discusses scientific evidence and observations just as those who describe the Big Bang use scientific evidence and observation to describe the beginnings of the universe. But your false reality, while allowing the Big Bang since it is similar to the biblical creation story, does not allow a 360 million year old earth with marine fossils buried in mountains with curved layers which were once on a flat sea floor. How can you accept one science completely while rejecting another completely when both use the scientific method?

"Double standard for Republicans and Democrats?"

Not at all. It's the Senate Democrats who have been refusing to seat Burris. He's being forced on them; they don't want him. They haven't wanted him from the beginning. He's known to be a loud-mouthed, self-aggrandizing spotlight-seeker with a "God's warrior" complex.

As to those of you babbling on about racism: You really can't get away with playing that card anymore. If Democrats -- and a good many Republicans -- were willing and eager to put a black candidate in the White House, they can hardly be resisting Burris's appointment because of his race.

spidermean2 wrote: "Sadam, a non-threat? Are you out of your mind?"

With the advantage of 20/20 hindsight, can you tell us the real threat Saddam posed in 2003?

hyjanks :
Referring to the tape I witnessed back in 2000. This definitely wasn't a case of Bush wanting to get away from a crazy lady. He stood there, took it all in and looked as if he should be getting even more praise.
========================================
Yes, that's exactly how you handle crazy people, you smile and nod, give the general appearence that, yeah, you are personally convinced that the Trilateral Council wil be arriving shortly in their black helicopters to save social security and lead the Washington Redskins to a Super Bowl victory or whatever craziness they are spouting.

You just so-o-o-o want to believe that Bush is crazy too that you imagine he must be thinking that exact same thing that the crazy person is spouting. I wasn't saying that the incident you described didn't happen, I was just saying that your interpretation of it was silly.

I don't think you can claim a double standard -- yet.

Burris wasn't running for election, and therefore couldn't be vetted by voters. He was appointed.

I am a Democrat, and am disgusted when any politician claims divine endorsement, be it Burris, Palin, Bush, or Lincoln. Wait until you've done the job well before you say God is on your side; if you're running for a position or are recently appointed, you should be praying for God's support, not praising his favoritism.

Double standard? I don't think so.

Peep #1 Did you see the Jon Stewart show about Burris' claim that god has endorsed him?

Yes, there's a double standard: your man in the White House has claimed that he heard some voices in his head telling him he was ordained to invade Iraq, and as far as I know, your assertions about "the press" aside, you personally didn't mention a damn thing about it, and give it only passing reference here to create this illusion of disproportionality.

His main man General Peter Pace claimed that Bush's hands were guided by God hisself. And you still said nothing. You claim "the press" was in furor -- but you evidently were not part of that furor.

NOTHING as hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were killed and maimed -- women and children crushed and burned to death and shot, all in the 21st century version of the Crusades.

But now --- now your sensibilities have been irritated. You are now motivated to use your bully pulpit (as it were) and expend your credibility. But instead of critiquing the atrocities emanating from a White House needing medication, you choose instead to defend the indefensible: the vapid, power-abusing, abjectly uninformed, mojo-bag-rubbing witch-exorcism recipient from the methamphetamine capital of the Arctic.

If I'm wrong, and if you exposed this Bush murderous psychotic hallucination as a precursor to untold death and destruction, one that cost us so much in blood and treasure, I'd be interested to see it.

Short of that, your instead choosing to defend the indefensible with the irrelevant proves that you're just another partisan hack hiding behind religion.

Double standard, indeed. If you right wingers would act like Christ told you to act, the world would be a better place.

Burris is a self-important pompus jacka$$! If he want to claim divine intervention for the sake of his own ego stroking it is far from surprising from a guy who owns his own mausoleum engraved with his "accomplishments".

Burris' claim that God has ordained him for Senate office draws little attention because (1) it is lost in the static over the Blog's corruption charges, and (2) Burris is not seeking to put his concept of God's will into law, unlike Palin and other Republicans. Burris is not Palin; it's a different situation.

That Burris thinks that God has ordained him for public office calls his sanity and ego into question, but that is separate issue. I hope voters will take note.

If Obama or Biden were to plead for the Almighty's intervention, all hell would break lose amongst liberals, independents, atheiests and agnostics!. Believe me, I would raise McCain!. I am an independent, atheist who voted for Obama.
Nobody cares about what lower grade politicians have to say about god. Let the states, counties and cities worry about that.

Mr. Waters,

Do you believe all things are truly equal or are you just trying to "stir the pot" of social division to attract a few more readers to drink yesterday's political kool-aid?

The reason Burris' reference to God isn't equal to Palin's is because he is only aspiring to be a stand-in Senator for a short time until another one is elected for the full term; he's not trying to be President of The United States (and don't tell me she doesn't have her eyes on The Oval Office!) McCain's got one foot in the grave already and I don't believe for a second, and I'll lay odds that a majority of Americans would agree, that an "innocent little shove" to help maintain the Conservative status quo would not be beyond Ms. Palin or her rabid supporters.

Another reason Palin gets skewered and Burris doesn't is because he's not using God to justify doing something evil, like illegaly starting a money war with one Islamic nation while playing kissy-face with another. He hasn't claimed that God guided him to put forth policies which harmed the environment, or took away jobs which left formerly productive proud American people homeless and destitute, or denied basic health care to American children. Mr. Burris does not have a Congress full of blindly faithful followers who will vote his every cock-eyed idea into reality while he spends most of his time not actually leading but vacationing on his ranch... excuse me, listing his accomplishments on his mausoleum.

Maybe The Good Lord wants an African American Senator in the Senate now or maybe not. If being a fill-in is all Burris is claiming, then that comes way, way, way short of standing in front of a congregation -- and a rolling camera -- while witches are exorcised and "be gone-d" in the name of God!

You are writing in a prestigious media venue, Mr. Waters, not emulating FOX News. Please make sure your editors and publisher understand this before you put your name to this kind of shameless rabble-rousing again!

He black and a Democrat. Hence there is no outcry.

Burris is not only a Democrat, but he is black. Anything he says is OK and if you disagree you are a racist. That's why nothing has been said about his comments. On the hand not only is Sarah Palin a Republican, she is white, and even from a working class background, so it's OK to bash her

There is a world of difference between a Jr Senator, and a sitting President, and a potential Vice President.

Jr Senator has a very small constiuency compared to Pres and VP. He may represent those that feel this type of thing is true, where Pres and VP represent 300+ million people, many of which don't believe in god, for example.

Of course, it's hypocrisy. Do you think for a moment that if this were a corrupt GOP governor and his stooge, that the liberal media wouldn't be bashing him?

Liberals are hypocrites. If you say homoseuality is unnatural, you are being intolerant and a homophobe. If you say Christianity is a fairy tale, you are "enlightened."

Liberal ideologues believe freedom of speech only applies to people who agree with them. Of course, they believe they are smarter than the rest of us.

I agree that it would be nice if we were an intellectually mature enough country to simply keep all the unmedicated schizophrenics out of office. Instead we get George Bush invading the wrong country because a voice in his head (identifying itself as "God", as the voice tends to with all schizophrenics) told him to. And we get a preacher-certified witchcraft-free provincial tribesperson like Palin as a major-party VP candidate. And Burris, mistaking Blago and being in the right place at the right time (and having no scruples, moreover) as "divine intervention".

Yes it would be nice if we were a first-world country like the European nations and the rest of the developed world. But at this point in our stumbling history, the North American Taliban - in all its wonderful flavors - still has a strong grip on our national political culture. I hope we can become a modern country yet, but there are still so many areas of the country where the Taliban have yet to be ousted. I hope our troops can get home from Afghanistan soon and rout them from our own hinterlands.

GeneM, Jon Stewart is a comedian, not a journalist or legitimate news source! The problem today is that the voting public doesn't actually know the difference. Rather than report facts we leave it all up the interpretation of journalists and comedians to shape our thoughts for us?

Fact is it's ok for anyone to believe in anything as long as it's not god. Of course there is a double standard, all republicans are potrayed as red-neck bible thumping gun lovers by the media and the use the Palins of the world to drive home that message.

Because he's part of the socialist system being fostered by the left wing media maybe? They must think we're really stupid to believe all their tripe and garbage, and they're right. Look at the last election and figure it out for yourself. Gov Palin had all kinds of more experience than the Obamessiah, but she had two flaws that were too big to overcome. She was female and white.

The fundamental difference between Palin and Burris's invocation of God are the implications on others lives. Burris is claiming that God wanted HIM to be senator. While I disagree with his statement (i'm an atheist), it's still his choice to believe or not. On the other hand, Palin used "God's will" as justification for policy that would affect other's lives, such as the war in Iraq being a mission from God (that will send others, not herself, to fight), or religious justification for pro-life policies (that affects the lives of thousands of potential mothers). I believe they are both misguided in their use of personal spirituality as justification or proof, however, Burris's invocation of God is not being used to justify policy. That is a major difference.

The problem with our domestic Taliban and the unmedicated schizophrenics in positions of power in this country aside, I think the press is going soft on Burris (relative to Palin) for several understandable reasons:

1. Up till yesterday, it appeared this stunt of Blago's was not going to stand anyway, so the focus was on the governor and how the Senate would deal with it.

2. Burris is a potential Senator, not Vice President. There is a difference in scale. People also had a vote on Palin, whereas Burris is an appointment, so there's really not as urgent a need for the press to vet him in a hurry. He'll either get in or not, and you and I have little say in it, per Illinois/Federal law.

3. Burris may have exhibited the common unmedicated schizophrenic politician symptom in declaring his ascendency "God's Will", but he hasn't earned the scorn of the country as a laughingstock who doesn't know the basics he would need to carry out his job credibly. I suspect he knows, for instance, that Africa is a continent and not a country. He hasn't claimed foreign policy experience because Illinois is near Canada. He likely knows who Canada's PM is. He can probably point to a newspaper that he reads regularly. He also hasn't misused his state's troopers for a personal vendetta. He hasn't pushed for the Taliban-approved "abstinence only sex education" and then turned out to have his teenage child get pregnant.

In short, he's a garden variety unmedicated schizophrenic, but he's not otherwise a ridiculous figure as relates to carrying out the duties of his office. That's why the "double standard". I hope that helps the whiners understand what's going on.

Walters, are you serious? You compare to statements by Burris to those made by Palin and Bush? Every heard of comparing apples to oranges? Burris isn't asking to lead the country.

The points made about Palin aspiring to being VP and one medical mistep away from the Oval Office and Burris aspiring to be the appointed junior senator from Illinois is obvious. Ditto for Palin's belief that whatever suited her politics (Iraq, pipeline etc) was divinely ordained, while Burris claims divine endorsement for only his personal ambitions. However, the one compelling reason for the intense scrutiny Palin received was that her abrupt selection by McCain ("Sarah, I hardly knew yuh") provided a window into McCain's judgment. Indeed, every Republican I spoke to who decided to vote for Obama or at least sit out the election mentioned how dismayed they were by the selection of Palin, which they saw as kowtowing to the religious right. Maybe Ziegler and Palin attribute that response to the media brainwashing the country about her beliefs, but she did absolutely nothing to suggest she was not pandering to a small, self-important segment of the population that believes its views divinely mandated. She was only speaking the language of her constituents.

B2O2 :

I agree. The North American Taliban is trying to force its strange ideas on us all -- i.e. that somehow men mating with men and women mating with women is natural, that killing fully formed babies in their mother's wombs is a choice, and that the notion that a Creator exists is foolishness even though the world is so infinitely complex that it could never have happened by accident.

Oh yes, we have a Taliban all right. You want to see it. Look in a mirror.

Come on. This isn't even a debate. The double standard in the press is so glaringly obvious, so stunningly absurd, that any subjective observer that denies it is full of crap. Here's the bottom line: Burris is a minority democrat. He can say whatever he wants and the press will nod it's collective head and move on. Palin is conservative. Any references made by her to God means she is a dangerous oogedy-boogedy wacko. End of story.

InTheMiddle:

Clearly you are not "InTheMiddle", but part of the minority of religious right that seems to think that the worst thing in the world are homosexuals. Keep your sexual repression and heteronorms to yourself. Newsflash: we're not trying to "mate".

Permit one added comment: America had spent the last eight years under a President who used religious language to suggest he was on a divine mission, that there was something predestined to his policies. When it came to stem cell research, the validity of evolutionary theory, the role of science in determining government policy, indeed, the triumph of gut reaction/principals over studied decisions/pragmatism determined what America's president would do. Palin demonstrated all of these instincts and failings but was even more upfront about the religious basis of her hubris. In some ways, Palin was a surrogate voodoo doll for the Bush presidency. Naturally her religious views were at the center of public curiosity, and given how the electorate feels about Bush, her views also were the lightning rod, especially after she had shown her primary qualification for office was certitude not knowledge or reflection.

Political parties don't attack their own, and right wingers don't attack those who claim the Judeo-Christian God has a plan for their lives. Those principles apply consistently in the Burris case. Therefore, there's no double standard.

so there's a double standard, so what? Why get so self-righteous about it ... perhaps that's why you are upset, the need to feel self-righteous about something.

And notice that it's only the rightwingnut believers who are feeling this way. Kind of hard to get noticed that you're self righteous when people aren't paying attention to you any more, isn't it?

Palin is a religious whackjob fundamentalist freak, Burris is a religious coward. They *are* different, see?

The public and media lack of outcry has nothing to do with double standards for liberals and conservative. It has something to do with Bush being the leader of the whole country and that Palin potentially could have become the leader of the of whole country. Bush was bad enough, Plain would have made us the laughing stock of the entire planet.

Burris who??? I can almost guarantee that 95% of the American public and 99.99% of people overseas have no idea who the junior Senator from Illinois is, therefore, it doesn't make any difference of whether he was installed by a god or Lord Blagojevich.

InTheMiddle (sic) - you folks in the North American Taliban are desperately trying to paint yourselves as fit for modern times, knowing that as our troops in Afghanistan fight your Central Asian chapter your crediblity and stock are plunging here on the home front.

Abortion is not the act of killing "fully formed babies", as another poster pointed out gays and lesbians are not trying to procreate (thankfully, as world population explodes to unprecedented levels), and I'm very sorry that you cannot fathom modern biology and expanses of time that dwarf your myopically limited life.

I do congratulate you folks in the North American chapter though for your advances toward modernity in recent decades. Thanks to the influences of liberal thought, you are no longer beating women for getting out of line, are allowing them out of the kitchen and have stopped calling rock and roll music satanic (well, at least some of you have). I hope you haven't gotten in too much trouble with the folks at HQ in Kabul over these concessions to liberal modernity.

...Bush and Palin caught holy hell when they suggested divine endorsement of their actions and ideas. Not a peep about Burris.

Double standard for Republicans and Democrats?"
***********************

Hardly. There is a vast difference between attributing to God "insight" for public policy in a secular nation and thanking God for perceived personal beneficence. Believe me, the second this poor clown starts invoking the almighty in the Senate chambers, he'll be driven from the room.

B2O2 :

The Washington Post clearly is on your side, because my response to the earlier posting was not posted but sent to an editor for approval. Of course, this is censorship. But what should I expect from the North American Taliban, which believes in freedom of speech for everyone except those who don't agree with them.

At least Burris didn't have a "witch-hunter" pray for him like Palin did.

Excuse me, David, but you must have really had to look hard for this example. The wingnuts have a well earned reputation for looking at their own, most egregious behavior and trying, by some serious pretzel twisting logic, to try to make it seem as if the opposition is the one guilty.

Mr. Burris has no intention of allowing god to order him to attack some country for its oil, unlike the present occupant of the White House (poWH). Mr. Burris has no intention of trampling on the Constitution in order to placate his famous base and gain political advantage over the opposition, unlike the poWH. Mr. Burris isn't trying to use his power as a legislator to inflict his own interpretation of god on the American public, unlike the poWH. Mr. Burris is not trying to mangle science and science education in order to follow the dictates of his god and also the famous base, unlike the poWH and Sarah. Mr. Burris is not trying to use his legislative powers to favor Big Oil over the American people who have to suffer the effects of pollution and global warming that resulted from distorting science, unlike the poWH and Sarah.

No, David. There is no double standard. Mr. Burris is not using his relationship with his god as an excuse to abuse power. The reason that Sarah and the poWH are ridiculed for their silly religious stances is that they, in fact, ARE using "God's will" as an excuse to destroy people's lives and this country for the benefit of Big Corporation, Inc.

As a somewhat religious person and a somewhat political person, I shudder whenever I hear the two meet. I don't care which party you're with or what post you hold, God is not your inside guy for information. If you want to know what to do on foreign policy -- listen to Henry, Madeleine or Colin. If you want to know who should be in office, ask the electorate.

We can start with the fact that everyone already believe Burris is crazy, but beyond that Burris is not invoking God to fish for votes, but to state that he will be seated in a position that he was appointed to. President Bush and Gov. Palin were attempting to tell the voters to vote for them because God had already decided the fate of the election.

It is the same as the question: Why do we condemn radical evangelicals who declare anyone who doesn't follow them is going to Hell while accepting those who say there is a Hell. Answer: Because one is controlling, the other is accepting.

"Burris is not only a Democrat, but he is black. Anything he says is OK and if you disagree you are a racist. That's why nothing has been said about his comments. On the hand not only is Sarah Palin a Republican, she is white, and even from a working class background, so it's OK to bash her"

Some people were racists before they even knew Burris existed, and they will go to their grave racists. And they are so ignorant they don't even know it.

This is the same nonsense that proposed the "divine right" of kings to rule in Europe. As a nation we rejected that when we rebelled against England. And, THANK GOD, we were successful!!!

While there is some doubt about what exactly Palin meant when she said that the Iraq war is a mission from God, there can be no disagreement what she meant when she said that God had ordained the construction of a pipeline that she (and Big Oil) wanted built across Alaska.

And as for Lincoln saying that his actions were ordained by God, what he actually said was, "let us not say that God is on our side, but let us hope that we are on God's side." In other words, he was hoping that what he was doing was right in the eyes of God, not that he was certain that God had told him what to do (unlike many of the American Taleban who seem to be so sure that God wants the same things that they do.)

Actually, I first became aware of Burris' comments on the Rachel Maddow Show, on MSNBC, as well as on Countdown and The Daily Show--all pretty darn "Liberal" (to use the cant of the right wing posters), and all commenting satirically as they would have for a similar comment, had it come from the benighted Governor of Alaska (or her exorcist preacher).

spete1972 :
Come on. This isn't even a debate. The double standard in the press is so glaringly obvious, so stunningly absurd, that any subjective observer that denies it is full of crap. Here's the bottom line: Burris is a minority democrat. He can say whatever he wants and the press will nod it's collective head and move on. Palin is conservative. Any references made by her to God means she is a dangerous oogedy-boogedy wacko. End of story.

***************************************
It's not that she's a "dangerous oogedy-boogedy wacko" that rankles most of us--it's the rank hypocrisy in claiming to be a Christian and then engaging in one non-Christian behavior after another. You'd be very hard pressed to find anything she said or did in the course of the campaign that would be well-grounded in the New Testament, the book on which she supposedly bases her life.

So far, Burris hasn't had much of a track record, but I haven't seen him claim that God is on the Democratic Party side....

ecglotfelty :

Re: "Witchhunt" comment.

Your intolerance is only exceeded by your ignorance of charismatic Christian beliefs.

Christians believe that human beings are opposed by an evil being, Satan, and his angels (i.e. demons) who stand in opposition to God. The Bible says that Jesus Himself spoke to Satan and was tempted by Satan.

Some Christians interpret Luke 10:19 and other verses to believe that believers are given authority to come into opposition against Satan and his angels and to "bind" them and "cast" them out. This is not a universal doctrine among Christians. Clearly, it is what Sarah Palin's demonination believes and that the person praying for her was taking authority over what the apostle Paul referred to as the "spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly realms" who might be seeking to attack or tempt her.

You may not believe Satan exists. It's a free country. But the fact that Sarah Palin and millions of others do is hardly a reason to disqualify her from public office.

there are some differences, Senator is nowhere near as significant as VP, without an election the whole process isn't as interestng, and his overall persona is very different from the highly telegenic political circus act we were treated to from Ms. Palin. I certainly noted his comment with a sigh though.

Many Christians believe in predestination. Burris' comments may be a result of that belief.

One should always be wary about anyone who states that They are God ordained! It, at best, shows an unbalanced ego.

Diogenes :

Re: Predestination.

Predestination deals with salvation, not political office, so it does not apply here.

Many Christians believe God does communicte with them directly about His intentions for their lives.

I, however, think that publicly proclaiming that God annointed him to be a senator suggests that, in fact, God did no such thing. If God had annointed him, he would have no need to worry about whether it would happen or try to convince others that this is God's will.

There is a measure of deep humility involved in actually hearing the "still small" voice of God. It is not something one parades.

"Humans are not the apex of living creatures, but one part of the wave of constantly evolving life progressing on the earth. Hopefully once we shed the tyrrany of fears of the unknown and death (as shackled to us in the Bible, Koran , Torah) we can continue to evolve."

Hahaha...if you ask me...we've been DEVOLVING for many a generation on account of our hatred of all things noble, just and good...etc...BIBLICAL. I fear for my kids and grandkids!

If predestination and relinace on God's will works, then Sarah Palin is the vice-president, and the Senate is thwarting God's will by not immediately seating Burris.

If God doesn't play favorites, how will he explain Palin's defeat and Burris' accession to a Senate seat, if that happens. I think Burris will or will not be seated based on the rule of law, not the will of God.

Burris is from Illinois so he must be a "TERRORIST"! Or an Arab! Did he not launch his political career in the kitchen of Bill Ayers that well known "domestic terrorist"? After all he is black and from Illinois!!! And Bill Ayers is responsible for launching all black political careers in Illinois! Don't seat him in the Senate until Fox News ha shad a chance to crucify him on "BILL O's" Show!!!

I guess some people still take LSD.

um duh

maybe

its cause Burris never campaigned

Burris is just plain senile. I am sure the reason no one has made an issue of any of his babbling is because they know just that pure and simple

There is no side by side rule to compare Burris and Palin. Burris is a good man in his own right and has not use his beleif in God to spill and talk hate. Palin was and still is a fraud. what day did Roland preach God and from the same stage talk hate and speak lies from the same side of his mouth. Those type of things were her person trait at every rally she spoke at. She still refuse to admit her faults. She has a degree in what? Still out there blaming others for her stupidty and lack of knowledge on any subject she was asked by the media. She ought to leave her hubby and marry "joe the dumb plumber". simple get right back under that rock. Roland has proved himself in office beyond any doubt. Never was accused of taking a dime of the people's money and purchased his own line of wear and tear. Name brand shoes and purse for her kids, silk jocks for the dud...give me a break on this hateful chick. Roland wife don't belong to a gang with intend to suceed from the USA as a card carrying member and Roland never attended a meeting giving them his whole heartly support. God is real in this man life and not just a figure. Roland serviced the people of his State with faith because he never forgot that it faith that help him get there. Never put his chest out like it was Roland only. Never forgot that it was one vote at a time thanks be to God. Don't wake me up on Palin. She is blaming the media for down fall and it was the media that put her out there because she had nothing to offer and John McCain was aware. McCain has proved himself to be a real person. Back in the Senate and acting like a statesman whether he like it or not.

Well the media has double standards but I think that the reason why Burris didn't get the rough treatment that Palin received is because he isn't the following: 1) A republican; 2)White; 3)A woman. And in addition to that the media and democrats are anti-christian and anti-religion i.e. secular.

By the way what non-christian thing did Sarah Palin do during her time as governor and VP candidate?

TJDemo :

Re: People talking LSD.

I guess we all find out if it is LSD or truth on the day we die, won't we?

That will be an interesting moment for you.

This is not a double standard, but a very simple and real distinction. Burris invokes God as having a plan that involves his own success in reaching his own goals -- a bit clunky to my secular ears, but basically harmless. Palin and Bush invoke God as supporting the decision to *start a war*. Not so harmless.

Before we get so paranoid about the media's supposed liberal or Democratic bias, let's take a moment and see what the specific facts of the case look like.

You didn't refer to what exactly you mean by 'The Palin Treatment." Perhaps it was the strangeness of her association with a pastor who claims he threw a witch out of town that people commented on. Perhaps it was the commentary on her opposition to sex ed and birth control for teens shortly before the announcement of the daughter's pregnancy as a result of unprotected, purity pledge violating premarital teenage sexual intercourse.

I recall very little criticism of her faith in the campaign or media except that it seemed to be a type that would be better suited to the Dark Ages than to modern society.

The most noteworthy thing about Palin in this campaign was her complete lack of the kind of knowledge required for the position one heartbeat of an ancient and unhealthy heart away from being President.

She is so clueless that she doesn't even realize how clueless she is. That is Sarah Palin to me. Her backward religious beliefs are a most secondary consideration.

One was the worst president in US history
One was running for Vice Presidency
Burris came out of nowhere
No one cares about him and that is why the story is not catching, it's not a double standard, it's just that no one cares.

cfeher :

Your ignorance of Christianity is showing. Read my earlier posting.

PCPatterson:

"You'd be very hard pressed to find anything she said or did in the course of the campaign that would be well-grounded in the New Testament, the book on which she supposedly bases her life."

Sadly, what you just said goes for all conservative (pseudo)Christians. There is nothing more abhorrent to them than the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and the political positions that he spoke out in favor of.

He espoused helping the sick. Conservative Pseudochristians are violently opposed to universal health care, I guess figuring that Jesus would stand by quite contented as 40 million souls suffered without health care.

He espoused helping the poor, and had little patience for situations in which the rich get richer and the poor poorer. Witness his fury toward the moneychangers at the temple. Today Conservative Pseudochristians would call his actions at the temple "class warfare" and enthusiastically root on tax cuts and other perks for the wealthy. Damn the poor. That's what Jesus would say, apparently.

He espoused working for alternatives to war, including by talking to (!) your enemies. In fact, that radical pinko pacifist even encouraged us to LOVE them! Conservative Pseudochristians would spit on Jesus if they met him today at an anti-war rally, for daring to speak ill of one of their precious insane and deceit-justified wars.

He espoused understanding and nonjudgment toward one's neighbors. He said nothing against gays. If he were working in a public school system today and talking about acceptance and tolerance of people who loved differently, the gang of Conservative Pseudochristians in the North American Taliban would be calling for his head.

In every facet of life and on every issue, right wing Christians despise Jesus and everything he preached.

But they're more than happy to appropriate his brand name, wide trademark recognition that it enjoys! They are America's biggest hypocrites and a profound burden on our society. Again, I hope our troops can take care of our domestic Taliban as soon as they get home from fighting their Pashtun-speaking cousins in Afghanistan.

Of course there is a double standared. No questioning of Caroline Kennedy, no hard questioning of Obama's right Rev. Wright.

Again, the Post ombudsmen admitted AFTER the election that the Post showed extreme bias for Obama.

This prickly "...you did it to PALIN how come you don't do it now..." is starting to look contrived. Burris is perhaps unfortunate in his choice of god-talk, but is not going to be in the spotlight very long and frankly, the stakes are not nearly as high with Burris as one of 50 Senators as it was for Palin, who could have quickly become the Leader of the Free World.

And, Palin made it much more of an issue. Quick, what are the names of Burris' family? What is his hometown? When was his last child born? What's his church?

It seems that we knew all that about Palin's personal life immediately as part of the "compelling life narrative" that the NRC pumped relentlessly into the national press as soon as she was announced. The NRC bet that the US voter would buy her whole package and brutally opened all the details they wanted to about her life, in an attempt to sell us another conservative puppet like W. Even Palin's religious credentials were used to "clear" her choice with the fundacostal tribes who were in a snit over McCain.

Bottom line: Palin was a total political calculation and is still some kind of stalking horse for the way conservative creeps still skulking the sidelines. Burris is pretty much on his own looking like he got thrown onto center stage as a gambit. And judging through the lens of the media, I think the country perceive's Burris' faith as non-threatening and sincere. We always saw Palin's as contrived and overproduced.

The answer to your question is quite simple. Palin was talking about war. Bush was talking about war. That's life and death, misery, fear, etc. Burris is talking about the "miraculous" turnabout in the attitude of the leaders of the Democratic Party towards his nomination. Let him start talking about God endorsing a war somewhere, and believe me, you will hear from quite a lot of us.

He was spared the attacks because he is a male, and he is African American. On this flip side, he at least comes across as far more intelligent than the Governor.

cfeher ,

You are the one who is clueless. Gov. Palin has actual achievements. She rose to her current position on merit. Unlike some people who got in to Harvard, even though they did not have the grades or SATs to merit it. In fact no one knows those grades or where the tuition money came from. To paraphrase legally blond, like it's hard to get in to Harvard. Or,, like it's hard to get elected President.

The difference is that unlike Palin, Burris has never tried to enforce his faith judicially. Unlike Palin, Burris is not an evangelical ready to shove her narrow religious views down the rest of America's throat. The so-called Baptist Community for "Religious Liberty" would never have made this fuss about Burris were he of the same fire-breathing temperament as they are. Their phony sense of indignation is about as transparent as it gets.

There's an awful lot of whining lately from the right. If they lose, it's got to be someone else's fault. Not the fault of their own bankrupt policies (regulation bad; Enron and Mathoff good). Kind of like President Bush. For Palin to blame Katie Couric for Palin's own inability to answer simple questions is pathetic. People still talk about Palin because she was so ridiculous and dishonest. "You can see Russia from Alaska and so I have foreign policy experience." What papers do you read? "all of them." Why can't she be honest. "I don't have much experience, but I am a quick learner" "I read the Anchorage Daily News and watch Bill O'Reilly." Come on. She puts her family in front of the cameras to show off "conservative values," and then objects if anyone looks into those values. If she didn't want her family in front of the press, she should not have put them there. Time to move on and reverse the decline of the country.

ALANR1 said: "Unlike some people who got in to Harvard, even though they did not have the grades or SATs to merit it. In fact no one knows those grades or where the tuition money came from."
----------------------
That's an idiotic statement. Try reading what you type, and use your brain this time.

Why didn't Burris get the Palin treatment? Because he made his comment in the right forum. At church. And because he's not Palin. Palin wasn't even intelligent enough to sound halfway informed in interviews.

I haven't heard Burris whining about how he's being bashed. While I don't understand why any person would accept a nomination from Blogojevich, Burris has showed some class. Palin is classless.

“Render to Caesar”

Better to keep religion out of politics. I want to know that the official I vote for is going to represent me, not some god or group of religious whackos. None of these politicians are divinely ordained, or anointed, or blessed. If they think they are, they’re delusion and shouldn’t be allowed in office. If the religious whackos think they are, they deserve to get the first shaft when the politicians show what they’re really made of.

Just think of the concept of separating church and state.

The Difference is, one was running for the 2nd most powerful position in the free world, the other was nominated for a position where crazy corrupt lunatics are a dime a dozen

"Sadly, what you just said goes for all conservative (pseudo)Christians. There is nothing more abhorrent to them than the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and the political positions that he spoke out in favor of.

He espoused helping the sick. Conservative Pseudochristians are violently opposed to universal health care, I guess figuring that Jesus would stand by quite contented as 40 million souls suffered without health care.

He espoused helping the poor, and had little patience for situations in which the rich get richer and the poor poorer. Witness his fury toward the moneychangers at the temple. Today Conservative Pseudochristians would call his actions at the temple "class warfare" and enthusiastically root on tax cuts and other perks for the wealthy. Damn the poor. That's what Jesus would say, apparently.

He espoused working for alternatives to war, including by talking to (!) your enemies. In fact, that radical pinko pacifist even encouraged us to LOVE them! Conservative Pseudochristians would spit on Jesus if they met him today at an anti-war rally, for daring to speak ill of one of their precious insane and deceit-justified wars.

He espoused understanding and nonjudgment toward one's neighbors. He said nothing against gays. If he were working in a public school system today and talking about acceptance and tolerance of people who loved differently, the gang of Conservative Pseudochristians in the North American Taliban would be calling for his head.

In every facet of life and on every issue, right wing Christians despise Jesus and everything he preached.

But they're more than happy to appropriate his brand name, wide trademark recognition that it enjoys! They are America's biggest hypocrites and a profound burden on our society. Again, I hope our troops can take care of our domestic Taliban as soon as they get home from fighting their Pashtun-speaking cousins in Afghanistan." ------------------------------------ This statement was so dead on the money

What's the difference if it's liberals or conservatives? Pimping poor old Jesus for political gain is an abomination to his Name.

Sir,

Your analysis is off mark.

Burris' claim to god's support comes after his legal appointment is being barred by the US Senate. You can only compare this to a situation where the McCain-Palin ticket won the election and were being blocked from assuming their role.

While I wish no human would claim god as their cheerleader, Burris' claim coming after his appointment is less repulsive.

Had Sarah claimed, prior to winning, that god wished her to win then yes, that would have been, in my opinion, more ridiculous.

Even so, I repeat for emphasis, I consider both examples to be repulsive.

so what exactly is the double standard here?
Do the christians feel that Burris should get the same crap treatment as Palin, or do they feel that Palin should have experienced more brown-nosing from the press, just as they themselves are doing to her?

Is Palin a martyr now?

You people are sick.

Palin's quote about the Iraq war, to correct the record, was taken grossly out of context. She said that we must "PRAY that this a task from God", not that IT WAS a task from God. It was a quote also from Abraham Lincoln. The relevant Lincoln quote comes from F.B. Carpenter, the artist who painted Lincoln’s portrait in the White House over a six month period in 1864. Carpenter’s 1867 book, Six Months in the White House, contains his recollections of events he saw and heard at the White House during that time.
Here’s what Carpenter recalled Lincoln as saying in 1864:
No nobler reply ever fell from the lips of ruler, than that uttered by President Lincoln in response to the clergyman who ventured to say, in his presence, that he hoped " the LORD was on our side.". "I am not at all concerned about that," replied Mr. Lincoln, " for I know that the LORD is always on the side of the right. But it is my constant anxiety and prayer that I and this nation should be on the LORD'S side."
It irritates me that in the ABC interview Charlie Gibson left off the "PRAY that", which made Palin sound like a Right-wing zealot, who was claiming the war was predestined by God. She was praying that we are on the Lord's side in fighting the war in Iraq, which tells me that she is humble in seeking God's will, not assuming it as Burris has.

Sadly, Maevtr does not know what he or she is talking about.

"He espoused helping the sick. Conservative Pseudochristians are violently opposed to universal health care, I guess figuring that Jesus would stand by quite contented as 40 million souls suffered without health care."

Typical leftist thinking. First off, many of the 40 million are kids in their 20's that have no health care because they don't feel they need it. They CHOOSE that. Also the act of GIVING is CHARITY, not the govt conscripting money from anyone.

He espoused helping the poor, and had little patience for situations in which the rich get richer and the poor poorer. Witness his fury toward the moneychangers at the temple. Today Conservative Pseudochristians would call his actions at the temple "class warfare" and enthusiastically root on tax cuts and other perks for the wealthy. Damn the poor. That's what Jesus would say, apparently.

Hmmm, another leftist mindthink. You think that if we tax people more, the poor will not be poor? Or if private enterprise made up of small businesses have the money, they will have the funds to employ blue collar workers so they won't be poor.

He espoused working for alternatives to war, including by talking to (!) your enemies. In fact, that radical pinko pacifist even encouraged us to LOVE them! Conservative Pseudochristians would spit on Jesus if they met him today at an anti-war rally, for daring to speak ill of one of their precious insane and deceit-justified wars.

Actually many conservatives are against war also. What many of them feel is that the people from Answer are, are against was even if it is JUST, and Jesus would never have been against defending ourselves. Try reading some St. Augustine. Was Afghanistan just? Is there the ability to actually talk to terrorists if they want to kill you no matter what? Would Hitler have listened? NO, NO, NO.

He espoused understanding and nonjudgment toward one's neighbors. He said nothing against gays. If he were working in a public school system today and talking about acceptance and tolerance of people who loved differently, the gang of Conservative Pseudochristians in the North American Taliban would be calling for his head.

Actually, Jesus talked about marriage more than once, and he NEVER talked about gay people . He talked about relationships within the context of man-woman and that was it. He told the woman at the well "to go and sin no more" and he would tell gays the same thing. Probably in a much more loving manner than many Christians , but he would do in love but firmly.

In every facet of life and on every issue, right wing Christians despise Jesus and everything he preached.

You are way off line in this statement. Jesus was all about giving us all POWER over our sin through the gospel and the overwhelming power of his death and resurrection. He spent time with sinners and the downtrodden to attempt to help them. The Pharisees were the hypocrites, and they for the most part would have never spent time with tax collectors, gays,adulterers and those in need. Jesus quietly and firmly loved people but at the same time admonished them, and was willing to pay the price to see them redeemed.

You've taken a wild stance about people and judged them out of hand. Time to read the whole N.T., including the writings and letters of Paul, that explain how and why Jesus came. You obviously don't understand Christians and Christianity as much as you may think.

There are few things more offensive than politicians of any party pimping poor old Jesus for greed, money and power.

Since this is a Christian nation, it is not unreasonable that a Christian is elected president and that he hold Christian values. If we were an athiest nation, then it would make sense that we elect an appropriate leader....

as for the Burris/Palin comparison, it can be said without much arguement that the media goes out of its way to portray Palin (and Bush) as religious zealots that attempt to shove their faith in other people's faces....which is not true...on the flipside, if a Democrat (like Burris) mentions anything religious oriented, the media will report it in a minimal manner, so the public will not get the idea that the man is influenced by religion (Lord have mercy)

In short, media wants perception to become reality

fr ptandcarol:

>...as for the Burris/Palin comparison, it can be said without much arguement that the media goes out of its way to portray Palin (and Bush) as religious zealots that attempt to shove their faith in other people's faces....which is not true.

Both of them most certainly DO try to shove their faith in other people's faces. That's why I'm glad dumbya is finally leaving, and pwecious wittle sawah isn't going to DC as VP, as she was woefully lacking in common sense AND experience for such an important job.

DISGUSTING how these posts point to their God given right to Israel's driving Palestinians out of their ancient homes...

but God hasn't done anything else since then. And nobody dare think so.

Well, Burris' statements certainly *do* give me pause, ...but there's a difference between a religious man interpreting the events of his life to say he must have been intended to be a role model and saying that one speaks to said God and therefore wants to build a pipeline or start an ill-advised war.

Frankly, I don't know who Burris is, and I don't know what's up about his positions on things: frankly, this whole Blago scandal could have been made a lot simpler if the *un-tainted* Dems in Illinois put up a candidate for Blago to rubberstamp. Then there'd be a lot less room for doubt or distraction.

I see no double-standard: no one went to Alaska and tried to oust Palin despite her scary and unConstitutional ideas, but when she made it the rest of the country's business, that's what that is.

There's also a difference between a party dedicated to imposing religious will on the nation and one that may have some religious members who say things.

Contrary to what some conservative Christians say whenever their grasping for political dominion is questioned, this isn't about attacking people for their beliefs: it's about *agendas.*

I haven't seen a theocratic agenda, here. To be honest, I'll be more curious when I find out if this appointment stands.

Since the man hasn't *run* for the office he might take, though, let's hope he can be informed on where his duties in this sort of thing *lie.*

Being a 'role model' doesn't *have* to involve getting all tyrranical and irresponsible. Whoever you give the credit to.